Category: Blogs

Paycheck to paycheck America

Increasingly, since the 1970s Americans get stuck in survival mode, rather than thrive mode. More and more workers are living paycheck to paycheck. What happened?

There is no longer denying that the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. The once iconic American middle class has all but disappeared. There is, however, plenty of denying contributing events – and therefore solutions – for such a pickle.

There were plenty of events. Here are some, certainly not all:

The 1970s saw an economic watershed.

From the end of WWII until the 1970s, incomes of the rich, not so rich, and poor rose around the same pace. Household savings rates were around 7 to 10%, a healthy percentage that allowed people to build capital and improve their lot.

The 1970s saw the start of a widening income, savings, and wealth gap. Today’s average household savings rate is 4.5%. Incomes of the less-than-rich tend to cover household expenses and not much else. Moving up the economic ladder under such circumstances is a nearly impossible feat.

The 1970s also saw a cultural watershed.

Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society was a herculean effort to deal with poverty through social welfare. Congress passed legislation enshrining President Johnson’s agenda between 1964 and 1968. By the 1970s public assistance was culturally accepted as the way to improve the lot of the poor.

That is still the case today. Legions of government programs, non-profits, and billionaires’ tax-advantaged foundations exist today to end poverty.

1971 saw the birth of fiat money.

The Great Society social programs that started in 1964, the Vietnam War (1955 – 1975), and a Federal Reserve that did not respond forcefully enough to unbridled government spending and rising prices, all contributed to inflation that reached 5.89% in 1969.

Such level of inflation decimated the value of the U.S. dollar, and a run on U.S. gold appeared probable. So, President Richard Nixon ended the country’s gold standard in 1971 – releasing the fiat money genie out of the bottle!

Without the market restraints inherent in a gold standard, government folks became free to borrow and spend. And free to keep interest rates down to facilitate payment in the ever increasing national debt.

Sharp-eyed folks in the general population figured windows of low interest rates and cheap money allowed them to borrow, invest, and grow rich.

Technology helped.

In the olden days, stocks were considered risky business not suitable for average respectable people. However, as technology gave average respectable people the Internet, access to on-line accounts, apps, social media, and a dizzying array of asset classes, investment in intangibles was democratized.

Then came financialization.

An old working paper dated December 2007, by Thomas Palley, in conjunction with The Levy Economics Institute of Bard College, has a very good description of financialization. In Financialization: What is it and Why it Matters, Dr. Palley wrote:

“Financialization is a process whereby financial markets, financial institutions, and financial elites gain greater influence over economic policy and economic outcomes. Financialization transforms the functioning of economic systems at both the macro and micro levels.

Its principal impacts are to (1) elevate the significance of the financial sector relative to the real sector (2) transfer income from the real sector to the financial sector, and (3) increase income inequality and contribute to wage stagnation. Additionally, there are reasons to believe that financialization may put the economy at risk of debt deflation and prolonged recession.

Financialization operates through three different conduits: changes in the structure and operation of financial markets, changes in the behavior of nonfinancial corporations, and changes in economic policy.”

Basically, financialization says, why should a company bother with working to create better widgets or bother with managing a productive labor force. So much easier to make money from financial transactions like acquisitions facilitated by fiat money, stock buybacks to inflate value of outstanding shares, or speculation with today’s equivalent of puka shells– cryptocurrencies. What companies save on labor, goes to CEOs and shareholders.

On the other side, much of workers’ consumption changed from that based on wages to that based on debt. And looks like powers that be in the marketplace and in government are fine with that.

The rise of institutional investors followed.

Around the late 1970s, institutions like Vanguard, Fidelity Investors, and other fund managers popularized a variety of financial products, including mutual funds and 401-k management. This attracted investors, contributed to fund managers’ growth, and eventually resulted in institutional investors today accounting for about 80% of the volume of trades on the New York Stock Exchange.

Note that these institutions do not own the stocks and other instruments they manage. It is America’s wealthiest 1% that own 50% of stocks, while the 10% wealthiest own nearly 90% of stocks.

This level of shareholder power is bound to divert profits from labor to dividends and/or CEO compensation. Note that a large portion of CEO compensation today is in stock and tied to how well the CEO enriches the company’s shareholders.

Meanwhile, wars on poverty focus on social welfare.

Since the 1960s rivers of money have gone into social welfare. Most improvement, if any, in the lot of the poor has come from handouts. Lower-income earners have remained stuck in survival mode, rather than rise to thriving mode.

Certainly, there have been the relatively few that rose from very modest beginnings to wealth. But here we are talking about the average worker in the fast-food, home-health care, hospitality, and other lower-paying industries.

Included in handouts are government mandates such as minimum wage increases and rent control. These two mandates especially reveal the cynicism inherent in legislatures. Politicians surely have a modicum of knowledge of the realities of the marketplace, which they purposefully to ignore.

Surely, they must realize that when you increase people’s power to spend without an equal or greater increase in output, you end up with inflation. A 3% increase in the price of hamburger is not a big deal for the well to do, but very unfortunate for the poor.

Politicians must also realize that investors, like landlords, want a certain profit, and when you mess with that profit through rent control, they stop being landlords and go invest in something else. Fewer landlords mean fewer housing, and potentially more poor families living in their car or worse.

Awareness is the first step to cure

We cannot go back in time, but we can stop pretending handouts work.

Schools that teach not indoctrinate or coddle work, discipline works (in school and at home, for kids and for adults), work ethics work.

Cottage industries (stuff you make at home and sell) work. Fiscal responsibility at home and in government works (especially reducing the national debt before interest eats up all of GDP!). Politicians that promise wider opportunities for people to earn a living, not freebies and AI, work.

America is still the land people of over the world want to come to. But many American families must be wondering, “What happened to the Middle Class.”

Recommended article: US strikes on Iran are a test of hard power’s limits

Whether there is indeed a ceasefire between Iran and Israel or whether the US will remain in a rat hole of retaliations remains to be seen. But, as the recommended article explains, Iran will retain its irreversible knowledge gain in matters of nuclear enrichment, to be used or not as Iran sees fit.

In the midst of claims by President Donald Trump of “spectacular military success,” and fears of “descending into a rat hole of retaliation after retaliation” expressed by UN Chief Antonio Guterres, the Reuters news agency published a calm and rational article on June 22, 2025, which describes an additional scenario: nothing has changed as far as Iran’s ability to proceed with its nuclear research.

In US strikes on Iran nuclear sites are real-life test of hard power’s limits, authors Francois Murphy and John Irish speak about Iran’s “irreversible knowledge gain” that bombers cannot obliterate.

Here are highlights from the article:

“You can destroy or disable a nuclear programme’s physical infrastructure but it is very hard or impossible to eliminate the knowledge a country has acquired.”

“Western powers including the United States have publicly suggested as much, complaining of the ‘irreversible knowledge gain’ Iran has made by carrying out activities they object to.”

“‘Military strikes alone cannot destroy Iran’s extensive nuclear knowledge,’ the Washington-based Arms Control Association said in a statement after the U.S. strikes with massive bunker-busting bombs on sites including Iran’s two main underground enrichment plants at Natanz and Fordow.”

“The strikes will set Iran’s programme back, but at the cost of strengthening Tehran’s resolve to reconstitute its sensitive nuclear activities, possibly prompting it to consider withdrawing from the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and possibly proceeding to weaponisation.”

“Israel has also said it has killed Iranian nuclear scientists but, while little is known about the personnel side of Iran’s nuclear programme, officials have said they are sceptical about that having a serious impact on Iran’s nuclear knowledge, even if it might slow progress in the near term.”

“One important open question is how much highly enriched uranium Iran still has and whether it is all accounted for.”

“A senior Iranian source told Reuters on Sunday most of the highly enriched uranium at Fordow, the site producing the bulk of Iran’s uranium refined to up to 60%, had been moved to an undisclosed location before the U.S. attack there.”

So, ceasefire or not…

Whether there is indeed a ceasefire between Iran and Israel as President Donal Trump announced today, June 23, 2025, or whether the US will remain in the rat hole of retaliations remains to be seen.

But, as the recommended article explains, Iran will retain its irreversible knowledge gain in matters of nuclear enrichment, to be used or not as Iran sees fit.

Picture: From AP video on MSN News, B-2 bombers return to US base

We need to make our kids happy again

Today, our children and youth, coddled by parents and government, have shed the masters of the workhouses and acquired the masters of advertising and agendas.

School age children today exhibit greater emotional instability than in the past, seen since around the 1970s in poorer academic performance, inattention, incidents of violence, and suicides. Society’s response has been to significantly increase the number of mental health counselors present in schools, so far it appears to no avail.

To a hammer everything looks like a nail.

To the American Psychological Association, “With a growing mental health crisis among young people—a trend both exacerbated and illuminated by Covid—the need for school psychologists is multiplying.”

However, to a layperson with an open mind, there should be something amiss with this one-solution mindset, especially since it does not seem to be working. The “growing mental health crisis” did not develop in a vacuum – nothing does. Should we not look for what changed in the past few decades that might have contributed to the “crisis” and fix those variables?

Here are some likely candidates.

Bad Therapy: Let’s begin with the emphasis on mental health in schools – “trauma informed education” – that encourages inward-looking, self-awareness, and emotional skills. A common sense question should be whether “An individual is more likely to meet a challenge if she focuses on the task ahead, rather than her own emotional state. If she’s thinking about herself, she’s less likely to meet any challenge.” (How Bad Therapy Hijacked Our Nation’s Schools, The Free Press, 02/27/24.)

Clueless experts: “Experts” nowadays seem to come with an agenda, rather than with common sense. For example, when someone blames poverty and lack of sufficient services for the sad state of our youth, the question should arise, was there no poverty in the past?

Denatured foods: Nutrients in our foods feed our bodies, our brains, our energy levels, our well being. The detrimental effects of processed foods should be obvious to everyone. However, more insidious is the prevalence since the 1960s of denatured (meaning altered) fruits and vegetables, which contain significantly lower nutrient contents. In an effort to increase fresh produce yield, resistance to disease, storage life, transit capability, attractiveness, and other beneficial characteristics, farmers choose to grow hybrid varieties. Unfortunately, in nature we often lose one characteristic to gain another. (Industry Scandal: The Loss Of Nutrients, 07/20/24)

Barren existence: Boomers like to tell how when they were kids, their free time was spent outdoors, jumping rope, making up games, deciding who went first and whose turn it was to wait, watching fireflies, and hurrying home just before suppertime (lateness had consequences). Hot summers in the inner cities were famous for fire hydrant sprinkling & splashing. Too many kids today have supervised playdates and structured activities — if they are lucky. Otherwise, chances are their time is spent in front of TV screens, on endless scrolling on smartphones, texting, or immersed in video games where differences are solved by shooting opponents and blowing things up.

Screen time: It should be obvious to anyone with an iota of common sense that today’s addiction to screens cannot be healthy or lead to productive social interactions. Yet parents and teachers seem to lack the will or authority to keep youth away from screens (often they themselves suffer from screen addiction). Worse, video games — purposefully and obsessively designed to addict, extract information, and monetize — fill hours of youth time. “Gaming audiences form a wide-ranging, worldwide community that goes beyond age, gender, and cultural limits … They’re deeply involved in these games, making them a prime audience for tech, entertainment, and lifestyle ads … Gaming audience spend a lot of time playing, giving advertisers a great chance to connect.” ( Advertising in Gaming: Who are Gamers?, Iion, 03/25/24)

But in the old days there were the work houses…

Media and other communicators are fond of pointing out the plight of children and youth in days gone by, when there was no “regulation” or “services.” Indeed the life of poor and sometimes orphaned children and young adults was certainly not idyllic in the past. Child labor, work houses, illiteracy, and often hunger were common.

Society did eventually recognize and effectively deal with those egregious conditions, mostly though legislation.

Unfortunately, as is so often the case, solutions implemented to solve one problem spawn other problems. Today, our children and youth, coddled by parents and government, have shed the masters of the workhouses and acquired the masters of advertising and agendas. Promotional advertising creates lifestyles, and agendas create dependence on everything from government assistance to youth gang requirements.

Looking back might help

Maybe looking at the array of variables that made kids different back in the day would help. Those variables could include hard working two-parent households, parents with high expectations of their children, teachers willing to impose discipline and expect performance, focus on the 3 Rs of education, and effective (not ineffectively brutal) law enforcement to ensure safe neighborhoods where all kids can play outside.

Interestingly, all those variables include action, not the navel gazing today’s “experts” encourage our kids, to wallow in!

Picture: Kids playing in the street around the 1940s, from the New York Public Library Digital Collections.

Pancho Barnes: She was the trailblazer few have heard of

In the 1920s and early 1930s, air travel was still in its infancy. But aviation trailblazers were barnstorming in popular airshows, setting and breaking flying records, and moving mankind closer to space travel. Pancho Barnes was one of these pioneers.

March is Women’s History Month, and the Just Vote No blog has chosen to celebrate the contributions of Pancho Barnes (July 22, 1901 – March 30, 1975). Who? Interestingly, a search of Google Doodles does not show that Pancho Barnes was ever celebrated. Amelia Earhart was celebrated twice. No wonder Barnes once said, “Amelia Earhart got all the publicity and Bobbi Trout made all the money, but I was the best pilot.” True.

Brief background.

Florence Leontine Lowe was born into a well-to-do family in San Marino, California. She attended fine private schools, became an accomplished equestrian at an early age, and acquired a love of flying from her paternal grandfather. Grandfather Thaddeus S. C. Lowe established the first military air unit during the American Civil War, the Army of the Potomac’s balloon corps.

At 18, Florence married the Reverend C. Rankin Barnes, with whom she had her only child, William E. Barnes. However, after a few years as a reluctant wife, she ran away and eventually ended up in Mexico. There Florence Barnes became Pancho Barnes.

Pancho Barnes returned to the U.S. at the death of her father, from whom she received a large inheritance. With that money, she purchased a Travel Air biplane and took flying lessons. History has it that after only six hours of instruction, she was flying solo.

Pancho was then on her way to becoming a legend in her own time.

Those were the times of early aviation when airplanes were still a mystery. Young men and women were eager to test their own maximum capacity as pilots as well as the capabilities of their airplanes. They were also eager to share their derring-do with an enthusiastic public.

Thus, there were the barnstormers, with Pancho Barnes among them. Barnstormers made their living putting on well attended flying shows in barn fields. Their spins, rolls, loop-the-loops, wing walking not only entertained large audiences, but also served to prove a barnstormer’s skills.

In 1929, when Cliff Henderson promoted his first Women’s Air Derby (immediately nicknamed the Powder Puff Derby by American humorist Will Rogers), Pacho Barnes was there. The transcontinental race ran from Santa Monica, California, to Cleveland, Ohio. Of the race’s 20 participants, 15 made it to the finish line. In the heavy airplane class, Louise Thaden finished first, Gladys O’Donnell second, and Amelia Earhart third. In the light airplane class the winners were Phoebe Omlie, Edith Foltz and Jessie Keith-Miller. Pancho Barnes was not one of the finalists because a car crashed into her airplane as she was landing in one of the stops.

But barnstorming and racing were not Pancho Barnes only interests. In Hollywood she was a popular stunt pilot. She is credited with forming one of the first Hollywood unions, the Associated Motion Picture Pilots, which gave stunt pilots more bargaining control over pay and safety.

Two other feats: Pancho Barnes was the first female test pilot for Lockheed. In 1930, Barnes broke Amelia Earhart’s speed record.

Then came the Great Depression and Pancho’s new lifestyle.

The Depression of the 1930s was a life-changing event for everyone, including Pancho Barnes. That’s when she pivoted from aviatrix to businesswoman.

In 1935, she sold her home in Los Angeles and purchased a ranch near Muroc Dry Lake in California’s Mojave Desert. Nearby was a small base called the Muroc Army Airfield, later to become Edwards Air Force Base. And there was nothing else in that hot, barren, dusty expanse.

At the ranch Pancho built an airstrip, hangers, and classrooms for her Civilian Pilot Training Program. During WWII, Pancho’s ranch was taken over by the military. After the war, she added rodeo grounds, racetracks, a swimming pool, and a 20-room motel. The ranch became a fly-in destination for her numerous pilot and Hollywood friends, as well as a place for the men from the Muroc base to gather. In 1946, the ranch became a private club named The Happy Bottom Riding Club, which at one point had 9,000 members worldwide.

The Happy Bottom Riding Club.

Pancho Barnes, like other female pioneers of early aviation, proved women could be skillful daring pilots — just like Valentina Tereshkova, Svetlana Savitskaya, and Sally Ride proved women could be cosmonauts and astronauts. These are invaluable cultural contributions.

But, Pancho Barnes’ contemporaries credit her not only with cultural contributions, but also with helping to advance America’s aviation and the space program. This point is entertainingly made in a video released in 1994 by Computer Sciences Corporation, funded by the Department of Defense Legacy Resource Management Program, called The Happy Bottom Riding Club: The Legacy of Pancho Barnes.

In the video, a narrator, several aviation pioneers, and Pancho herself tell stories about The Happy Bottom Riding Club. Here are a few snippets from the video’s transcript.

0:31 – 0:47 “What took place here a half century ago altered the course of history and changed the world. The events that happened here probably helped America win the cold war, launched us into the space program, and made America a major force to be reckoned.”

1:27 – 1:57 “But the story of Pancho Barnes and the Happy Bottom Riding Club is one that is tightly interwoven with the history of Edwards Air Force Base and the flight test center. You can’t tell one story without telling the other. Edwards is where the first American jet airplane flew, the sound barrier was broken, and where the rocket sled tests blasted through the sound barrier on the ground and proved that man could survive ejection from an airplane.”

16:50 – 17.04 “That’s where everybody would go and talk about your whatever kind of program you’d been on today. Whatever you’d encounter during the course of the day was invaluable to get around to each other and the way we managed to do that we’d always go over there and have a beer at Pancho’s place.”

32:11 “I knew we could break the sound barrier and I offered a free stake to the first man brave enough and smart enough to do it.”

32:17 “Most aviation riders I know consider the 1947 flight [when Chuck Yeager broke the sound barrier] probably the most important flight in history after the first flight of the Wright Brothers.”

35:34 – 35:45 “And when they heard the sharp double crack of the sonic boom although they didn’t realize it they were actually witnessing the dawn of the space era.”

36:17 – 36:29 “Chuck says, ‘Well, I broke it,’ and it was just like that, no big deal made out of it. He broke it. Everybody knew he would. We bee lined it to Pancho’s.”

Every aviation pioneer knew the sound barrier had to be broken before space could be conquered, and everybody knew Chuck Yeager could do it (even if he had two broken ribs at the time he climbed on his airplane). Yeager got the steak dinner promised by Pancho, and that was it.

Things changed when powers that be decided to “clean up” Muroc Army Airfield.

In 1949, Muroc Army Airfield was renamed Edwards Air Force Base. Then in 1952, the base’s commander, General Al Boyd was replaced by Brigadier General Stanley Holtoner. His mission was to turn Edwards into a modern aviation test center, which to him meant discipline and no fooling around.

So, maybe The Happy Bottom Riding Club had to go? Apparently. General Holtoner’s orders were to acquire Pancho’s land by eminent domain, because an extended runway had to be built. Pancho fought back in court and won, but to no avail, since a “mysterious” fire broke out that totally destroyed the ranch. Pancho did not feel it was feasible for her to rebuild and sold the land to Edwards Air Force Base. The runway was never built.

So, Pancho Barnes retired.

She rode horses and raised dogs. Until in 1975, Pancho Barnes died. Today she is best remembered by military and aviation enthusiasts, who understand her aviation skills and contributions.

Pancho was not pretty like Amelia Earhart, she did not disappear in mysterious circumstances, and she died in her home at 74 of natural causes.

But she definitely deserves a Google Doodle during Women’s History Month.

Picture: Pancho Barnes, age 29, with her Travel Air Mystery Ship. On that day, August 4, 1930, she set a new speed record for women. The record was previously held by Amelia Earhart.

Recommended eye opener: Joe Rogan podcast #2281 with Elon Musk

This recommendation is for folks not familiar with The Joe Rogan Experience podcasts. And for those who would like to understand what DOGE is really doing and why.

This recommendation is for those not yet familiar with Rogan’s conversations with folks like J.D. Vance, Mark Zuckerberg, Mel Gibson, Rod Blagojevich, Tulsi Gabbard, Donald J. Trump, Woody Harrelson, Bob Lazar, Gad Saad, and many others with a lot to say.  Those who are already Rogan enthusiasts will surely have already listened to this episode.

Briefly regarding the Joe Rogan Experience podcasts: Rogan, born in 1967, started his podcast in 2009 on YouTube.  Today, the podcast has massive audiences on all popular platforms.  The recommended episode #2281 with Elon Musk had 10,518,308 views and 66,911 comments on YouTube as of this writing.  Joe Rogan lives in Austin, Texas.  He practices martial and fighting arts, and is an avid archer and bow hunter (yes, he and his family eat everything he kills).  Rogan is able enthusiastically to discuss all kinds of subjects with his podcast guests.

So, why is the Joe Rogan Experience episode #2281 with Elon Musk important?  Because this episode has the potential of forcing DOGE opponents to understand what DOGE is really doing and why it needs to be done.

In episode #2281, Elon Musk says that Americans are living in two separate universes.  There is the DOGE opponents’ universe, and there is the DOGE supporters’ universe.  As a rule, opponents most likely get their news and facts only from mainstream media sources like MSNBC, AP, Washington Post, New York Times, and Facebook.  As a rule, DOGE supporters most likely also consume alternative media like X and the Joe Rogan podcasts. 

Today’s mainstream media shows DOGE protesters speaking of service cuts to the needy, fears of deportation from the U.S., anxiety over changes to Social Security and Medicare, shattered dreams of laid off government employees.  It shows legislators pointing to the “human impact of DOGE cuts.”  It talks about DOGE usurping Congress’ job.  All valid concerns.

Alternative media like X and the Joe Rogan podcasts expose DOGE’s findings in the underbelly of a government doing its best to delay its certain collapse.  The alternative media tacitly brings awareness that DOGE is indeed doing the job Congress has failed to do, since Congress remains unconcerned that absent policy changes the U.S. will face bankruptcy in the not too distant future.   

Just a few numbers can show why DOGE needs to take a chainsaw to the U.S.’s bloated bureaucracy – a task Congress should do but will not.

*   National debt as percentage of gross national debt was 123% as of fiscal year 2024.  As debt increases faster than GDP, this percentage will increase, eventually resulting in unsustainability.

*   House Continuing Resolution No. 14 passed on February 25, 2025, along party lines, with the sole Republican “Nay” coming from Thomas Massie (R-KY).  The Resolution recommended increased amounts of debt each year, resulting in a 47.5% cumulative increase 2025 to 2034.  The Economic Times sounded a warning in November 2024, which like all other warnings, was ignored by the U.S. Congress.

“America’s national debt has reached a record high of $36 trillion, with a $2 trillion increase this year alone … The situation is becoming more dire, with the US debt now standing at 125% of the country’s GDP. Experts predict that this debt-to-GDP ratio could reach 200% in the coming years, meaning that the national debt could be twice the size of the entire US economy.  This is expected to result in the government spending more on interest payments than on essential areas such as infrastructure, development, and education.” America Headed for Bankruptcy, The Economic Times, November 25, 2024.

*   In 2024 the U.S. national debt was $35.5 trillion.  The combined wealth of billionaires was $6.2 trillion.  The combined wealth of millionaires was $26.1 trillion.  Even if the government taxed all the wealth of billionaires and millionaires in 2024, it would not succeed in reducing the national debt to zero.  Congress has preferred to remain ambivalent on calls to fix the country’s deficits by taxing the rich, because it can’t be done.

It would be great if DOGE’s opponents among voters would listen to Elon Musk’s conversation of February 28, 2025, with Joe Rogan. The entire 3-hour conversation is worth listening to, with plenty of entertaining topics — like responses from the sassy sexy voice from Grok. But the segment starting at 13.56 relates to DOGE findings and is the most crucial part of the podcast. 

Here are just a few observations by Musk:

*   Today’s dominant notion is that although a business needs to at least break even to survive, government can spend way beyond its revenues.  That notion is flawed, and on the current trajectory, the U.S. government will collapse in the near future. 

*   Again comparing government to business, a business must pass audits (external or internal) showing clearly described payment (where the money goes and why).  The U.S. Treasury issues numerous payments without codes or descriptions, the destination of which no one can readily determine.  [Note: This observation about the U.S. Treasury is not new.  For example, a report issued by the Office of Inspector General released May 29, 2024, concluded that the Treasury lacked sufficient controls to be fully compliant with the Payment Integrity Information Act of 2019.  Apparently, nothing has changed.]

*    About 1.5 million non-government organizations (NGOs) operate in the U.S.  An estimated 30% of NGOs rely on U.S government grants.  Payments to them are often on autopilot, without any follow-up as to the NGOs activities or efficiency. 

*   Concerns over the fate of Social Security are valid.  Concerns should include the fact that Social Security is a pay-as-you-go system that has created massive unfunded liabilities.  Future obligations are far greater than payments.  If the system is not rectified soon, it will collapse.

*  “DOGE staffers”:  These are the worker bees of DOGE.  They work as employees of government agencies and are vetted in the same way as any other government employee.  Their role is explained in the Executive Order of January 20, 2025. 

*   What DOGE does is shown event by event, line by line, on the DOGE website.  The website is accessible to anyone, including DOGE critics who express concern about not knowing what DOGE does. 

It is unfortunate that those truly concerned about the economic future of our nation had to resort to drastic unconventional action.  But inaction would have been an even more unfortunate choice. 

Picture:  Joe Rogan in his studio on February 28, 2025.

USAID – Humanitarianism vs. America First

The new normal: “Every dollar we spend, every program we fund, and every policy we pursue must be justified with the answer to three simple questions: Does it make America safer? Does it make America stronger? Does it make America more prosperous?”

On January 26, less than a week after President Donald Trump took office, the U.S. State Department announced Secretary Marco Rubio was initiating a review of aid programs under the following guidelines:

“Every dollar we spend, every program we fund, and every policy we pursue must be justified with the answer to three simple questions: Does it make America safer? Does it make America stronger? Does it make America more prosperous?”

As the principal U.S. agency funding foreign assistance, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) was the first to be reviewed, and subsequently slated for elimination, reform or consolidation.

A perusal of the Internet readily shows numerous articles lamenting the humanitarian catastrophe that pausing USAID assistance will cause. One really must dig to find articles confirming the problems inherent in USAID. Depending on viewpoint, this might be because USAID has no problems or because mainstream media is biased. Or all of the above.

In spite of rhetoric about the ills of wealth redistribution, mainly coming from the right, today’s average Americans do observe charity. The National Philanthropic Trust says, “Per capita, Americans voluntarily donate about seven times as much as continental Europeans.”

This humanitarian spirit spills into governmental policies. Therefore, it should not be surprising that U.S. foreign aid agencies have been giving generously to populations in need whether friend of foe. A hungry child in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan experiences the same suffering as a hungry child in the Philippines.

Unfortunately, this humanitarian spirit causes U.S. aid agencies and other parts of government to work at cross purposes, one part spending money and effort on an adversary and the other part spending money and effort combating that same adversary. Here is an example:

The influx of undocumented individuals into the U.S. has become a cause for concern, particularly in conservative circles. Another cause for concern has been reform district attorneys whom conservatives associate with rise in crime. However, USAID funded East West Management Institute, an Open Society Network organization focusing on judicial reform. Also in the Open Society Network is Welcoming America, an organization that empowers “supportive residents of local communities—immigrants and U.S.-born together—to disseminate positive messages about local immigrants.”

This is most probably just one of many examples of cross purpose foreign assistance that does not sit well with the new White House, prompting the swift actions we all have witnessed.

Indeed, as supporters of USAID point out, government spent in fiscal year 2023 only 1.2% of its budget in foreign aid – not a lot to worry about. However, one of the reasons the nation is $36 trillion in debt (121% of GDP) is that members of the U.S. Congress have been either asleep or busy campaigning, while nickel and diming the nation into fiscal unsustainability.

Supporters also have expressed angst that China, our current competitor on many levels, will gain ground if USAID work is paused. Such concern borders on wishful thinking. While USAID focuses on food and social justice, China focuses on roads, hydro power, transportation, and other hard “aid.” The U.S. Government Accountability Office in its October 2024 post says,

“China is the world’s largest debt collector, with outstanding borrower debt sitting between $1.1 and $1.5 trillion. But countries receiving Chinese investments may end up with unsustainable debt that leaves them no choice but to support Chinese global goals.”

Sounds like while the U.S. is playing checkers, China is playing 3-D chess.

Although it is good for the American people to remain charitable and the U.S. to remain engaged in the needs of less fortunate nations, we need to refrain from being naïve. Our legislative leaders have done very little besides bicker and campaign. It is time for somebody to make our government efficient and focused on America’s best interests.

Picture: The former USAID headquarters in Washington DC. USAID employees also occupied a 38,520 sq ft annex building, also located in Washington DC.

Did Greenland say it wanted Texas?

Nations have always felt comfortable taking over other nations. So, it should not be surprising that President-elect Donal Trump wants Greenland. Niccolo Machiavelli explained the situation way back in 1532.

No, Greenland did not say it wants Texas. However, nations have always felt comfortable taking over other nations or occupying foreign territories, and nothing has changed. Examples currently abound: China is committed to reunification with Taiwan, by force if necessary. Russia wants Ukraine as security against NATO encroachment. Israel also cites security as it expands settlements in Palestinian territories and occupies buffer zones in southern Syria. North Korea has never stopped eyeing South Korea.

Therefore, it should not be surprising that President-elect Donald Trump, especially given the expansionist aspirations of China and Russia – as well as the treasure trove of valuable minerals under Arctic soil — wants to take over Greenland. This despite the clear message “Greenland is not for sale” repeated by both Greenland and Denmark. And by the way, Trump also would like to take over Canada and the Panama Canal.

Whether Trump’s threat of maximum menace represent his version of negating tactics or his version of American exceptionalism — i.e. empire building — is anyone’s guess. However, either way, he is seemingly guided by what Niccolo Machiavelli called “effectual truth” in his novel The Prince (1532). Here is an excerpt,

“It remains now to see what the modes and government of a prince should be with subjects and with friends … it has appeared to me more fitting to go directly to the effectual truth of the thing than to the imagination of it … it is so far from how one lives to how one should live that he who lets go of what is done for what should be done learns his ruin rather than his preservation.“

Especially in developed nations, ideal leaders are often envisioned as behaving presidentially, respecting other nations’ sovereignty, practicing “peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none” (as Thomas Jefferson advised during his inaugural speech of 1801).

But the U.S. has enjoyed very few years of peace since independence in 1776. During the 19th century, the U.S. used force during its Western expansion and its removal of French and Mexican presence. The 20th century saw the two great wars and combat against Communist expansion. In the 21st century U.S. lives and treasure have been spent establishing footholds in the Middle East. Today, thankfully not U.S. lives, but certainly plenty of U.S. treasure is being spent defending Israel and Ukraine. While China and Russia are just outside the gates.

Perhaps the world is engaging in imagining what should be rather than what is. So, Donald Trump’s expansionist pronouncements stick out like a sore thumb.

Alternatives? Peace through strength (waging war and calling it peace) is the historical possibility chosen by great empires. Globalization as exemplified by the European Union chooses peace and prosperity through national acquiescence. That’s it?

Niccolo Machiavelli is often perceived as supporting ruthless leaders. However, in Chapter 19 of The Prince he says,

… a prince ought to have two fears, one from within, on account of his subjects, the other from without, on account of external powers. From the latter he is defended by being well armed and having good allies … But concerning his subjects, when affairs outside are disturbed he has only to fear that they will conspire secretly, from which a prince can easily secure himself by avoiding being hated and despised, and by keeping the people satisfied with him, which it is most necessary for him to accomplish,

It appears a prince stays in power at the will of his subjects! Would that mean that in our time and place we could at the ballot box choose leaders who prefer peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations? If so, why have we not?

Picture: The symbol for the 1964 World’s Fair in New York state was The Unisphere. The theme of the fair was “Peace Through Understanding.” This picture is from The Legacy of the 1964 World’s Fair in the History website.

With a name like DOGE it’s got to be good

Wasteful government spending is nobody’s secret. Neither are ways to curtail that spending. However, the debt ceiling is raised every year, the spending continues, and the national debt keeps rising. Maybe DOGE, named after a meme coin featuring Kabosu the dog is weird enough to succeed!

We are living in a brave new world of memes, soundbites, and billion-dollar campaign war chests. Thus, chances are media savvy billionaires calling themselves DOGE might succeed in saving this nation from eventual bankruptcy, when other fiscal Cassandras were and are ignored.

Some reminders

As of December 31, 2024, the U.S. national debt was $36 trillion. As of September 30, 2024, the debt to GDP was 123%. What the country owes is greater than what the country produces to pay its debt.

For the last several decades, Congress – keeper of the nation’s purse strings — has shown no interest in cutting spending. Members feign anguish about raising the debt ceiling every year at budget time, then go ahead and raise it.

Voters seem content re-electing spenders and having their giggles at news of any ludicrous government expenditures.

Three outstanding producers of much giggle but little action

The late Senator William Proxmire (D-Wisconsin) issued 168 “Golden Fleece” awards from 1975 to 1988, informing the public of questionable ways Congress was spending taxpayer money. One of his best choices was a 1978 $97,000 ($400,489 today) study by the National Institute of Mental Health of activities in a Peruvian brothel.

Retired Representative Ron Paul (R-Texas) served in the U.S. Congress for 12 non-consecutive terms. While in Congress he was known as “Dr. No,” since he would not vote in favor of any proposal not expressly authorized by the Constitution. Imagine how much leaner, better, faster, cheaper government would be if every member of Congress did the same!

Current Senator Rand Paul (R-Kansas) has somewhat followed his father’s footsteps in speaking out against our big, expensive government. So far, Rand Paul has issued 10 annual “Festivus Reports” to acquaint voters of the frivolous ways their hard-earned tax money is spent by Congress. Judging by press reaction, one of the most giggle-worthy expenditures in the 2024 report is National Endowment of the Arts funding for ice-skating drag queens.

Enter DOGE

Soon after his presidential victory, Donald Trump appointed entrepreneurs Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy to lead an extra-governmental group tasked with dramatically reducing the federal budget and the national debt. These objectives are to be accomplished by drastically curtailing government spending, downsizing the federal workforce, and radically cutting regulations. This yet to be configured group has been named DOGE, an acronym for Department of Government Efficiency.

Never mind that, in addition to the government waste warriors mentioned above, we already have the Government Accountability Office and the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability shouting from the rooftops about the incredible amount of taxpayer dollars wasted by various and sundry federal government activities.

Never mind that DOGE will need to dodge all manner of pelts that will surely come its way – claims of extra-constitutional actions, challenges from the legion of entities feeding at the public trough, lawsuits from axed civil servants, dissatisfaction from the forever-growing mass of government-dependent voters, and reluctance from Congress members not willing to upset established sources of donations and votes.

How could DOGE miraculously succeed when others have failed?

  • The power of constant soundbites

Most people these days tolerate (or welcome) a ceaseless stream of breaking news and social media notifications. Shortcuts into the populace’s conscious abound. So do media influencers who successfully promote or ruin products, people, and ideas. Just look at your Facebook or X account, and no further indication of this truth is necessary.

DOGE comes with the power of Elon Musk’s frequent soundbites in the news. It comes with the power of X. It comes riding on the waves of a populist movement made credible by the success and high visibility of leaders like Javier Milei of Argentina and Nayib Bukele of El Salvador.

  • The power of ubiquitous memes

Evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins coined the word “meme,” short for the ancient Greek word “mimeme” meaning cultural copying. Dawkins characterized memes as,

“… melodies, ideas, catchphrases or bits of information that leap from brain to brain through imitation, expediting their transmission.” The surprising power of internet memes, 09/28/2022.

Unsurprisingly, DOGE is a meme coin, Elon Musk’s favorite crypto currency. The coin came into being when a photo of a Shiba Inu dog named Kabosu went viral, and crypto innovators riding on the popularity of Bitcoin produced the DOGE featuring Kabosu. Take your pick as to whether DOGE stands for DOG-E coin or not.

Kabosu, RIP, died May 24, 2024, at the age of 18. But she will forever be remembered thanks to the Kabosu monument built in 2023 in her honor in Sakura City’s Sakura Furusato Hiroba riverside park. See featured image of this article, showing Atsuko Sato (who rescued Kabosu from an animal shelter) cuddling Kabosu at the Sakura monument.

May the fiscal salvation offered by the X owner and frequent poster come to pass.

  • The power of excellence.

Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy are of the intellectual elites of our times. In the old days we had Nicolaus Copernicus, Isaac Newton, John Locke, Benjemin Franklin – minds that operated outside the accepted norm and thus produced what was unimaginable before they came along.

Nowadays with excellence justifiably comes monetary rewards. Musk and Ramaswamy are billionaires. And with money comes power. Musk contributed $259 million to groups supporting Trump’s 2024 campaign, most certainly because he did want to do what he proposed during an X interview with Trump: cut government waste.

One would be naïve to think members of Congress are not aware that plying ball might translate into re-election support.

  • The power of sudden epiphanies.

Today, January 6, is Epiphany, also called the Day of the Magi and the 12th Day of Christmas. The word epiphany means a sudden realization of something, an unexpected grasp of reality.

Let’s hope that voters, Congress, and the legacy media soon come to the realization that the current national practice of borrowing to support spending is not sustainable.

On day one, mind our house divided

Victorious conservatives see the recent decisive presidential election as a mandate for radical change. And progressives are predictably suiting up for battle. A house divided cannot stand.

The recent decisive presidential election showed that a significant number of voters were mad as hell and were not going to take it anymore. However, the aftermath showed some with fear of real and imagined threats and public figures vowing to fight in defense of their turf. Everyone seemingly ignoring that “A house divided against itself cannot stand.”

Abraham Lincoln spoke of the peril of a house divided — quoting Matthew 12:25 — at a time of great national sorrow, when the Southern economy dependent on slave labor was made to face an anti-slavery movement. Today, our nation is on a similar, although thankfully not as tragically wrenching, position of divisiveness: populous coastal states dependent on a redistributive economy were made to face a solid mass of conservative middle states.

Obviously, magnitude of suffering is not what can be compared between today’s divisiveness and the post-Civil War discord. What can be instructive, however, is an assessment of what works best after an upheaval. The post-Civil War Reconstruction period tried both change through conciliatory compromise and change through forced acquiescence. The latter overwhelmed the former, leaving unhealed wounds residues of which linger to this day.

Andrew Johnson, Vice President during Abraham Lincoln’s administration, assumed the presidency upon Lincoln’s assassination. He attempted to follow Lincoln’s advice to bind up the nation’s wounds by adopting a conciliatory approach to full emancipation of former slaves.

His efforts were ineffectively lenient, given the enormity of the challenge. The defeated South experienced rampant violence against former slaves. Radical Republicans in Congress upon achieving a majority, implemented a vastly more stringent agenda, imposing military rule in the South, and disenfranchising Southern rebels.

While Radical Republican actions enabled basic requirements of equality with passage of the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the Constitution, they also ushered Jim Crow. From Whites Only water fountains to Whites Only suburbs, Jim Crow lasted for nearly 100 years. The last vestiges of which were legislatively erased by the Civil Rights Act of 1964, but Jim Crow left an entire population of citizens playing catch up.

We should accept that Andrew Johnson’s conciliatory approach did not work. However, we should also speculate whether the Radical Republican approach might have been too harsh, producing unfortunate boomerang effects.

The result of the 2024 presidential election is being lauded by supporters as a mandate for radical change that will necessitate radical actions. Predictably, progressive-socialist bastions are already suiting up for battle – the boomerang effect is already evident.

Progressive state governors like Gavin Newsom of California, J.B. Pritzker of Illinois, Kathy Hochul of New York, and Maura Healey of Massachusetts are leading the charge – in the words of Gavin Newsom – to “Trump-proof” their states.

Less strident state leaders have issued more thoughtful messages. Minnesota Governor Tim Walz made a good point: the Trump-Vance team often spoke of leaving decisions to the states; therefore, he is “willing to take them at their word for that.” Walz listed the areas he will defend: abortion rights, climate change, gun restrictions in schools and labor rights. These issues are good ones for the federal government to handle with finesse rather than bluster.

Admitedly, there are issues that need to be handled firmly, but hopefully not belligerently.

It should be obvious by now given the nation’s current unsustainable $35 trillion debt that government is spending beyond its means trying to support an obscenely bloated bureaucracy and a dependent legal and illegal constituency. The incoming administration has pledged to trim both.

Hopefully, in its efforts to keep its pledge the new administration will act “with malice toward none” by avoiding unnecessary acrimonious words and deeds. This tactic will do wonders to heal the nation’s divisiveness and set it on a path to greater prosperity.

Hopefully, the new majority in Congress will heed its Constitutional duties “to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States.” (Article I, Section 8, Clause 1). For the last two decades, Congress has abdicated most of its Constitutional responsibilities, by loosening its purse strings ($35 trillion in national debt), adopting a lenient approach to homeland security (open borders and a military not fully prepared), and forgetting what “general” as opposed to selective welfare means.

Hopefully, new leaders will focus on the big picture – national expenditures, prosperity, and a safe homeland. And defer posturing, especially in signing of Executive Orders.

Hopefully, new leaders will mind history and the perils of a house divided.

Grocery prices too high? You can fix that!

When inflation gets so high that voters complain, politicians can dance around the challenge by implementing price controls, breaking up big corporations, or trying other gimmicks that have never worked. Or they can refrain from pressuring the Federal Reserve, and allow them to bring inflation down by increasing interest rates and decreasing the money supply.

The working middle and modest-income classes in the United States are struggling with rising prices and stagnant incomes. They are also hoping government will “do something” to ease their pain. Unfortunately, most often government is the cause of the pain, not the cure.

An article dated November 2013, on the website Federal Reserve History, has some interesting things to say about the Great Inflation of 1965-1982.

Here are a few quotes from that article:

“The Great Inflation was the defining macroeconomic event of the second half of the twentieth century … It was, according to one prominent economist, ‘the greatest failure of American macroeconomic policy in the postwar period.’ “

“In 1964, inflation measured a little more than 1 percent per year. It had been in this vicinity over the preceding six years. Inflation began ratcheting upward in the mid-1960s and reached more than 14 percent in 1980.”

“While economists debate the relative importance of the factors that motivated and perpetuated inflation for more than a decade, there is little debate about its source. The origins of the Great Inflation were policies that allowed for an excessive growth in the supply of money—Federal Reserve policies.”

“The late 1960s and the early 1970s were a turbulent time for the US economy. President Johnson’s Great Society legislation brought about major spending programs across a broad array of social initiatives at a time when the US fiscal situation was already being strained by the Vietnam War.”

“A more disruptive force was the repeated energy crises that increased oil costs and sapped U.S. growth. The first crisis was an Arab oil embargo that began in October 1973 and lasted about five months. During this period, crude oil prices quadrupled to a plateau that held until the Iranian revolution brought a second energy crisis in 1979. The second crisis tripled the cost of oil.”

“The Nixon administration introduced wage and price controls over three phases between 1971 and 1974. Those controls only temporarily slowed the rise in prices while exacerbating shortages, particularly for food and energy. The Ford administration fared no better in its efforts. After declaring inflation “enemy number one,” the president in 1974 introduced the Whip Inflation Now (WIN) program, which consisted of voluntary measures to encourage more thrift. It was a failure.”

“In 1979, Paul Volcker, formerly the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, became chairman of the Federal Reserve Board.”

“By this time, it was generally accepted that reducing inflation required greater control over the growth rate of [bank] reserves specifically, and broad money more generally. … Lending activity fell, unemployment rose, and the economy entered a brief recession … But the Volcker Fed continued to press the fight against high inflation with a combination of higher interest rates and even slower reserve growth … Unemployment peaked at nearly 11 percent, but inflation continued to move lower and by recession’s end, year-over-year inflation was back under 5 percent.”

The meaning, summarized:

*Government spent too much thanks to the Federal Reserve’s generous increase in the money supply and its failure to change monetary policy when inflation started to rise significantly.

*There was no oil price gouging. The significant increase in the price of gas and energy was the result of shortages caused by the Arab oil embargo and by the Iranian revolution.

*The Nixon administration’s wage and price controls did not work. They resulted in massive shortages of goods and an inflation rate of 11%.

*The Ford administration’s measures to encourage corporate and consumer thrift did not work either.

*What did work in bringing inflation down to 3.66% by 1987 were the policies of Paul Volcker, Federal Reserve Chairman from August 1979 to August 1987. He raised interest rates as high as 19.08% and decreased the money supply.

*The Federal Reserve continuously plays a balancing act in abiding by its objectives of maximum employment and price stability.

The Somewhat Great Inflation of 2022-2024.

The 9% inflation rate of 2022 pales by comparison to the 13.88% 1980 rate.

However, just as spending on the Vietnam war and the Great Society fueled inflation, spending in response to the 2019-2023 pandemic did as well. In 2020 federal spending increased 45% from 2019, as compared to a 18% increase in spending in response to the Great Recession of 2008-2009.

The Nixon administration price and wage control did nothing to stabilize prices. So far, neither has the Biden administration Inflation Reduction Act. However, interest rate increases have made a difference.

The unadjusted 12-months ended July 2024 inflation rate for all items of goods and services was 2.9%, down from 3.2% in 2023 and 8.5% in 2022. The decrease is thanks to the Federal Reserve Bank steadily increasing the Federal Funds rate from 1.68% in July 2022 to 5.33% in July 2024.

Other factors besides spending.

There are certainly other factors besides excessive government spending without significant increase in production that can trigger inflation. The factors that contributed to the current inflation are mentioned in these two studies:

*A study reported in July 2024 by MIT Sloan School of Management indicates the following triggers and their relative influence on the current inflation:

Money supply 2.90%
Yield curve 3.30%
Wages and salaries 4.80%
Personal consumption 6.20%
Producer prices 10.10%
Interest rates 14.30%
Inflation expectations 16.90%
Federal spending 41.60%

Federal spending outweighs all other influences. Interestingly, money supply is not a significant contributor according to this study. Although, this paragraph from Statista Research dated May 14, 2024, disagrees.

“While between 2000 and 2019, the M1 money supply increased at a slow pace, there was an exceptionally sharp increase in 2020, which was the result of the Federal Reserve’s quantitative easing in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The sharpest increase took place in May 2020, when the M1 money supply was increased from 4.8 to 16.2 trillion U.S. dollars.”

*And from Brookings Institution research dated June 13, 2023:

“The pandemic-era inflation has been a complicated phenomenon that involved both multiple sources and complex dynamic interactions. Ultimately, as many have recognized, the inflation largely reflected strong aggregate demand, the product of easy fiscal and monetary policies, excess savings accumulated during the pandemic, and the reopening of locked-down economies.”

Additional factors.

Indeed, the current inflation is complex, with many variables. One variable that the above-mentioned studies do not emphasize because it does not play a major role in inflation is corporations’ ability to raise prices in a consolidated market. Microsoft and Alphabet are examples of near monopolies that are often accused of setting rules and prices largely undisturbed by competitors.

Although those accusations are partly true (Procter & Gamble’s recent report of sales decline attests that the company’s ability to raise prices is not unlimited!), the clamor that government “do something” is laughable, since it is government’s “easy money” that allows formation of such monopolies. Remember, buyouts are mostly leveraged, facilitated by low interest rates.

In conclusion.

Once upon a time, the U.S. dollar was backed by gold. In those old days, politicians could not get re-elected by just spending unlimited amounts of government fiat money giving their constituents the moon – today they can.

Unfortunately, unbridled spending brings on inflation. When inflation gets so high that voters complain, politicians can dance around the challenge by implementing price controls, breaking up big corporations, or trying other gimmicks that have never worked. Or they can refrain from pressuring the Federal Reserve, and allow them to bring inflation down by increasing interest rates and decreasing the money supply.

Thankfully, politicians do not simply step into their roles – they get elected by voters. Thus, voters can fix things that go wrong, like inflation, by voting wisely.