Department of Business?

Enough Is Enough

Now according to Obama what would really help create new jobs in the private sector and enhance the nation's business environment is a new huge bureaucratic, money munching monster called the Department of Business. You see from a progressive like Obama's perspective the government is the answer to all your prayers rather than the problem that is dragging our economy down kicking and screaming.

Now what this sort of thing might do is create a new "Jobs For Friends" program to bloat the already bloated federal bureaucracy and allow Obama ], or any other despot, the ability to exercise enhanced crony capitalism I don't see any jobs being created in the private sector. The government sector maybe. But that sector produces not but grief.

When Mitt Romney says Barack Obama doesn't understand business that is an understatement.

How About Proposing A Department Of Bad Ideas Barky?

Wasn't this the same Obama who just proclaimed on the campaign trail that the “free enterprise system is the greatest engine of prosperity the world’s ever known." He was all about it being the sliced bread of America then turns around and claims bow that given a second term he will create this bureaucratic nightmare to make the situation even worse than he has made it with even more excessive regulations. And you're going to vote for this guy? Just what every business man needs - more top down guidance on how to screw things up. Talk about "trickle down government!"

Heck just let your imagination run wild. Imagine a whole department of pencil pushers willing to fork over our tax dollars to solar energy companies that have one foot on the banana peel when they get an Obama stimulus injection. Imagine hell! It has already happened over at least ten times too many. One writer likened this creation as being able to do what the Department of Education has done to our children's education. It has fed the National Education Association unions but beyond that not much has occurred. The function of education needs to be returned to the local/state level.

The craziest part of this idea, one of the worst Obama has had yet, is that this will further his trickle down government agenda even further. He has already gotten the US tax payer even more knee deep in debt because of his green energy cronyism and bailout of Government Motors and Chrysler. He took both of those to accelerated bankruptcy and saved the UAW's butt at the expense of the investors and non-union businesses associated with the industry and wants to tell us every penny has been repaid when it hasn't been. GM still owes the US tax payer a minimum of $25 billion and is on shaky ground again.

His idea of the government's function in "free" private enterprise is to pick the winners and losers instead of the consumer. So then they take these hair brained ideas which hair brains think sound wonderful and invest our tax dollars. Then when they fail it will take more tax dollars in order to bail those failures out. Good grief what a vicious circle.

The problem with large government lovers is that they don't care what something costs, as long as it isn't them paying for the cost of subsidizing idiot ideas. The Chevy Volt is a prime example and an absolute bust. Coal is a prime generator of electricity and what does the Volt need in order to run just down the block at most? Exactly the fossil fuel that Obama has such disdain for. Think about the logic of such flawed thinking.

We Don't Need anymore Of This Sort Of Thing...

Look folks. If the Obama administration was a publicly traded company it would have folded long ago. We're $6 trillion into our pockets with Obama and we need to pull the plug on this whole failed social experiment. We don'[t need the government to understand business. We do need a President though to be the CEO of this country who has business experience. All these academic eggheads surrounding Obama don't have a clue.

QUESTION OF THE DAY: Is an election on big ideas even possible when Barack Obama is one of the candidates?

"Like" It, "Tweet" It, "Pin " It, "Share It" With Your Followers. Time to let em read it.

As Always,

The Frog Prince

It's November So Remember!

More by this Author

  • "Ineptocracy" Is A Word
    18

    Ineptocracy is the new system of government that Obama-Biden ushered in. It is a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society...


Comments 21 comments

Barefootfae profile image

Barefootfae 4 years ago from Skye

How many times is he going to try and alter the flag??

It's really tacky looking anyway.


TheManWithNoPants profile image

TheManWithNoPants 4 years ago from Tucson, Az.

Just a few more days bro.

~ jim


Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 4 years ago from Rural Arizona

Holy crap, just what we need right now is another government money pit to throw money at. I can't even imagine how a bloated department like this would accomplish a thing.


tsadjatko profile image

tsadjatko 4 years ago from maybe (the guy or girl) next door

Don't we already have a department of Commerce? Isn't that the same.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

The link at the end addresses some additional issues but yes. we have a Department of Commerce which is basically a money muncher already too.

TFP


Barefootfae profile image

Barefootfae 4 years ago from Skye

Might this not also turn into "Hi there, We are from the Govt and you have earned all the money you need this year. Get It?"


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

Barefootae - Yes, I get it loud and clear. Time to serve up eviction notices before we go over the cliff.

The Frog


Stu 4 years ago

The whole thing is really alot worse than it looks. A "Department of Business" will formalize and expand a racket that Obama has been running for four years. The basic scam is for a crony (often a liberal government official with ties to Obama who quits and starts businesses in the private sector) to form a think tank that "advises" Obama on policies that benefit his businesses. In effect, the think tank writes laws that are passed by Congress and signed by Obama. These laws create government handouts to his businesses. And then the businessman makes campaign contributions to Obama and his loyalists in Congress. Essentially, it's taxpayer funded money laundering. But to Obama, it's "investment." But these "investments," funded by you and me, generate no return to the Treasury, not even return of principal, so we get no tax relief or debt reduction. In fact, all the People get is debt expansion to fund the so-called "investments." In socialist countries they call this "corporatism." But at least in these nations the scam is out in the open. In Obamaland, the whole scheme is hidden behind think tank "studies," false claims of new jobs and clean energy miracles, and an endless circle of federal handouts and campaign kickbacks the MSM won't talk about (and may not even be allowed to talk about under FTC/FCC retaliation fears).


breakfastpop profile image

breakfastpop 4 years ago

What a sick joke. He also wants to tell people in the private sector how much money they can earn. I had better be able to cast my vote on Tuesday. As of now I have no services. If I can't, vote twice, one for you and one for me! Up and useful, very useful!


rfmoran profile image

rfmoran 4 years ago from Long Island, New York

The bottom line is that Obama really, deeply and sincerely does not trust free people making free choices to get it right. He is of the conviction that "well meaning" public servants really know what's good for us, rather than rapacious profit seekers. That central planning has never worked and never will is a thought that he does not bother to think. Well done hub, voted up and awesome.


Conservative Lady profile image

Conservative Lady 4 years ago from Surprise Arizona - formerly resided in Washington State

He will destroy every thing great about this country if the voters let him. It will take a long time to recover from President Obama....


Ghost32 4 years ago

Conservative Lady: And maybe that's a good thing. It might remind us not to go to sleep at the switch again but to remain ever vigilant--like the Progressives have already been doing without fail for more than a century.


Stu 4 years ago

Hi tsadjatko,

Yes, we do have a Department of Commerce. From its mission statement: "The U.S. Department of Commerce promotes job creation, economic growth, sustainable development and improved standards of living for all Americans by working in partnership with businesses, universities, communities and our nation’s workers. The department touches the daily lives of the American people in many ways, with a wide range of responsibilities in the areas of trade, economic development, technology, entrepreneurship and business development, environmental stewardship, and statistical research and analysis."

The Secretary of Commerce leads the DOC, overseeing a $7.5 billion budget and nearly 47,000 employees. A major issue here is that the federal government shouldn't be meddling in commerce, as it has no Constitutionally enumerated power to do so. Again from their mission statement: "Here at home, the Commerce Department promotes progressive business policies that help America’s businesses and entrepreneurs and their communities grow and succeed." This is (likely) just a euphemism for socialist corporatism (trying to force businesses to further federal goals at the expense of shareholder returns, thus making corporate officers violate their fiduciary obligation to shareowners). As long as the DOC issues no regulations, it probably is not in technical violation of the Constitution. But clearly its existence violates the spirit of the Constitution. The powers granted to the federal government are enumerated in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution. All of these powers relate to international matters, like operating the military, promulgating postal and maritime law, setting tariff rates, etc. Purely domestic law is the sole jurisdiction of the states and municipalities.

Some falsely argue that the federal government has plenary (general) jurisdiction over companies with interstate revenues or expenses, resting their intellectually activist laurels on the Constitution's Commerce Clause: "[The Congress shall have Power] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes." (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution). In reality, the Commerce Clause was enacted with the Congressional intent of prohibiting restraint of trade by the states, and had no bearing on regulation of businesses. The Commerce Clause grew out of the seminal Ogden Shipping case. Ogden Shipping Corporation, among other things, engaged in interstate commerce by transporting goods from NY to NJ via river boats. At the time, the state of NY granted Ogden a dispensation from having to pay its 6% excise tax on interstate product transport, but all other companies, whether chartered in NY or not had to pay the tax if NY rivers were utilized for interstate commercial purposes. This kind of "King's Dispensation" dates back to the colonial days - many states enacted domestic tariff laws that discriminated against products imported from other states, or produced in-state by companies with charters in other states (protectionism). The Commerce Clause had the originalist intent of eliminating these types of state based restraints of trade.

In 1890, Congress passed the Sherman Antitrust Act, which made it illegal for businesses to monopolize or restrain interstate commerce. While prevention of antitrust is laudable and legal at the state level, it is beyond the scope of Constitutionally enumerated federal powers. The Sherman Antitrust Act was not only unconstitutional, but it led to numerous laws and court decisions that mutated the original intent of the Commerce Clause (preventing restraint of trade by the states) to unconstitutionally granting the federal government "power of general application" over businesses with interstate operations. Essentially, the current activist interpretation of the Commerce Clause gives the federal government virtually unlimited powers over businesses with interstate operations, whereas the Tenth Amendment in combination with Article 1, Section 8 actually forbids the federal government from having ANY powers in this area of law (i.e., these are purely state matters per the Constitution).

Stu


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

Stu - The Department of Commerce is like tits on a bull - totally useless. One cabinet department that needs to have the axe taken to it.

TFP


tsadjatko profile image

tsadjatko 4 years ago from maybe (the guy or girl) next door

Frog that would be a travesty - stu will have learned all that info for naught! :-)

Just kidding Stu - I really do appreciate all the info you shared - and I am impressed, you are no slouch when it comes to knowledge of the government.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

tsad - Stu has been a very good friend fopr many years. He's one of the smartest men that I know and I know some smart people.

TFP


teaches12345 profile image

teaches12345 4 years ago

Really? I can't help buy feel that he is grasping at straws here. It just doesn't make sense and goes against what he originally stated on business pursuits.


b. Malin profile image

b. Malin 4 years ago

My BIGGEST worry durning "Sandy" and the Bay rolling down our Neighborhood was...OMG, I've got to be able to VOTE on Tuesday. Here in South Jersey, by the shore, we are Drying out, the Ban has been lifted, and we will be Voting...We are Survivors. I'm now NOT worried about any new CRAZY Obama Government Ideas like the Dept. Of Business...Because we are putting OBAMA out of Business in Washington. I am Casting my Vote for Romney!

Good Hub Frog!


drbj profile image

drbj 4 years ago from south Florida

A Department of Business when we already have a Department of Commerce - isn't that redundant, Jim?

I like Mitt's response to that insanity - 'we need a president who IS a businessman!'


Wayne Brown profile image

Wayne Brown 4 years ago from Texas

One only has to look at the Dept. of Agriculture to realize how many tenacles a "Dept of Business" would have into the private sector. It is difficult enough now for a new business to set up with minimal federal involvement...such a depart will only make it worse for it will see itself as a regulator and a fee collector at best. This will add nothing to the government of value to the people and ultimately will drive up the cost of goods and services even more. Obama must be missing some of his Magna Cum Laude marbles to be suggesting a growth in government at a time when a reduction in spending is an absolute requirement. He has not qualms in reducing our military yet is more than willing to expand the overall size of government. How can any intelligent person follow such logic and come up with the same conclusion? It is time for him to go....passed time. ~WB


Faith Reaper profile image

Faith Reaper 4 years ago from southern USA

Not one bit of sense does he ever make, and he contradicts everything he has ever stated? In the morning, at last, we vote him out . . .

sharing

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working