When I was a child being raised by a union-factory worker and a union factory worker's daughter, I was told repeatedly by both that the Republicans were out to put more money in the business owner's pockets. Looking back on that, I think that may have been the biggest inspiration for me to turn my back on my parent's political interests once I reached the age of reason and join the Republican party. After reading a repetitive assault on Wisconsin's current governor based on job creation this afternoon, I realized that a lot of people don't understand the numbers, and I'd like to get it off my chest. I'm not going to bash, mud-sling, or name call, even though I guarantee that this simple explanation of economics will render me the victim of all three.
To start this article, I'm gonna cover a couple topics that are completely unrelated to the topic at hand. The reason I am saying these things now is because even though my article is about economics, these are the topics people are going to lash out with. It's also my experience with the harder core Liberals that this will be the point where they stop reading and start lashing out, since I am expressing conservative beliefs to their parties ideals, so here goes.
1. The non-existant war on women - No politician for any office in any party is stupid enough to attempt to enact a law that will alienate 50.3% of voting adults in America. There is no war on women, that was an election ploy thought up by the Democratic National Convention to discredit anyone who is a Christian. I assure anyone reading, that George W. Bush was strongly against abortion and no law was ever even attempted for a federal ban on it. He knew, as well as I do, that Congress can pass no law forcing religion on anyone by the Constitution, same way every other politician in the country. As I posted in my article "The Separation of Church and State", this is also a state and local government issue.
2. Gay Marriage - Also a religiously protected issue, also not something that can be decided on a federal level. Covered in the same article.
3. Drug testing for welfare - Great idea. I challenge any politician or, for that matter, any democratic supporter who claims that everyone, or even most people on welfare are drug free and actively seeking employment instead of using the system to rent a house between 50th Street 68th Street and 24th Avenue and Sheridan Road. And for the politicians who have the money, also buy one of these houses in addition to the one you are renting and ONLY rent it to someone who is receiving Section 8. Don't tell anyone who you are...and just live there for a year. Then go back to Madison, or DC, and tell me that everyone living on state aid is drug free and actively seeking employment.
Now that the extreme left wingers have stopped reading, and are preparing to blow up my comment feed, lets get down to the meat of the article for the moderates of both sides, and the idiots on the far right that make the rest of us look bad.
Now, where I began was saying the adage says that Republican politicians are only out to line the pockets of businessmen. After doing a lot of thinking about this over the years.....I determined that this isn't entirely wrong, and unlike my parents, I'm not really opposed to this practice. Money becomes capital that can be further invested into a business. Now, let's look at business in America for a second before we go any further than this. It's no secret that when most people think about business leaders in the United States, they think of massive corporations with a few very rich people at the top. Businesses like GM, McDonalds, Denny's, Bank of America, eTrade, and Disney top the list. All of these are massive corporations where the heads were voted in or inherited the business from a parent. Most of the people at the top of these businesses never had to work for anything and had everything handed to them for their entire lives. What you may not realize is that this actually represents a very SMALL percentage of businesses in the US. The vast majority of people operating a business in the country are people who worked hard to scrape out a little bit of capital because they had an idea to make their communities better, and risked everything they had to try and bring it to light. My cousin's are business leaders like this. My uncle is a business leader like this. My brother in law to be is a business leader like this. When I dig myself out of the hole that the Obama Administration has left me in, I fully intend to become a business leader like this. People like us look to tax breaks for operating our businesses in a legal manner and putting people to work so that we can come in and make our businesses better.
Now that I've touched on the definition of the most common business leader, I look at what our Republican Politicians do for us. A tax break on a business or a business leader is an opportunity for extra capital. That is capital that is free to us to do with what we wish. At the point that the break has been made to a business or a business leader, the money is no longer in the possession of the governing authority. So, when a CEO from a bigger corporation uses that break to go on a golf outing, you maybe need to stop pointing the finger at the politician that made it happen. I know that there is corruption in politics, and sometimes it is planned between business buddies, but for the most of us who want to lead a business, those dollars are what we use to improve working conditions and create jobs to support our communities.
One final touch on Bush's "sending all jobs overseas". I have another article planned on unions and worker ethics that will go into greater detail about this, but I know this will come up in comment feeds because it is a part of Republican Economics. I've never spoken to Bush, so I can't speak for him personally. But what I do know is this. Local manufacturing means US jobs. US workers are taxpayers. And, most importantly, taxpayers pay the wages of politicians. Republicans also generally have a common goal of putting people back to work and shrinking government run benefits in favor of people supplying their own benefits. There isn't a Republican Politician alive who would benefit from sending a single job to China or Mexico, therefore it would be in their best interest to keep the jobs here. This is a pretty simple idea, actually. Jobs going overseas keeps production costs down, especially with free trade, and that makes them more accessible to the majority of people. I have more to say on this when I speak about the structuring of unions past and present, but for tonight I leave you with just that little piece of wisdom. For now, keep in mind that not every business owner is the CEO of BMO Harris, and vote to keep jobs here and create more.
