The Swamp fears Donald Trump, With Good Reason

As we all know, Democrats and the Swamp hate Donald Trump.  They probably hate him more than any president ever.  Those elites, including celebrities, journalists and politicians used to love Trump, with thousands of them smiling and taking pictures of him over the years. But not anymore.

All of that changed in 2015 when he decided to run for president.  It wasn't that he was running for president that made him enemy number one, but rather because he was running for president as a Republican.

But of course being a Republican wasn’t always the polarizing factor that it became in 2015 and beyond.  Sure, the media disliked Bush and McCain and Romney, but they were OK because they were all within the acceptable limits of what could be tolerated and controlled.  Trump was and is something altogether different. 

To understand why he was and is different, look at the people at the heart of the Swamp, the government.

Nancy Pelosi, is 84 years old with 47 years in politics & government, a Political Science major with no experience in the private sector.

Chuck Schumer, 74 years old, 49 years in government, a lawyer with no private sector experience.

Hakeem Jeffries, 54 years old, 17 years in govt. A lawyer with no private sector experience.

Joe Biden, 82 years old, 50 years in government, a lawyer with zero private sector experience.

Bernie Sanders, 83 years old, 53 of which were in politics and government, a Political Science major who held a smattering of odd jobs prior to joining government.

Adam Schiff, a 64 year old lawyer who’s spent 38 years in government with zero private sector experience.

Pete Buttigieg, 42 years old, 12 years in government, a Political Science major who spent 3 years working for consulting giant McKinsey & Co. mostly working with NGOs and corporations.  He was in the Navy and did a stint in Afghanistan.

AOC is a 35 year old Econ and International Relations major who’s spent 8 years in government and whose private sector experience is that of a bartender.

Gavin Newsom, a 57 year old Political Science major who’s spent 27 years in government and who in 1992 was brought in by his friend, Gordon Getty, as the co-founder of PlumpJack Winery in Napa, California.   

Elizabeth Warren, a 75 year old lawyer who’s spent 30 years in government and has zero private sector experience.

And it’s not just Democrats…

Mitch McConnell is an 82 year old lawyer who’s spent 50 years in government and never held a private sector job.

Kevin McCarthy is a 59 year old MBA who worked in government for 37 years and sold sandwiches out of his uncle’s yogurt shop while in college.

Paul Ryan is a 54 year old Political Science and Economics graduate who spent 28 years in government before retiring to become a lobbyist in 2019.  He was a waiter and fitness trainer in college.

So there you have it, of the dozen or so most powerful people in American government & politics, only one has any real experience in running a business (Newsom) and that business was funded by one of the richest men in the world at the time.  But somehow they’re the ones making the laws that increasingly impact the businesses that employ every American, and indeed the lives and communities of every single American.   

For these people, government is virtually everything in life.  For most of them, they know nothing about the private sector, the thing that powers America.  They know nothing about running a business, creating jobs, meeting payroll, and perhaps most importantly, doing all of those things while risking everything and while trying to abide by a stultifying labyrinth of ever changing government regulations from an endless array of agencies. 

None of them, aside from Newsom, has built anything of any consequence.  They have no experience of what it’s like to be in business, where 86% of employed Americans work, run a business or be an entrepreneur, the economic fount of America. For most of their adult lives none of them had to worry about the solvency of their next paycheck. Their healthcare plans and those of their families and their employee’s families weren’t resting on their success.  They’ve not had to worry about selling enough products or services in order to keep the lights on, the employees’ paid and fresh product on the shelves or services in the pipeline.  Worrying about and conquering those pressures are what created America’s prosperity. Those are the things that fund the paychecks Americans pay taxes out of that the government turns around and redistributes.  Those are the things that make most Americans’ lives better than those of almost every person in human history. It’s those things, not government…and the people arrayed against Donald Trump have virtually no experience with any of it.

But Trump, he has it in spades.  He’s built giant hotels in the midst of economic turmoil.  He’s done so having to deal with unions, mafia, government regulators, contractors, competitors, bankers and more.  He’s built hotels, golf courses, casinos, apartment buildings, communities and more around the world.  He owned the Miss USA and Miss Universe pageants.  He was a founding member of the USFL, a competitor to the NFL.  He was the star and producer of the Apprentice, the business focused reality show that averaged 14 million viewers per episode for its first six years.  Sure, Trump’s had failures, bankruptcies and lots of lawsuits, but you don’t accomplish anything without risking those outcomes.  He’s failed plenty of times, but he’s succeeded far more often.  He’s created companies that have made millions of paycheck deadlines, that have fed tens of thousands of families and have generated billions of dollars in revenue. 

Donald Trump accomplishes things.  Not only without government, but usually in spite of government.  Maybe the best example of this is his renovation of Wollman Rink, a project that had languished for six years in the hands of the NYC government, who wasted $13 million working unsuccessfully on the project.  Trump completed it in a matter of months, and under budget. And that’s what scares them the most. The Swamp cannot afford to let Donald Trump, on the world’s biggest stage, show Americans that they don’t need government to succeed, that problems can be solved without government “help” and to demonstrate that many times, government is actually the problem. If you’re in the government business, that’s a bad thing because as anyone who’s ever picked up a history book knows, Americans, when unshackled from government regulation, can do extraordinary things. And once they’re reminded of that, all bets are off. 

The last time Trump was president he said he was going to drain the Swamp.  He didn’t. The truth is, he had no idea how deep or wide the Swamp was and is. Most of us didn’t.  Now he does and now we do.  This time he’ll be under no illusions about what he’s up against, and ideally, will act accordingly.  The Swamp knows that. They see the writing on the wall. And it terrifies them.

At least when a pirate takes your money, you know its going to create real jobs in the rum industry...

How much do you earn per year? $25,000? $75,000? How about $150,000? Maybe a bit more, maybe a bit less. Whatever you earn, you probably wish your check was just a little bit bigger.

Many of us look at guys like Alex Rodriguez earning $30 million a year or Johnny Depp earning $50 million or Larry Ellison earning $130 million and wish we could exchange paychecks with them. But then of course we’d have to do what they do in exchange for those paychecks, something which most of us are unlikely to be able to accomplish. That is of course the beauty of free markets, where what you earn is relative to not just the value you bring to an organization, but the relative scarcity of potential replacements who can provide that same value. Take as an example a fireman. Firemen do things that everyone values. When you are standing there and your house is burning down, you value what a fireman does more than anything Angelina Jolie, Bill Gates or Dr. Dre will ever do. Let’s say the average fireman makes $45,000 a year in salary and benefits. Does Johnny Depp’s $50 million compensation mean that his job is 1,000 times more important than the fireman’s? No. The difference is that while Johnny Depp is one of only a handful of actors who can almost guarantee to make a $150 million movie into a blockbuster, there are tens of thousands of people who can and will train to become firemen. Although Hollywood is full of actors who might be willing play the role of Jack Sparrow, the discount DVD bin at Wal-Mart demonstrates clearly why Disney was willing to pay Depp tens of millions of dollars to reprise his role.

In a free market, as what someone earns is largely determined by the value they bring to whoever is writing the check, and how many other people can provide that same value, people can do a variety of things to increase their income by increasing the value they bring to their employer. They can get more or a better education. They can train at their craft to become more skilled. They can learn more skills so they can bring value in other areas.

Wherever your skills, education and efforts have landed you, you probably feel like you work pretty hard and earn your paycheck. Now imagine on having a job paying $95,000? That sounds pretty good. Now imagine that in exchange for that $95,000 you don’t have to actually do anything. Well that was the case with Solyndra. Not that the employees weren’t working hard and trying to create a successful company, they very well might have been. The problem is that the business they were in was simply not sustainable. As is seemingly always the case with “green jobs” everywhere, they can’t survive even the most basic elements of a competitive marketplace. Of course if an investor wants to put their money there, that’s their right. Invest in something you think has legs. Maybe you’re right, maybe you’re wrong. Give it a shot. That’s how free market capitalism works.

Unfortunately however, that’s not what happened at Solyndra. The Obama Administration decided that American taxpayers should tip the scales by putting up half a billion dollars for a company that spent $6 to manufacture a solar panel that it could then turn around and sell for $3. A four year old would recognize that was a recipe for disaster. Even a few people in the Administration saw that there might be a problem. Not only did they know it was problematic before they gave the guarantees, but they had to bend the rules half way through to let the company take all of the money guaranteed even after Solyndra failed to make it’s required payments.

Just in case you think the Administration was chastened and might have learned from its mistakes, think again. Just last week the DOE handed out another $5 billion in loan guarantees to other “green jobs” companies – one of whom is owned by Nancy Pelosi’s brother in law. In the case of one of those projects, the Crescent Dunes Solar Energy Project, the Obama Administration officials signed off on $737 million in loan guarantees for a project that will result in 600 construction jobs and 45 permanent jobs. That works out to $1.245 million per temporary job or $16,600,000 per permanent job. Those numbers are getting up into the Matt Damon pay range. Of course that’s not what those workers are going to be paid, but if Solyndra is anything to go by, they will be earning $100,000 or so per year. Good for them. I’m happy to see anyone earn whatever they can earn. The problem is, however, that the companies paying their salaries are not viable entities. They can’t survive without government support. And government support doesn’t come out of thin air. It comes out of your pocket in the form of taxes. Imagine if the government weren’t wasting these billions of dollars… your $75,000 paycheck might look like $80,000. Who would you rather have that extra $5,000 per year, you and your family or the people running the next failing “green jobs” basket case?

If the American people want to spend $5 billion investing in the future, I’d suggest they follow the path laid out by PayPal founder Peter Thiel rather than the one crafted by community organizer Barack Obama – i.e. more taxes and more money to floundering green companies. Thiel is paying a handful of students $100,000 to drop out of college and spend two years becoming entrepreneurs. They get a guaranteed paycheck, they get mentoring from Thiel and others in the venture capital world, but most importantly, they spend their time seeking to create, invent and develop technologies or products or services that will change the world.

To put this is perspective, the typical VC investment scenario plays out as follows: They lose money on seven out of ten investments. They break even on two out of ten. One of the ten is sufficiently successful that it not only pays back everything that was invested in it, but it covers the losses of the seven and makes money on the whole project.

If that kind of an approach were applied to the money the DOE is throwing down the “green jobs” ratholes, at least we’d have a chance to recoup our money and maybe find a technology that could actually survive in the marketplace… Of course the best thing to do would be to get the government out of the “investing” business all together, and let you keep your money. That $5 billion giveaway to the greenies works out to about $16 per person. If you had it back you might be able to go and see the latest Johnny Depp movie and help the studio pay his hefty salary. You might even have enough left over for a bucket of popcorn.

Blumenthal & Pelosi showcase Democrat's incompetence

There is an old adage that goes something like this: It’s better to keep your mouth shut and let people think you’re stupid than to open your mouth and prove them right.

Thankfully for America not all Democrats are paying that adage much heed, and just in time for the election. Last week Linda McMahon, the GOP candidate for US Senate from Connecticut did the voters of her state a great service. She asked Richard Blumenthal, her Democrat opponent, a simple question: “How do you create a job?” His answer, if you can call it that, was a minute and a half of television gold, which would have been suitable for Laugh In were it still on the air:

“A job is created, and it can be in a variety of ways by a variety of people. But principally by people and businesses in response to demand for products and services. And the main point about jobs in Connecticut is, we can and we should create more of them by creative policies. And that's the kind of approach that I want to bring to Washington… I know about how government can help preserve jobs. And I want programs that provide more capital for small business, that are tax policies that will promote creation of jobs, stronger intervention by government to make sure we use the Made in America policies and Buy America policies to keep jobs here rather than buying products that are manufactured overseas.”

At the beginning you think he might almost be stumbling into the right answer only to watch him find his bearings and focus so that by the end it's crystal clear that he has no idea how to create jobs. The key phrase in his answer is “stronger intervention of government”. Dick Blumenthal in one moment of clarity demonstrates the typical Democratic approach to solving every problem in the country: Government intervention.

Despite decades of failed examples of government intervention in virtually every aspect of the American economy, Democrats still seem unmoved by actual evidence of failure and cling to their progressive notions that nirvana is to be found at the end of a bureaucrat’s pen.

If Blumenthal were the only one then you could make the argument that he was an outlier and that most Democrats aren’t of that cloth. Luckily he’s not the only one who opened his mouth this week to demonstrate Democratic ineptitude. He was joined by Nancy Pelosi as she responded to Newt Gingrich. In a note to GOP candidates Gingrich suggested they make the campaign about the “Democratic Party of food stamps and the Republican Party of paychecks.” He points out that when Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats took over Congress: ‘Unemployment was 4.6% and food stamp usage was around 26.5 million Americans. Today, the unemployment rate is 9.6% and over forty million Americans are on food stamps.”

Pelosi responded and in very short order demonstrated exactly how Democrats put us in this position in the first place: "It is the biggest bang for the buck when you do food stamps and unemployment insurance. The biggest bang for the buck." The solution to all problems is government.

The Democratic belief that prosperity can be legislated or redistributed into existance makes no sense, particularly in a universe where there is simply no empirical evidence that such policies work and legions of examples that it doesn’t work. It almost makes one think of the Soviet Union’s Five Year Plans where the planning committee would set out rosy economic plans for the country that had little connection with the actual conditions in the economy. Invariably, in Orwellian fashion, the plans were invariably officially “successful” regardless of their abysmal failure on the ground. That practice didn’t work out that well for the Soviets and I’m not sure it’s a plan for success here either.

Finally, while Congress has much blame for our current economic mess, they are only part of the legislative partnership. Luckily for them, in President Obama they have found soul mate. A week before his inauguration he told an audience: "Only government can break the vicious cycles that are crippling our economy -- where a lack of spending leads to lost jobs which leads to even less spending; where an inability to lend and borrow stops growth and leads to even less credit." Once in office he boldly set forth implementing the Democrats solution for the country. We had the Stimulus, the nationalization of the auto industry and student loans, the government takeover of healthcare and massive increases in regulation. And, if all that inept legislation were not bad enough in itself, his cabinet appointees, the people who actually implement that legislation intended to revive the economy and spur job creation, have less business experience than any cabinet in 100 years.

America faces a stark choice in November, one between a newly energized, free market solution oriented GOP (albeit having been dragged in that direction by the Tea Party movement – sometimes kicking and screaming) and a party of Democrats, who have pulled back the curtain to reveal what most of us assumed all along: They are economic illiterates. Their solution for creating jobs, reinvigorating the economy and putting America back on the road to prosperity is only to be found through government intervention. As the voters sit back and evaluate their choices, they need simply examine the success those Democratic policies have engendered everywhere from Detroit to California to the Soviet Union. Do they want to sign on for another American version of a Five Year Plan or is it time to give the free market a chance for a change?