Robert R. Owens, PhD
What's in a Number?
September 1, 2009

Stating the obvious passes for folk wisdom in remote tribal areas such as the Southside of Chicago and since we now live in the Chicago-on- the-Potomac perhaps we should start to take some of this obvious wisdom into account. Take statistics, here is a science that’s used to make judgments and to justify actions. And what are statistics, just numbers. And what’s in a number? And as the Chicagoism goes, “Figures don’t lie but liars figure.” How does this help us understand our new Omerica?

Contrary to popular belief as nurtured by the Mainstream Media, President Obama is not the most popular president in history. His poll numbers are now lower than President Bush’s were at the same place in his first term. He’s even tracking lower than the almost universally repudiated President Carter was at the same point in his first term. And while the media’s initial announcement that “Voter turnout in 2008 shattered all records,” and “2008 Could Mark Highest Voter Turnout Rate Since 1968”was trumpeted on the all-liberal-all-the-time news networks making Obama’s victory appear a sweeping mandate for change. However, the follow-up reporting which found “That huge voter turnout? Didn't happen” and “Voter Turnout in 2008 Lowest in 12 Years” didn’t receive the same 24/7 wall-to-wall coverage.

In addition, despite being panned and pummeled by the establishment during the election, Sarah Palin was personally more popular than either McCain or Obama. Today after months of the media telling us how blessed we are to have a president who is like god and that Sarah Palin is barely intelligent enough to breathe she is only 6 points off the mark for a rematch with her at the top of the ticket. We’re told by the same people who relentlessly attack her that her decision to resign as governor of Alaska cost her some popularity. These same domesticated journalists ignore or ridicule the idea her decision allows the people of Alaska to have a state government dedicated to their interests instead of asking the people of Alaska to pay endless legal fees fighting off frivolous lawsuits brought by the progressive attack machine. New media sources insist her numbers are holding steady. As people think this through they will see that the honest and forthright way she’s moving forward will be a mark in her favor.

A bail-out here, a take-over there after a while it’s all just a blur. When financial figures grow beyond experience they lose all relevance and become just numbers, millions, billions, trillions might as well be gazillions. Yet everyone understands we don’t create wealth moving it around. This “spread the wealth around” statist thinking leads to saving a failing business like GM.

In the short term we may save some jobs but what new industry have we stopped from starting by propping up one that should die? The government can’t give anyone anything unless they take it from someone else. Giving GM 80 billion dollars means there’re 80 billion dollars less for new enterprises. Have you ever asked yourself, why didn’t we bail-out the buggy whip industry? We could’ve saved many jobs but we might have strangled the auto industry in its cradle. Today, in the Bizarro World of Obamanomics our government owns two major auto corporations and now we’re subsidizing the consumer with cash for clunkers. What’s the result of these statist actions? Taking from those who produce wealth to give it to those who consume wealth is a disincentive to creating wealth.  Why make it if the government is going to take it away.  People are already asking, “Why should I keep working?”