Economic security

Economic Security, much ado about something.

What does Lexi (AOC) know about economic security. Perhaps she will give a speech, or an interview, where she can explain her knowledge and depth of understanding with respect to The New Deal. Seems unlikely given her focus on moral objectives, rather than details.

In 1933 congress passed the NIRA (National Industrial Recovery Act). From this authority Roosevelt announced on June 8th of 1934 in a special message, the objective of economic security for the elderly, unemployed, disabled, mother’s pensions, services for disenfranchised children, and aid to state and local public health agencies. On June 29th, 1934 Roosevelt through executive action established the CES (Committee on Economic Security). The executive order was 6757. The report was due by December 1st, 1934. The Social Security Act was signed into Law on August 14th of 1935. Incidentally the Supreme court ruled on May 27, 1935 in Schechter Poultry vs United States that the NIRA was unconstitutional. This was just a few weeks before the legislation was set to expire.

So, we have the Economic Security act as introduced, morphing into the Social Security act we know today. The little detail of the act being born of an unconstitutional authority is long forgotten. Arthur Altmeyer seems to have ignored the long-term solvency of the trust. Does Lexi know the history of the Act? Or, is she just parroting a point of view?

Economic security, for those unwilling to work, is a small part of the Green New Deal. In the broader context consider the existential threat of climate change versus the Great Depression. What measure will Lexi recommend when the Green New Deal causes massive economic dislocation and unemployment.

If we blame the Great Depression on corrupt markets. Will we blame the “Green Collapse” on corrupt politicians? But first a question. IF greenhouse emissions cause global warming, will the elimination of greenhouse emissions cause an ice age? Maybe some moderation is called for, or at least less hysteria.

Similarities in economic drivers of the New Deal and the Green New Deal are nonexistent. While it is possible that Trump may ignite a resurgent Smoot Hawley circumstance, it appears unlikely. Unemployment is relatively low. Economic growth is acceptable, and the stock market is healthy. The deficit, however, is cause for concern.

The Green New Deal can transform circumstances almost immediately. Economic growth will slow or reverse, unemployment will likely skyrocket, retirement funds may be obliterated, and the deficit will be crippling. Changes in transportation modalities approximate being bound to the land, in a way few but Friedrich Hayek would fully appreciate. Only Lexi, could possibly consider this progressive.

While Republicans attack the Lexi deal based on cost. Democrats counter, what is the value of saving the earth? Both arguments are shallow. Republicans need to focus on the lasting reason for the republic, which is the blessings of liberty. Remember Schechter, an excess of government authority. Democrats seem disingenuous when talking about the middle class, while advocating positions that cement in place a haves and have nots segregation of the people. The French constitution was developed to equalize society. It led to Napoleon. Our constitution was exceptional in that the objective was liberty.

If the NIRA was unconstitutional. The Green New Deal must be preceded by a revolution. As all individuals are gifted in different ways. There is nothing as coercive and antithetical to land of opportunity as the objective of equality. Lexi needs to study some history, and maybe she will develop into Alexandria. For now, she is simply the spokesmodel for “I am from the government and I am here to help”.

Coincidentally, the dust bowl was a climate crisis in the 30’s. Although the AAA (Agricultural Adjustment Administration) was aimed at helping farmers by paying subsidies to landowners. Tenant farmers were replaced with equipment and many were left unemployed, sharecropping virtually disappeared. Victims of the unintended consequences of paying landowners to destroy crops and livestock. However, rising farm prices helped landowners pay their mortgages and saved the banks. Tax the poor with higher prices to protect the vested interests of the rich, very progressive.

Ironically, Roosevelt said in his June 1934 message to congress. “Among our objectives I place the security of men, women and children of the nation first”. Maybe Trump should declare a Border New Deal And call it a public works program. Alternatively, maybe the New Deal should not be exploited in the context of modern political lexicon.