|
Last
week, I mentioned that under FDR, to me, our worst President outside of
Lincoln, Johnson, and most of them during the last hundred years I
suspect, the welfare system got into gear, which debased the buck
tremendously, and still does, but at an ever-increasing rate. When a
roller-coaster begins its downhill run, it is virtually impossible to
stop it in mid course, and the same, as history always proves, with a
nation which begins to inflate. Argentina a decade ago, Zimbabwe
currently, and virtually all nations throughout history have begun to
inflate, and been powerless to stop it.
Look at the mechanics of it. It's easy to blame
the politicians for their reckless spending, and the blame does rest
there, except for one tiny detail. That detail is that if they didn't
"produce" the incredible spending, they'd possibly or even probably be
defeated at the next election by a candidate who promised virtually
unlimited largess from the public treasury. If one Congressman or
Senator voted NO on nonsensical spending, or even a handful, the rest
would vote yes, and the dollar supply (inflation) would continue.
Currently, the Republicans and Democrats are all very anxious to vote
another hundred billion dollars to continue the lost war in Iraq. A
hundred billion printing press, un-backed, paper dollars is eleven
zeros. If they vote 'yes' on the hundred billion, that's $3,000 for
every man, woman, and child in America. The war, so far, has probably
cost every man, woman, and child a hefty $15,000 each. You haven't paid
for it? Oh yes you have, because every one of those individual fifteen
thousand dollars for every one of us was printed, and added to the
money supply, which decreased the value of each and every dollar. Each
dollar, thanks to the Iraq mess, buys less. Each dollar, thanks to
Vietnam and Korea, bought less, thanks to those wars' costs, fought
with printing press money. Examples are easy to see in just the
automotive sector.
Before Korea started in 1950, a brand new, fully
equipped Ford V-8 cost in the neighborhood of $1500. This was double
what one would have cost before WW II. Today? You know, I don't have to
parade umpteen figures before your eyes. I was sixteen in 1950, and
bought new tires for $9.95, and filled my car for 19 cents a gallon. I
made a phone call for a nickel, stamps were two cents, etc. ALSO, a
well paid worker made under a dollar an hour. We were competitive then
with other nations. Not only competitive, but we outshone them many
times over, and were exporting just about everything we made, as fast
as we could make it. We sent machinery, food stuffs, cars, gadgets,
tractors, revolving doors, elevators, trolley cars, locomotives,
lumber, and anything you could possibly think of, overseas. We were a
grand nation, even after WW II. Partially because factories in Europe
and Japan were demolished in the war, it is true, but here we go again
with a major welfare program which debased the dollar.
Ever hear of a nation paying the nation it
defeated? Germany was forced to do so, and their currency went to zero.
In America, after millions wounded, and 362,000 dead, we decided,
thanks to the politicians, to pay our former enemies to rebuild! Known
as the Marshall Plan, it cost hundreds of billions of dollars. Printing
press dollars, which gave Japan brand new, state of the art steel
mills, while ours were worn out after the war effort, for just one
example. The dollar presses and checkbooks were turning out record
numbers of dollars for the Marshall Plan, and prices were going up,
thanks to it. The war had doubled prices, and the Marshall Plan did
dollars in additionally. Still though, we made it, and didn't collapse
as did Germany after WW I. We were strong. Our coins were made of
silver, dollars at least partially backed by gold, and we weren't
physically wrecked by the war.
The welfare system got really
re-invigorated after the war. There was no un-employment during the
war, and after the war there was a lot of catching up to do with
consumer goods for home and export. By 1960, things had calmed down a
bit, and prices were on the rise, thanks to the buck printing,
authorized by the politicos. Gas was 31 cents a gallon, a new home
$16,500, stamps three cents, a dozen eggs 57 cents, and a gallon of
milk 49cents. The national debt was $290 billion, and Washington was
spending $92 billion a year. Sound crazy? Compared to today, it was
wonderful!
In 1970, the printing press dollars were on the
move, with prices doing the same. The average home was up $10,000 to
$26,500, stamps four cents, a gallon of milk $1.15, a dozen eggs 62
cents and gas 36 cents a gallon. The national debt was $196 billion,
seemingly down a bit, but prices were up because the dollar was being
printed. Welfare had really gotten going, with hundreds of public
housing projects being built, and the FHA giving no money down, no
qualification home purchases, which was beginning the destruction of
our major cities. Vietnam was in full swing, as well.
By 1980, under Jimmy Carter, we had 14%
inflation, and a new home had jumped to $76,400, a $50,000 increase in
ten years. Gas was $1.25, a dozen eggs 91 cents, and a gallon of milk
$2.16. The federal debt was $990 billion. A lot of things happened from
1970 to 1980. The costs of Vietnam were obvious in prices, weren't
they? We then had Medicare and food stamps, which cost billions of
printing press dollars, and whose cost will forever increase.
In 1990, a new home cost an average of $149,800,
a dozen eggs a buck, a gallon of gas $1.16, and a gallon of milk $2.78.
The national debt had zoomed to $3,206,000,000! The presses were
merrily rolling along, and Washington was spending for all they were
worth.
1995's prices were, of course, higher than five
years previous. The average new home was going for $158,700, a gallon
of milk for $2.96, a dozen eggs for $1.16, a gallon of gas was $1.15
(remember the oil glut?), a stamp was 32 cents, and the national debt
was then $4,921,000,000. Officially the debt was that, but who really
knew or knows. Washington was spending $1,500,000,000 a year, and
taking in a lot less, so inflation continued.
Another factor which must be brought into a study
of inflation are the average wages for each year. In 1999, the average
wage was $39,973, and in 1960, it was $4068. In 192 it was $30,636, in
1980, $17,710, 1975, $11,800, and in 1970 - $8734. In 1970, if one had
placed one's entire average salary in a bank at 2% interest,
compounded, by 1975, you would have $9643, but the average wage in 1975
was $11,800. If, in 1970, you had placed the full cost of the average
home ($26,500), in the same bank at 2% interest compounded, by 1980,
you would have had $32,303, but by 1980 the average home price had
jumped to $76,400. Your dollars lost twice more than savings, plus
interest paid, plus you would have been paying income tax every year on
that 2% interest. One can go on and on about how it is foolish to save
in dollars, but the official figures show it, with no doctoring or
supposition. Dollars are death, and it isn't our fault.
In 10 years, from 1989 to 1999 the average wage
had gone from $29,943 to $39,973, but that 30% increase in wages over
ten years was met with huge increases in the income tax rate, and
increases in every single item consumed or used during that time period
of more than 30%. Dollar savings was silly then as now. The above
figures are official figures as released by the Washington, and does
anyone really believe statistics provided by a government which hides
everything it can to make itself look good, including no longer
publishing the M3 figures? The off-budget items, including Iraq and
Afghanistan, plus lots of others, aren't included in the 'official'
huge dollar increases, but are certainly reflected in prices. The buck
is proliferating like so many bunny rabbits in spring time. The prices
are reflected in dollar increases, regardless of 'official' inflation
and dollar amounts.
Politicians can't stop spending, because if they
did, they would be defeated and replaced by more spenders. The non
spenders will never outvote the spenders, because politicians love
adulation and re-election. Were I in D.C. as an office holder, I would
vote NO on every spending issue. Could I be elected? Of course, not,
because I couldn't promise to bring home the bacon. The system is self
defeating, self proliferating, and self destructing, and it isn't our
fault. The majority, in every civilization is always wrong, the voters
always vote for the candidate promising the most largess from the
public treasury; the public treasury always goes broke and takes the
nation down with it. We are in the final stages I am afraid, and it is
not our fault. We can only protect ourselves. More next week.
|