the mind of Austin Hostetter

HOW HELPING AMERICA HURTS AMERICANS

2012-01-27T17:49:00.003-05:00

This past Tuesday, President Obama delivered a surprisingly moderate, uneventful State of the Union address where he, like most expected, called for tax reform, a commitment to higher education, infrastructure investments, and a commitment to bringing jobs back to America.

For a while now, the new political trend of working to bring recently outsourced manufacturing jobs back to our shores and promotional tag lines like "buy American" have engulfed the economic debates. To help boost American job levels, many (on both sides of the aisle) have made commitments to creating a climate that allows manufacturing to return, giving the starving middle class of this country another chance. In his speech Tuesday, Obama added to this rhetoric, calling for new taxes on companies that ship jobs overseas.

But if true economic theory is taken into consideration, these calls for the rebirth of American manufacturing are detrimental to our economic health. Like many know, manufacturing jobs have moved overseas because, among many things, labor is much cheaper in other parts of the world. In the grand scheme of things, outsourcing and moving manufacturing to cheaper locations creates more competitive prices for the American consumer; if these jobs were to return to America, more people would be employed, however, prices would be a great deal higher.

The same goes with the whole 'buy American" concept. Passing trade laws and taxes that "encourage" consumers to buy American rather than foreign products affects competition and therein forces the consumer to pay a higher price for goods.

If we really want to build a strong workforce in this country, we need to drop our love for manufacturing jobs. Our economy is in a transition from a manufacturing economy to an information based economy (which is why manufacturing jobs have moved overseas). While most of our workforce is trained in manufacturing, these kinds of jobs are gone. The only way to create pure growth is to innovate; mainly, move to the next economic step.

So how do we put a manufacturing based workforce back to work in a new information economy? Promote and invest in education, allowing the workforce to learn skills in broadband internet, new energy technologies, and high speed rail. If the government really wanted to create jobs, they should be revamping our education program, invest in clean energy research and technology, and invest in new infrastructure.

Obama and the rest of the country need to get a grip on this. It's time for our government to invest in the future, not live in the past.

2012-01-22T10:43:00.000-05:00

A REMINDER

2012-01-16T11:06:00.001-05:00

In a time plagued by arguments of wealth and poverty, free markets and socialism, and greed and redistribution, let us take a moment to reflect on the happenings of the financial collapse.

Since the birth of "Reaganomics", the government has been deregulating the financial sector of our economy. With this new power to reign free, Wall Street gave rise to large financial firms, also called investment banks. These firms are not like commercial banks; rather than accepting deposits and distributing money, these investments banks concentrate on issuing securities to its customers (individuals, corporations, and governments). Their main business is centered around issuing securities and insuring pension funds, hedge funds, etc.

Because they mainly focused on securities, financial firms handled the insurances behind most mortgage loans issued by commercial banks. When the deregulation faze was at its highest, many investment banks began to bundle these mortgage-backed securities to trade and sell to investors. After this trading proved to bring an impressive return, financial firms began to encourage banks to issue more mortgage loans so more trading could take place.

So, banks began issuing risky home loans to just about anyone. Rather than only granting mortgages to customers with good credit and a down payment, banks now allowed customers to take out mortgages to buy houses that were way out of their price range. Because these loans were much more volatile, the financial firms and investors collected even higher profits from them, and the investment banks grew larger and larger.

There was no reason to suspect system to collapse; housing prices continued to go up; therefore, everyone would eventually be able to pay back their loan (or the bank could repossess the house at a higher value). However, like we have all come to know, the housing bubble eventually busted, and the market plummeted.

Home owners across the country began to default on their loans, and banks began pull from the insurances set up in the investment banks. This immediate and sudden pull of money caused the financial firms to embark on a downward spiral, and, to kick things off, Lehman Brothers (one of the main investment banks) collapsed, causing mass panic on Wall Street. After more firms like AIG began showing signs of failure as well, everyone began to panic.

Because everything from home loans to pension funds is insured through these firms, their collapse would equal a global economic catastrophe. The federal government knew this. So, in an effort to prevent economic Armageddon, the government passed the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP), which provided a capital injection (aka free money) to investment banks to stop the bleeding and continue the flow of credit.

However, rather than using this capital injection to continue lending money, the investment banks used it to raise their management's salaries and issue historic bonuses to their employees. Rather than punishing the people who single handling made the economy tank, banks gave them raises, and the country slipped into the greatest economic recession since the Great Depression.

People are confused as to why the Occupy Wall Street protesters are so pissed at corporate banks. Let this be a reminder.

THE NEW OBAMA

2012-01-13T16:55:00.000-05:00

A few hours ago, President Obama asked Congress for the powers necessary to restructure the executive branch of the government. These powers, according to Obama, would be used to create a leaner, more effective government for small businesses to work with.

By streamlining many government hurdles through combining and eliminating many government entities, the processes by which businesses in this country work under would become less burdensome and more effective in combating the recession. On top of this request for power, Obama announced the Small Business Administration would be promoted to a cabinet level position, ensuring the voices of small business owners would be heard.

This is just the most recent of the President's attempts to woo businesses in this country - and it's working. For the past month, Obama has focused his efforts on the economy, jobs, and creating a safer, consumer-friendly environment for businesses to participate in. With a renewed commitment to the Consumer Protection Agency, the passage of the payroll tax holiday, future cuts to the defense budget, and a call for "leaner" government through merging agencies, Obama is positioning himself as a new kind of liberal in an effort to gain popularity in an election season.

Obama's new policies aren't all expanding or shrinking government; they are creating a smarter, more effective government that will help drive the economy in the 21st century. With all of the hoopla on the right involving his massive expansion of government, Obama is showing his true colors: he is not committed to a larger government or less freedom, but to creating a government and economic system that is fair, productive, and ready to combat the future.

I have personally been impressed with the President's performance in the new year. With the GOP preaching about extreme measures that would radically impact the way this country operates, Obama is providing common sense solutions that will have huge implications.

This much is clear. After spending the majority of his first term in healthcare battles and continual staff debacles, Obama is finally regaining his mojo, focusing on what needs to be the top priority for this country: creating a 21st century government model for a 21st century economy.

A VLOG OF EPIC PROPORTIONS

2012-01-12T13:30:00.000-05:00

This vlog was produced directly following the results of the New Hampshire Primary this week. It features opinions regarding the final polling numbers, and the GOP race overall.

FYI: all vlogs will be posted on The Vlogosphere, which is located above this page on the navabar. The page should be updated frequently, so be sure to check it out if you wish to see my pretty face.

PACIFISM, NOT ISOLATIONISM

2012-01-08T19:30:00.000-05:00

In a time of massive federal deficits and economic collapses, America's fiscal future rides of the brink of Armageddon. Yet the unsoundness of the country's current economic state pales in comparison to the degradation of its moral standing in the world.

After a spending almost a half a century lusting for war, America is at a pivotal point in its foreign policy. Standing in the face of terror enemies, Arab springs, and new growing superpowers, we must evaluate our strategy moving forward on a global scale. In recent weeks, the Obama Administration has laid the groundwork for this evaluation with the announcement to draw down military levels across the board through significant cuts to the defense budget.

The economic and fiscal impacts of this measure are profound: almost half a trillion dollars will be removed from defense spending - a bloated budget that accounts for one-fourth of this country's overall spending - in an effort to scale down our ever-growing national budget deficit.

Yet the moral implications of the draw-down are even more significant. Ending the ventures in Iraq and Afghanistan provide a benchmark in American history; one that ends the policies of "nation building" and aggressive defense. Since the days of Vietnam and the beginnings of the Cold War, America violently pursued a mission committed to conquering in the name of capitalism and killing for the sake America's best interests, creating negative connotations towards democracy that led to the formation of modern day terrorism and religious extremism.

Libertarian leaders like Ron Paul realized the encumbering importance of scaling back our military efforts; however, they have missed the mark in many respects. The true, conservative approach to foreign matters (as proclaimed by Ron Paul) is isolationism, a belief that America should only focus on herself and not mettle in global matters. This, although providing a simple answer to our fiscal dilemmas, does not conquer the moral imperative that exists.

We are a blessed nation, and, as of right now, we exist at the top of the world's powers. Our moral obligation does not stop at resisting the temptations of war. With our abundant wealth and overwhelming power, we have the duty to promote peace throughout the world. Rather than completely turning our backs on the rest of humanity, it is our time to set a new course in America's foreign policy.

With an emphasis on economic growth and equality, human rights, and religious freedom, America must continue its commitment to spreading democracy, not through military means, but through the measures of foreign aid, economic sanctions, and social business.

Pacifism, not isolationism, should be our future. A desire to see a world without war, without poverty, and with abundant equality and freedom can be the new doctrine leading into the next generation. And, like so many times in the past, America can be the head of this movement, leading through example.

My hopes are that Obama's small, simple effort to reevaluate America's military can be the right catalyst to spark this flicker of hope into a roaring fire.

Only time will tell.

EVERYONE'S A TERRORIST NOW

2012-01-06T13:09:00.000-05:00

If your holidays consisted of caucus results, Congressional recesses, and secret legislation viewing, then this post will most likely not surprise you in the least bit. However, if your news proficiency was lacking over the past few weeks, don't you worry, Uncle Austin is here to fill you in.

In recent weeks, Congress passed the Defense Authorization Bill, continuing the efforts to fight terrorism on a global scale with tactics including enhanced interrogation and the elimination of Habeas Corpus for suspected terrorists. We've seen bills like this before: efforts to combat our enemies that completely violate the dignity of "suspected" criminals and tarnish our reputation of standing for equality and freedom.

But the neo cons needed more to fulfill the lust for their ultra-heavy militaristic addictions. To really give the terrorists a kick in the crotch, they added that these measures can be applied to anyone; however, instead of knocking the gonads of terrorists, they missed their mark and racked the American people.

Now, according to this new bill, the military will gain the right to detain any U.S. citizen without the proper warrants if that person is suspected of being a national security threat. Ergo, if Grandma spews hateful jabber about elected officials at the supermarket, it's off to Gitmo for her.

But wait, the hero of this story, Barack Obama, will save Grandma, won't he? Actually not. Obama signed this bill into law, stating that he did not support the bill and will not use it's power. The problem: even if Obama doesn't use his new authority, the next president probably will.

This new source of power for the Commander and Chief and the military is easily one of the greatest violations of the Bill of Rights in recent history. Now, our protection against the powers that be in this country are no longer guaranteed. Like so many measures before, the government is using this defense bill to slowly strip away our God given dignities in an effort to combat an unspecified, undefined enemy.

Yet even with its evident problems, this bill highlights a larger issue that is at hand in our government and in our society.

"They who give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." When Ben Franklin uttered those words, it was as if he knew our country would seek to limit the rights given to its citizens in the means of "protection" and "security".

Ever since its creation, America has always needed an enemy to face. First, it was the British. Then, the Germans followed swiftly by the Japanese. The Soviets, Communists, and Chinese followed, and now, it's Muslims and "religious extremists". The problem with our enemies now is the same one we've faced in the past: they are generally not as bad as we make them out to be.

Locking Japanese citizens up in internment camps and arresting communists simply because of their political beliefs, at the time, seemed necessary to protect the country as a whole. But as we face this country's next great rights battle, a battle I suspect will be used to lock up Muslims and supporters of Islam, we must stop to address what drives this need to always be fighting a villain.

The catalyst: fear. Fear drives our foreign policy and causes us to act irrationally. 9/11 angered this country and drove us to find a new enemy, even if that enemy was unjustly accused. Because of the actions of a few select people, we have demonized an entire sub-sect of the global population to feed our ever-growing fear.

So, instead of attacking this bill because of its contents (which should be done), perhaps we should instead look at the reasons for the passing of such bills, and look to solve that reasoning.

We face major security problems in this country, but the only way they can be solved is through negotiation, understanding, and a willingness to admit that America isn't the center of the world.