Breaking An Addiction To Government

The December New Hampshire labor report, period ending October 2010, is not all that remarkable.  Coos county is still suffering while overall the state is hanging in at 5.4%.  This number is still reflective of issues with the size of the labor force versus mid 2009 numbers.  We have to watch that as we head through the November and December reports into January, where holiday hiring will add to the labor force, and then most likley drop off.

What may have been the most interesting aspect of the new report however, was this paragraph from the first page.

In New Hampshire private industry GDP growth was below that of government. The current dollar change in private industry between 2008 and 2009 was almost non-existent. less than a $1 million dollar difference.  When adjusted for inflation private GDP saw a 1.5% percent decrease.  Government however (this is New Hampshire State Government) saw a 4.6% increase in current dollars.

This is how democrat controlled states feign growth. 

So is John Lynch's 'recovery' built on a foundation of one time money from Washington to expand the role of government?  That would be a yes.  The Norelli/Larsen/Lynch combine took the company credit card, bought a bunch of goods and services from themselves in the form of more government, and are now left with more mouths to feed and a huge recurring annual bill for which there is no revenue.

This would not only create a false sense of growth on the GDP side, it produces an employment picture that is also something of a lie.  A lie that is no different than the 'surplus' lie that was regurgitated by the local media, the democrats, the little governor that could (not) and his RINO Republican's whose bridge-drug addiction to spending makes them no better than the liberal-progressives whose binge-spending got us into this mess.  The truth of the structural deficit was clouded over by democrat deceit and a false surplus, until the left got hammered--now, there is no surplus and we have a looming 600 million dollar deficit.  (Suckley--Sullivan and Buckley--are probably already at work prodding the historical revisionists in their Concord offices so the media will have the right messaging to regurgitate through the echo chamber moving into the 2012 cycle)

Mental note to electorate. These democrats are lying bastards.

On a bright note, we (New Hampshire) seem to have asked the grown-ups to step in, cut up the credit cards, and set things right.  But like any withdrawal from addiction, (cigarettes, video-games, gambling, alcohol, facebook, cocaine, heroin, pornography, government spending) it will not be a pleasant experience.  We may wake up some days feeling less than happy with ourselves or our decision to get 'clean.'  Throughout our real recovery, the democrat 'whinery' will be producing the same old vintage--screaming for another 'hit' to make the pain go away like a daemon on our shoulder trying to drag us further into dependence. 

But we have to ignore them.  This is New Hampshire.  We are independent, self responsible, hard working people, who like our government small and local.  We can do better and we will.

Just remember; the left used government to create the lie of growth and stability, charging you more for less when jobs and income were in decline, based on a model whose glue would eventually mean less and less money in your pocket to keep the parts stuck together.  A model that adds parts and needs more of your glue with every passing year.  The same model that is collapsing in California, New York, Michigan, and other former great states that have been (or are being) reduced to the pathetic ash heap of history by years of democrat rule and chronic migration away from their crumbling government edifices who cannot stand on their own.

New Hampshire does not have to go out that way.  We can break the addiction.  And the voters have asked for that change.  It is a change that will eventually bring more companies, more jobs, and real growth--not the false "more government kind.'  And while the journey to recovery could be a rough road, we may never have a better opportunity that the next two years to get this done.

And once we get out, we have to make sure we never go back.

Image Source: thesassyminx.com

Cross posted

The Illusion Of Zero Drop Outs

Governor Lynch is all about his success at reducing Drop Out rates in New Hampshire.  (The number of high school age kids who leave school without graduation or achieving a recognized equivalent.)  He even has a goal.  New Hampshire will have a zero percent drop out rate by 2012.  And based on the available data, I think he will succeed, but not in reducing actual "drop outs" to zero.

Mr. Lynch's crusade is more about perception than reality.  He has legislated that students stay in school until the age of 18. At any point up to or after age 18, the student may exit the education system into any number of alternative which will not reflect negatively on the success of John Lynch or his program to achieve zero drop outs by 2012.

The term 'drop out' has been changed at the state level for reporting purposes, excluding any number of 'drop outs' from the data reported to national entities.  The new term is "Early Exit Non-Graduates."  Early exit non graduates can exit into any of a number of alternatives and not be counted as drop outs.  While there has been a decrease, this is still the primary method by which drop out rates are being reduced in New Hampshire.

Students who leave the public school system for home schooling, vocation programs, alternative education, seek certificates or GED's, or enroll in at least one college like course are excluded as drop outs.  It is reasonable to assume that public service jobs, or volunteer programs will also be rolled into the acceptable early exit program, as well as any number of employment opportunities to be classified  by the state as an acceptable early exit-non graduate solution.

And it is no surprise to anyone paying attention that failing students are pushed along or that standards overall have declined.  This may produce fewer drop outs, but at what cost to the student or the taxpayer funded 'states interest' on which a mandatory public education is supposedly based?

Are you beginning to get the picture?  John Lynch is committed to reducing the number of reported drop outs.  And I will give him credit with having a genuine interest in making sure kids are completing some kind of requirement.  But redefining the essence of what constitutes a drop out, and adding as many exit strategies as possible just so you can claim to have eliminated the problem, is not solving the problem. It is hiding it.  And while a standard public school education should not be the only alternative, and many kids will find success in other paths to becoming self reliant, advertising your redefined success in a historical context which you have abandoned is dishonest.

So can Governor Lynch achieve a zero drop out rate in New Hampshire?  Yes he can.  But it will be through bureaucratic wand waving and semantic gymnastics.  We'll still have drop outs.  We just wont be calling them that.  And the Governor is hoping no one will notice.

Cross Posted

Lynch Lied....On Parental Notification

In a letter to a constituent dated December 1, 2006, Governor Lynch lied on the matter of parental notification (the right of a parent to know if and when their underage daughter tried to obtain an abortion.)

    "Thank you for sharing with me your thoughts on New Hampshire parental notification law.  I share your belief that the health and safety of New Hampshire women, no matter their age, must be our first priority.

     "As Governor, and as a father, I believe parents should be involved in these important decisions.  But we must also recognize that there are cases where that is not possible--and we should not risk the health and safety of young women in those cases."

We might take away from this letter that parents should be involved.  That while there could be cases, "those cases" where health and safety are perhaps more important and parents cannot be consulted,  that in "all other cases" parents could expect to be involved as long as John Lynch was the governor, because as he says, he is a "Governor and a father".  

But that's not how it worked out.  As we all know, John Lynch repealed parental notification the very next year.  But not before lying to a constituent about his postion on this important issue.

Governor Lynch's final statement on the matter was that he could find no circumstance in which parents should be involved.  That every instance of pregnancy, regardless of age, was one of "those cases" where parental notification "is not possible."

It's no joke that an underage girl needs a note from her parents to take a different bus home from school, or to get an aspirin from the school nurse.  Nor can a minor get a tattoo or have their ears pierced without her parent being present.   In fact the list of things she can't do are too long to revisit here.  But thanks to John Lynch if she needs an abortion not only do her parents not need to be there, they do not even need to be notified.  They have no role to play at all.

John Lynch said he believed "that parents should be involved" and just a few months later denied them involvement of any kind.

(Update: Click here to see the actual letter) 

Cross Posted

Lynch Lied.Com Updates

Swing on over to Lynchlied.com to check out some of the most recent 'lies.'  There's a new one posted that is near and dear to my heart.  (I've been talking about it for years) It reminds us that John Lynch's support of RGGI is a broad based tax that has sucked 25 million dollars out of the pockets of New Hampshire's businesses and citizens since January of 2009, and that it is a tax that goes up independent of the legisaltive process.

No hearings will be held and no action need be taken for this tax to balloon out of control and for the cost of carbon credits to rise, increased by outside investors or speculators betting on the cost of those credits, increasing you energy bills so that the New Hampshire treasury can reap more of your hard earned dollars without any input from you.

Of course a Republican Governor might be more inclined to repeal our membership in this ridiculous 'experiment.' (hint hint)

Check it out. 

Cross Posted

The Lynch Budget Lie

 

A balanced budget is a technical term for making the numbers add up.  The amount you say you have to spend simply matches what you claim to have spent.  So if you borrowed some millions that you would later have to pay back, and you found a few hundred million more on the sidewalk (maybe in Washington DC), if it added up far enough to cover how much you spent, you could claim to have a balanced budget.

The difference is that being at zero, and owing tens of millions you never had is not balanced.  Add to that the reality that you now have a larger bill to pay every year but can't expect to just find a few hundred million laying around every year, and you have what is called a structural deficit.  Your political lifestyle vastly exceeds your expected revenue.  Call it a state wide mortgage that exceeds our ability to pay it by hundreds of millions annually.

This is called incompetent.  It is also the Lynch budget.  And even though an account or two may have pulled in more revenue than expected, there is still a massive debt due in the next budget, created by democrats, and signed off on by John Lynch, with no money to pay for it..

Why else proceed in contradiction to the supreme court, on the politically poisonous path of robbing $110 million in private property unless you really need that 110 million to start stuffing the sink hole of a massive structural deficit.  And even if you get this one time money, where's the line of suckers you plan to screw after you are done with them? 

If we had a real surplus they wouldn't need to rob the JUA fund.  They would drop the idea of selling off 60 million in state land.  In fact, they'd stop all the hand-wringing about the budget.  They have not.  The deficit is real.  And the democrats are to blame, and John Lynch and it is one more reason why John Lynch has been the governor for too long.

Cross Posted