What Does "Rock Bottom" Mean for America & Europe?

Rock bottom? I don't think it's reachable. Civil war will happen long before rock bottom is reached.

So, vote for Justin then?

Rock bottom will now come swiftly for America, this is what this leader wants, all his prior appointments and actions have aided it and the die is cast. The UN arms treaty is soon signed as will be the law of the seas now, the speed of their decent will be frightening to those that see through this fraud. New tax on house sales coming, with 6 dollar gas, his intention is to please his mentors, and that list was there for Americans to look at, but they instead read about every Kardashian and Brad Pitt spew. They are now boiling frogs. There is so much of America that still works great, but Hollywood and the left have been successful at ruining success for the long haul.

I consider Cloward/Piven the victor in the American election. Therefore, one need only look to Greece today to see what rock bottom looks like.

What....running out of other people's money?
If we allowed only those who contribute to society and do not receive a check from the government to vote it would have been a landslide....Remember, if the Turkey's run the farm there will be be no Christmas.

If they don't impeach Obama first, 4 more years of his attack on the middle class wealth engine (small business) and his energy taxing and production shut downs will drive so much business and industry off shore, America's productivity will equal some 3rd world bacwater like Kazakistan - maybe that's part of the American socialist agenda.

They say how the core 47% reliant voter base propels socialist election fortunes so they will now expand that base to a perennial 55% of chronic welfare dependants, ensuring perpetual election success. They don't want to kill off the productive sector completely just reduce its voting power so it can never win and milk it constantly to pay for reliant votes.

American communism isn't about total wealth redistibution, it's about permanent vote redistribution.

Rock bottom will come when the money becomes worthless. Whether the savings are lost to a stock market crash, hyperinflation, or so little is produced that everything is sky high.

***

Anyone know what the voter turnout was? I keep seeing 60 million for Obama, and 58 million for Romney. Suggests turnout was down sharply from 2008. What am I missing?

Greece ain't at rock bottom yet. It can and will get much worse. Rock bottom will hit when the middle class is bankrupt, and they have no interest in maintaining the status quo and/or Goldman Sachs.

As a 'boomer' I have an idealized concept of what was and a unexplainable fear of what will be. I never experienced the Depression or WWII as my parents did. As a Canadian I have no real concept of sacrifice such as my American friends who have served their country in combat.

My education by my parents and our school system emphasized critical thought and scientific confirmation of physical realities. I mention this as the question of 'what is rock bottom' will probably be answered within 5 years.

I often think about Jared Diamond's book Collapse. In the histroy of the world every civilization has had its day. One of his major points was that a collapsing society often over extends itself to the point of no return. By the time the threat is realized the collapse is already well under way. The difference between today and yesteryear is modern man's ability to communicate and manipulate within society to maintain stability. That in itself will become a major reason for the extent of the collapse when it happens. When citizens lose confidence in governments ability to provide stability the collpase will happen quickly.

Many of my generation have climbed on the deficit and debt bandwagon. They do feel that government can save them. The true ugliness of this process will be the systematic stripping of the countries assets as people struggle to maintain the status quo. If the 'Boomers' have been the major beneficiaries of this debt mining they will also be hurt the most. Assets will be stripped or devalued to worthliness. The younger generation will have little sympathy, nor should they.

What will be 'rock bottom'? When the levers of power are stripped from the infrastructure that used them to produce this collapse. When 2 + 2 becomes 4 again. It will probably require a gold based currency to re-establish confidence. It will require Chinese and Indian injected capital to re-establish capital investment.

The greater danger is to overreact to one specific election. I recall mentioning the "fear of being classed rascist" by many American Baby Boomers will complete it's guilty cycle with Barack Obama achieving a second term as President of the U.S.A.

The follow on generations and later born Boomers have not experienced the "me generation" effect and therefore did not receive the same benefit of this significant demographic change. Therefore less reflected guilt about rascism.

Fortunately many Boomers will not be in positions of authority in three years, plus the Nobel Prize winning, first African-American President is not the fool many think he is. He will want to leave enough legacy issues to ensure a historical perspective to rival the Great Presidents,not as the first Affirmative Action President.

The first step after winning term one was to push through universal health care, which will remain the law. There will be another major societal change in the second term and then this laid back beneficiary of Boomer guilt will continue to be an Eisenhower President with lots of golf; shooting hoops; and letting the over achievers run things. Only now they will less likely to be Boomers. Cheers

What Syncrodox said WRT Cloward/Piven.

Rock Bottom varies in each society. While Canada avoided it, in an absolute objective sense, the ruling class was able to finally see it.

Heck when even Bob Rae comes back from a meeting in NEw York and says, "I am not afraid that they wont lend us the money I am afraid that they will" then it shows even the thickest of lefties got the problem.

HEck even the Liberal Party understood that sending had to be cut.....speaking of fiscally thick....

IS obama there yet.....nope.....the majority of the populace is. But the leaders arent.

The next 6 months is the chance to form the consensus to do something, maybe not what you or I would do, but begin the process of dealing with this. If they blow that window, and dont underestimate Obama's ability to miss an opportunity, then the next stage will be where real cuts to spending have to take place, removal of services and the left finds that they have reached their limits, can't maintain the gold plated servcies they seek to provide and government becomes even less effective than it already is.

The populace cant help but notice the last stage.

Hope that Barry has an ability to learn and isnt intent on playing out the horrible negotiations that he did last time. I would love to play poker with Obama, he is a mark and everyone knows it. His problem is he is playing with other peoples money and other people's existence (as in the case of Israel)

Rock bottom needs to be something so awful that it cuts through all the self-serving defence mechanisms that typically enable reckless behaviour. It truly has to be beyond anything that person can endure. In this case as long as gov't continually picks up the tab and mends all wounds there never will be a rock bottom terrible enough to break through. The only other hard lesson I can think of that could possibly reach such bubble-wrapped and desensitized folks is a terrible war that strips away those protections and kills close loved ones.

The chaos after the Weimer Republic (and hyper-inflation) in Germany was rock bottom. Then came Hitler. The aftermath of the French Revolution (chaos and anarchy) was rock bottom. Then came Napoleon. Look at all the South American countries. Chaos, lawlessness, then a dictator. Russia is one long sorry story of strong man dictators. Same for China.

Wonder who America's strong man will be, and which political stripe: Nazi or Communist. Either way, it'll just be a choice between one type of fascism or another.

Rock bottom, perhaps the fulmination of cloward/piven. Another 5 trillion in borrowing should just about do it. Buy silver and bullets.

One thing that I foresee is staggeringly out-of-control inflation, as was the case in Germany between the two World Wars. We're already seeing rising anti-semitism. Hey, San Francisco's night-life has been like a scene out of "Cabaret" for decades now!

Rock bottom must be hit before anything will change, and it's coming. There is just not enough money in the world to pay the federal debt, let alone state debt, municipal debt, county debt - why not fire in personal debt. Fuel prices continue to rise, stock market depressed, businesses packing up and leaving, small businesses just folding up and laying off people. Sad but true.

It's the only way they will learn. What bother's me is that those Red states are going along for the ride, and the Entitlement generation is going to drag Canada right off the edge as well. Harper has been very very aggressive getting new deals signed but he cannot replace our massive market to the south. Sadly, He will be blamed for the resulting mess by those same entitled brats who destroyed America, and the next election will be a similar battle here between lefties and common sense.

Stockpile some water and food, invest in gold, and get some ammo, the West is going down. We did this to ourselves.

"What will be 'rock bottom'? When the levers of power are stripped from the infrastructure that used them to produce this collapse. When 2 + 2 becomes 4 again. It will probably require a gold based currency to re-establish confidence. It will require Chinese and Indian injected capital to re-establish capital investment."

I couldn't agree more with ct.

Hitting rock bottom needn't result in a dictatorship or a subsistence economy a la Zimbabwe. New Zealand hit rock bottom but bounced back thanks to the visionary efforts of Roger Douglas. So did England with Margaret Thatcher. The Republican party desperately needs a visionary figure sometime in the next four years however.

Hmmm... Rock Bottom seems to be a somewhat relative term doesn't it? Does anyone here think that the US will hit a Haiti, or Zimbabwe style 'rock bottom', or will it look more like a Weimar Republic rock bottom? The difference being that despite the unpleasentness which followed the Weimar Republic, at its core the elements of a civil society persisted (despite being perverted by the Hitlerian Regime) before and afterwards. No such functioning elements exist in Haiti to any meaningful degree. I dont think folks here believe the US is actually headed there - so Rock Bottom as a term is a bit elastic and loses its meaning, especially with the strength of the US Constitution. No matter how much one may despise a Pelosi, Reid or Lightworker, the 'gridlock' which MSM seems to fear is a feature and not a bug. I suspect that, as with previous experiments in fiscal and monetary insanity, the US will experience a deeper trough than many other countries, but when they do recover it will be faster and last longer than any mixed market economy (CAN, EU, take note). The singular reason for this, is that nowhere else in the world is risk rewarded so harshly, nor so well......

In the meantime can we all wish the LightWorker a happy Fiscal Cliffmas......

Jeff K: "He will be blamed for the resulting mess by those same entitled brats who destroyed America"

Yup.

The truly scary part is, we don't know. We can't know. The modern world has never experienced anything like what the fiscal collapse of the United States of America will be, and that outcome is all but assured with Obama's reelection (Romney may not have been able to stop it either, but I believe he would have at least tried. Obama will not even try; he will not even care).

For the last 60 or 70 years it has been a given that the USA would be the bastion of economic freedom, of personal liberty, of military strength, upon which the world could depend. The shining city on the hill. The last best hope for mankind. When that pillar upon which the world is built crumbles and falls away, there is no way to know how the wreckage will appear, no way even to *guess*.

I think the only thing we can say for sure, is that the world order that emerges from the coming global & American economic collapse will not be a kind one, and it will not be run by powers so beneficial to the world as America has been.

A very dark time awaits us.

Rock bottom is a bond market/us dollar crash in the case of the US. There is no way people will continue to buy this paper. Once it happens you will see rates skyrocket which will further compound the problem. It's probably no less than two years away.

The problem is that there are sharks waiting at the bottom. Once the US gets there, they will pounce at the opportunity to take over and 'rescue' America from corrupt Capitalism and introduce some Utopia where they are in control of everything. Look at Greece, do you think they would rather live with freedom or retire at 55. I know which one they will choose.

Has it really come to this? Who is going to stand up for freedom when the time comes?

Expert Tom made an excellent point about the Greeks. As far as I can tell, most Greek would pick retirement at 55 over freedom; what they don't understand is that they will wind up with neither. They will work til they drop for some demagogue.

This is the basic problem within our modern era; it's not just in the US but worldwide.

The basic facts are that an economy does not run as a Consumer Society, but within a triad of Investment, Production and Consumption. This triad must produce wealth or surplus, which is then moved back into Investment..to produce more jobs ... etc.

1) Let's dispense with discussion about Obama. He's a narcissist, a demagogue, an incompetent and etc. Sure, he 'should' be impeached but that's a waste of time. The real issue is the economy. And since the only thing Obama can do, and has ever been able to do all his life is campaign, then, what will he do this term? He'll leave the policies and programs to the radical socialists in his backroom, and zip around the world pontificating. Leave it.

2) The problem is basic, which is that, demographically, a statist or redistributionist economy can only function in a small size no-growth population. The reason is that, unless you can produce more wealth, you can't support an increasing population.

The ONLY economic mode that can produce more wealth than you consume, is capitalism, which is an economic mode that enables and relies on MORE producers entering into the economy, building more industries, producing more goods, providing more jobs. Statism can't do this. Why not?

Because statism functions by the government redistributing money, taken from the people in taxes. BUT, if you take away this money to give to people to use for Consumer needs, then, you deprive the economy of the money needed for Investment and Production.

3) That's the reason for the implosion in the MENA, which has always been statist (redistribution economy)and can't support its exponential increase in population..and..doesn't want to move into a capitalist mode of wealth production.

Now, what has happened in Europe and America post war is that statism moved in, taking all the wealth out of the Investment phase and putting it instead into the use of the Consumer phase..and not letting any profits remain in private hands to be put back into Investment and Production. This has stagnated and decimated the economy.

4) Furthermore, this extreme focus on Consumption rather than Investment and Production, has led to the rise of the Unions, both private and public. Their focus is strictly on Consumption: salaries, benefits, pensions. This has starved the industry's capacity to build new factories, upgrade technology.

For example, the Toronto Transit commission spends 80% of its income on salaries and benefits, with some ticket takers getting over 100,000 a year and can't afford to keep its trains and even escalators running. The Sandy Storm wiped out electricity because high wages meant that the Investment in below ground wiring couldn't be done. And so on.

This has led to the massive loss of manufacturing and therefore jobs in the US as companies moved overseas.

Result? They've reduced the means of wealth production in the US, and they've had to borrow to meet their increased public service employee demands and, the increase in entitlements.

5) This increase in entitlements, where the state assumes costs of just about everything has destroyed the nation's capacity to produce wealth. Again, to produce wealth, you must put money into long term infrastructures..that factory and its equipment..and then, pay production costs..and then, market the products. The profits must not all be used in consumption but put back into more Investment and Production.

But, if the govt takes all the profits for Consumer Redistribution, the result is: no jobs. And, if production costs, because of unions, are so high, no jobs.

But our consumer society considers that all consumer needs are a human right.

6) Rock bottom. I think that the statist redistribution economies have already reached a state where they cannot borrow wealth to fund their consumer entitlement demands.

The GOP recognize this, even the Democrats recognize it, but, this election wasn't about facing reality. It was about power, and the Democrats rejected reality to retain power by focusing on: emotions. What emotions?

7) First, tribalism. The reality of illegal immigration in the US hasn't been dealt with. Never mind language and skin colour. Who cares. The reality is that the US has allowed millions of people into its economy who are deprived from participation in that economy. But they are an enormous cost; they use the hospitals as regular clinics, the schools, the roads etc and yet, pay no taxes. And, they can't get loans etc to start up businesses to contribute to the economy.

Rick Perry was right in his dealings with them in Texas. He couldn't deport them as that is a federal duty and the feds refuse. So, rather than relying on welfare to support them, he wanted to enable them to get a college education and work. The GOP attacked him, vilified him, for so doing.
BIG MISTAKE.

This sector of the US population has to be acknowledged and dealt with.

8) Women. The federal govt should stay out of social issues. Just as Harper has refused to deal with abortion and gay marriage, by saying that these are decisions best made by the people, not government, and thus, in the US, must be left to the States. The GOP should insist on this and stay out of social issues.

The Democrats run on them, and with the GOP instead ALSO running on them, they moved into an emotional rather than rational campaign.

9) Bottom line - the US has to deal with the fact that it has set up a statist redistribution economy and that such an economic mode cannot support its population. There's no requirement for genius minds in this. It's simple arithmetic. two plus two doesn't equal ten. If your tax income, even taking the rich to nothing, doesn't meet your costs, then...

10) The US, in this election, kicked the can down the road. But only for a few months. Not years. Months. Obama got his security; he can go zipping around the world pontificating. He's averse to work anyway. The Democrats can remain 'in power'. But, they have to deal with entitlements and tax reform, to enable manufacturing and wealth production to regain their role in the economy.

Not sure that you have to hit "rock bottom" to turn things around.
Canada turned things around under the (spit to side) Chretien Liberals.
Saskatchewan turned things around under the Romanow government.
Sweden turned things around in the 90's.
All it takes is for a sufficient number of leaders to coalesce around a common idea. I'm afraid that the strident tribalism evident in the US will delay that for a while, but once ground is lost to China and India and they run out of money for entitlements they will come together.

Much like Ann @ 10:29 AM...

Rock bottom is totalitarianism. For America it will be preceded by a complete and total economic collapse, after which anarchy and lawlessness will have a stint before the state turns on the people. I suspect there will be much bloodshed given the degree to which the populace is armed. Think Syria, squared or cubed.

While I appreciate Gord's analogy, the reality of each is inverse in their positive potential. His is an inverted analogy.

That is, when a drug addict, say, hits rock bottom, they have hope, they can end the pain relatively quickly, and can now move forward to a brighter future. When a nation hits rock bottom, hope is shattered and the pain is here to stay. It - liberty - is effectively over for a long time. To use a Steynism, the lights are out.

Ironically, nations do not have the luxury of drug addicts to hit rock bottom. Nations need to heed the warning signs along the way or else it is over. Really over. As in millions-dead and generations-will-pay-the-price over.

It's kind of like that old Niemoller quote, "First they came for the Communists..."

America sees the signs but ignores them to her own peril.

Hard days are coming.

It's as if the Greeks read SDA....

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/11/01/ripped-apart-by-financial-crisis-greek-society-in-free-fall/?intcmp=obnetwork

I know this is unrelated, but I'm wondering if anyone can help me with this. I'm trying to find a name for a fellow who runs a sobriety rehab centre in Vancouver (SDA posted a video of him speaking before the Vancouver Club, I believe)? For the life of me I can't remember his name or the name of his organization. I would appreciate it if someone could help me out.

Thanks,
James

Well, I think differently. I don't see an economic collapse. I see that the Democrats are focused, most certainly, on socialism. But, that's because socialism gives the government POWER, while the GOP give power to the people.

The Obama Democrats won in 2008 because they campaigned, not on reality, but on emotion. They campaigned on anger at Bush, and the empty emotions of hope and change. The GOP campaigned on, well, nothing.

The 2010 midterms most certainly were a campaign of reason, when the Tea Party, a movement not a party, emerged as an alarm call about the insatiable rewarding of its loyal followers by the Democrats.

Obama's Stimulus rewarded the public service unions but put nothing into infrastructure. His other first session agendas were all, equally, to bind dependent constituents to the Democratic Party. Health care, the increases in unemployment, the increases in food stamps, the bill to support illegal hispanics, gay marriage, forcing churches to pay for abortions and contraception...This was ONE agenda; to build up that faithful dependent electorate.

The 2012 election was based on yet another emotion. Fear. Fear among this new loyal set of constituents (hispanics, women, gays, public service workers, food stamp recipients, welfare recipients)..that the GOP would take it all away from them.

Now what? The costs of such a statist distribution economy can't be sustained. The GOP ran on this but the Democrats had spent FOUR years building up this huge set of dependent electorate. It had gained them the 2012 election!

Now what? Since this is all about power and maintaining power, I'm going to predict that the Obama Democrats will adopt a large part of the Romney and Ryan economic suggestions! They'll put them in place, and, take credit for them, as the economy improves as a result.

This will give them the electoral 2016 election as well.

Americans have been stockpiling guns and ammo for the last four years. The President's reelection is likely to continue this economic stimulus.

It seems some people are not planning on submitting to tyranny meekly.

So after 100 million casualties we can start looking for "rock bottom".

Canadians will want to avoid being downwind of blue states during this unpleasantness.

I've been wondering myself for a few years now how populations in the Western World can basically ignore the economic realities of the day during their elections and, instead, focus on some dumb superficial issues. This is not an American phenomenon. This is the case in Ontario reelecting McGuinty, in Alberta reelecting the PCs, in Greece, in France, in, basically, all of Europe. I would never have thought that so many people could just turn and look the other way and deny to themselves the trouble that their country/province is going to be in. This trend better buck soon or we're all in for a long and, I'm afraid, torturous road ahead compared to the prosperity of the past generation. Plus I love this new term "Fiscal Cliffmas". Very cheeky ;)

The US will never recover from "Rock Bottom".

It'll be replaced by something else. Histories obvious selections for that replacement isn't promising for most people.

The real travesty is that based on approximate aggregate voter participation (which I estimate at ~ 55%) coupled with the marginal vote statistically only 30% the American population have effectively forced their will upon 70% of their fellow citizens. All backed with the very real threat of state-sponsored violence for non-compliance against the now silenced majority.

The progressive left have cleverly and quietly built their machine over the past generations while the mostly centrist middle class ignored the phenomenon at their own peril.

Hans-Hermann Hoppe was right:

http://www.hanshoppe.com/2012/06/jeffrey-tucker-on-hoppe/

It has been said that when more people vote for a living than work for a living we are all in peril.

Most of the working class, excluding the union elites, have already hit finanical rock bottom my investment portfolio is abysmal these days. When the liberal elites start losing their vast fortunes because of Obama's incompetence then we'll see real change. Once their mansions are gone and their lavish lifestyles cease then perhaps we can rebuild.

I disagree with the rock bottom scenario about the US. The reality that spending above one's income can't be sustained is, I'll maintain, known to both the Democrats and the GOP. That is, rock bottom has already been reached. You don't have to become a Zimbabwe.

The economic realities are not known to many of the electorate, who are confined to their more immediate concerns of daily life. But it's known to government.

I'll suggest, as I did above, that the agenda of the Democrats in 2008 was, obviously, to win the election. They did this by a campaign of emotion: anti-Bush and hope and change.

They then began, the very next day, to campaign for 2012. Obama is incapable of anything other than campaigning, but, his backroom gang had a plan. To create a dependent electorate who would keep them in power. I outlined above, how they took four years to do this, and it paid off. The Democrats won in 2012.

Just as an aside, Harper also worked for years in the multicultural and immigrant community, which had all been set up by the Liberals, as dependent populations, as Identity Blocs, to serve as faithful Liberal voters. Using Kenney, Harper has moved them out of these isolate blocs and therefore, more pro Conservative.

Now, the Democrats have to win in 2016. They've got their dependent electorate. The problem is, the costs of maintaining this electorate can't be maintained. So, they must do something about this, or, the economy will really go under, and this time, the Democrats will be blamed. They won't get away with blaming Bush. Not this time.

I predict the Obama gang will adopt many of the GOP recommendations. First, tax reform. Then, they'll even do regulation reform. They've got to get the economy moving. Only then, will they deal with entitlement reform. Just as in 2008, the Democrats will move, tomorrow, to plan for the 2016 election. This requires a better economy, and thus, both tax and entitlement reform are basic. Heh - and they'll take credit for the GOP plans.

Seeing as places like Cuba and North Korea have yet to hit this magical rock bottom I'd rather try to turn things around before we get to never,never land.

The global economy is aready a dead man walking. There is no "rock bottom" coming, we are there. The only thing keeping the wheels of commerce turning is debt of such staggering magnitude that repayment is NOT even a consideration. In all of history that I am aware of there has only ever been one way out...Bretton Woods and Lord Keynes delayed the reconing, Nixon put a bandaid on it in 1971 and now here we are.

As father with a young family I am deeply pessimistic for my children's future. My parents grew up in the thirties in Saskatchewan and knew privation, and I was raised 60s and 70s and fed a steady diet of economic lies, false history and willful suspension of disbelief.

I now know for certain that "the best and the brightest" all majored in the willful suspension of disbelief. Nurtured on a diet of polylogism and denial of the fundamenal economic truth that every homo sapien ever born prefers leisure to labor.

There is a world of difference between being smart and being wise. The wise are nowhere to be seen, the smart are still gaming the corpse of the system. I am certainly no Objectivist, but to steal a phrase, I think the wreckers have won.

The only conclusion I can draw from observed events is that somewhere a "Mr. Burns" type character is drumming his fingers together saying "Excellent".

PET Cemetery Presents: O's Green Graveyard.

How O'low can O go?

...-

"Green Graveyard: An In-Depth Look at Government’s Bad Bets on 19 Now-Bankrupt Companies"

"As a follow up to the Green Graveyard overview, this post provides additional information concerning the funding for each of the now-bankrupt green energy companies. In one of the most extensive compilations to date, Heritage has identified 19 bankrupt green energy companies that were unable to succeed even with the government’s promise to provide generous financial assistance totaling a whopping $2.6 billion."

http://blog.heritage.org/2012/11/06/green-graveyard-an-in-depth-look-at-governments-bad-bets-on-19-now-bankrupt-companies/

@ ET
"Obama Democrats will adopt a large part of the Romney and Ryan economic suggestions! "

Well thought out , as usual. Where I might disagree is that Obama's vision of "Forward" does not include rational thought. By adopting parts of the GOP platform he would have to do a complete reversal of everything he believes in and actually do what's best for the country. The past four years have shown he is incapable of putting the country first and his main priority is sharing the wealth. Socialism is his wet dream and all his actions up to this point have confirmed that. Romney/Ryan wanted to turn back to Capitalism. All indications are Obama does not.

'There's as much money to be made in wrecking a civilization as there is in building it up' - to paraphrase Gone With the Wind.

Merry Fiscal Cliffmas!

peterj, I don't think that Obama has any intellectual ideals at all, other than being, Himself, venerated as Supreme. Socialism, as a political method, enables him to be Supreme. But he himself has no interest in the people of America.

His backroom gang, such as Valerie Jarrett, are the radical socialists and they develop the policies and programs. Obama just goes on TV and campaigns and preaches empty platitudes.

My point only is that the Democrats are focused on political power and their policies and programs are geared only to that end. The 2008 campaign was easy; bash Bush and promise an imaginary rosy future.

I maintain that right after winning 2008, they began the 2012 campaign. They worked to develop a dependent electorate, all dependent on government largesse. Hispanics, women, illegals, gays, students, academia, unions, food stamps, unemployed etc. These became their constituency and they focused, not on the economy, but on binding these groups to Democratic loyalty.

The 2012 campaign was based on fear; fear of losing the protection and benefits of Obama.

Their focus now is the 2016 election. They must now turn to the economy because they can't, economically, sustain this new dependent base until they do that.

That is, I'll maintain that above and beyond ideology, there is Power. The Democrats are focused only on Power. That means a dependent electorate, most certainly, but, the state has to have the funds to support them!

Farmer Joe, are you really suggesting that the _armed_ American people will accept starvation vis-a-vis N.Korea instead of rebelling? I think not.

"I keep seeing 60 million for Obama, and 58 million for Romney. Suggests turnout was down sharply from 2008. What am I missing?"

My unsubstantiated belief is the Evangelicals Christians abandoned the GOP because of Romney's religious beliefs.

I have counseled conservative friends that it is time to "throw the social conservatives under the bus as was done in Canada". If the social conservatives choose not to vote conservative then f'em. This single issue of 'abortion' alienates the vast majority of women and is killing the GOP and the country. They will have to make-up the loss in social conservative voters with women and gays. There is NO OTHER SOLUTION! The social conservatives SHOULD take one for the team, and vote for fiscal policy. If they can't do that, like the Dem social conservatives, then f'em, they can vote for the Dems too! This strategy has worked in Canada, and will work in the USA. Mitt Romney would have won the election had he repeated a few simple words that PM Stephan Harper said before the 2011 election, and I’ll paraphrase “the issue of abortion will never be on the table so long as I’m Prime Minister of the Conservative government”. Had Romney done this, he’d have swayed many Independent and Democrat women that I know personally. Many have said to me, and this was shown in the exit polls, that abortion was the #1 issue they voted on.

Finally, the social conservatives can continue to fight for life while not sabotaging the conservative political movement. We must depend on individual women to make the right choices regarding life. Education is the key.

Allot of the SDA comments are based on the assumption that Obamba wants to get America’s economy back on track.

There is no evidence of this, in fact allowing the US to decline to “rock bottom” fits well with radical community organizer Saul Alinsky ‘s Rules for Radicals, a influential personality to Obamba according to Alinskey biographer Sanford Horwitt.

Related, PLUS a QOTW

http://voxday.blogspot.ca/2012/11/hope-vs-math.html

"Let's just say that I expect the de facto social policy of seeking to replace white male Anglo-Saxon Protestant products of intact families with a labor force that increasingly consists of uneducated, illegitimate, irreligious female people of color to work even less effectively than the Roman attempt to replace Roman citizens with German barbarians in the legions."

Farmer Joe >

"Seeing as places like Cuba and North Korea have yet to hit this magical rock bottom"

Wow, "Rock Bottom" must be pretty low for you.

Losing one’s freedom & liberty to a police state and gulag system does it for me, regardless of having a roof over my head and government food rations on the table.

Indiana Homez - exactly right. The GOP leadership ought to refuse to deal in social issues.

As Harper has done, these issues most certainly exist, but they belong in the domain of the people not the government. Therefore they must be decided at the state or provincial level. Never at the federal level. Never. The federal level must confine itself to policies that are common to all, and these are economic, foreign relations, defense, and transportation and other common infrastructures. Not social policies.

The fact that the Democrats essentially based their entire election on social policies (women, gays, hispanics) was a tactic they used to build up a huge dependent electoral base. It worked. The GOP ought to have openly said: 'these issues belong to the people, most certainly, and at the state level'. These issues, as you point out, can be debated and fought, but at the state level.

Knight99, I'll differ from you. Obama certainly wants a dependent population, but above all, he and the Democrats want political power. If they destroy the economy, they won't have power.

Rock bottom? That's easy. Rock bottom is going to come two weeks after the last welfare checks bounce.

Rock bottom in miniature is Staten Island right now. No food, no fuel, no electricity, and average middle class white people down by the beach are having to use some of that ammo they've been stocking up on to fend off the looters. Because the cops ain't doing it.

Now picture that -everywhere-. Its exactly what happened in Russia in the 1990s.

That's rock bottom. Government services -stop-. We could see that happen in California in the coming year if they keep screwing around the way they have been.

WWIII.