Study-at-home courses for the Obama re-education camps

In this day and age of study-at-home courses, Communist re-education camps are being redefined. As the non-violent socialist revolution takes place in these United States, 21st century methods of re-education have taken the place of forced relocation used by the Communist dictatorships. You can now study at home to get your socialist indoctrination.

Just choose your favorite leftist propaganda sources on the internet, on television, and yes, even a few still remain on the radio. You can now feed on the lies of the day from home, avoiding the mess of forcibly being relocated into rural indoctrination camps. Dennis Rodman’s assertions to the contrary, the North Korean Communists still use traditional Soviet and Maoist style violence to maintain their rule. But they are about the only ones these days. Exposure of the Killing Fields under Pol Pot’s Communist regime in Cambodia left too vivid of an impression in most people’s minds for any forcible relocation of the citizenry to be acceptable. And Romanian dictator Ceaucescu’s efforts to massively relocate people into his apartment buildings died with his execution as the Iron Curtain was falling. Which leads us to the here and now, where instant media sources abound. Why relocate for re-education when you can get your immediate indoctrination from home? For example, on Tuesday, January 7, President Obama was our celebrity speaker on the TV news channels, re-educating us about basic economics.

---

The highlight of his “teaching” was the following: “Independent economists have shown that extending emergency unemployment insurance actually helps the economy, actually creates new jobs.” While it’s true that someone spending money in any kind of economic activity is by definition helping the economy, President Obama’s oversimplification of this concept, leaves out the matter of where this money comes. In other words, extraction of that money from taxpayers is actually taking money out of the economy, making the economy less productive. Obama continually ignores one of the basic premises of growing an economy, namely businesses make a profit and create jobs as the businesses grow by putting profits back into their businesses. On the other hand, cutting the profits of businesses by taxation and channeling it through the government bureaucracy does nothing to grow the economy. It actually hinders the growth of the businesses and does no more than move money from one part of the economy to another. In another of President Obama’s speeches on economics on December 4, 2013, he described how “Teddy Roosevelt fought for an eight-hour day, protections for workers and busted monopolies,” “FDR fought for Social Security and insurance for unemployment and a minimum wage,” and “LBJ fought for Medicare and Medicaid” and other ways the federal government had “stretched out a safety net.” But then he said at “as a result, America built the largest middle class the world has ever known.” Of course, none of those factors he mentioned previous to that had anything to do with the creation of jobs and the rise in the standard of living of Americans (what Obama described as building the middle class). It was actually due to the Industrial Revolution, the development of factories, mass production, cheaper, more efficient and readily available energy sources, and other factors brought about by the advent of the capitalist free-enterprise system and spurred on by the great entrepreneurial spirit of Americans. Advocates of greater government control over society, whether they be Democrats, Republicans or Communists, fail to acknowledge that the only way government can help economic growth is by getting out of the way of the activity of private enterprise capitalism. As I’ve shown, it is a completely false argument to say that growing social welfare programs stimulates the economy, because it involves taking money away from productive businesses that can actually grow the economy.