Happy Times are Here Again

Reagan was well meaning. He was smart. And his instincts were good. But he was no match for the entrenched power of the elites.

President Ronald Reagan speaks at the Inaugural Ball in Washington DC, 1981. Source: Getty Images

Monday, November 4^th, 2024 

Bill Bonner, writing today from Baltimore, Maryland 

It was 44 years ago. But we remember it well. The Inaugural Ball of 1981. Ronald Reagan had just been elected president. The ceiling was festooned with red, white and blue. The champagne flowed. The band played ‘Happy Times Are Here Again.’ 

And we were out of business. 

Yes, at the time we were running the National Taxpayers Union... whose stated mission was to ‘cut out government waste’ and save the taxpayers’ money. But now that Ronald Reagan was president, there was no more need. Reagan was in charge. And he would bring order to federal finances... and cut unnecessary spending. Or, so we thought. 

Unlike Donald Trump, Reagan had devoted years of his life to government and politics.  Beginning his career on the ‘left,’ he moved to ‘right’ as he got older and concluded that ‘government is the problem, not the solution.’ He knew that budgets needed to be balanced. And he was fully committed — ideologically, intellectually, temperamentally — to the traditional conservative cause of limited federal power. He even appointed our friend David Stockman, a man who could spot a wasted penny from miles away, as Budget Director. 

If his team couldn’t turn things around, none could. 

And yet, he failed. The momentum of Big Government was too strong. Reagan was well meaning. He was smart. And his instincts were good. But he was no match for the entrenched power of the elites. 

David Stockman wrote an excellent book detailing how things went wrong. It’s called The Triumph of Politics: Why the Reagan Revolution Failed. It explains how, even in the early ‘80s, Washington politics diverted ‘conservatives,’ turning them into the biggest spenders ever. During Reagan’s four years, US debt increased 160% — the third biggest hike of any president... and twice that of Barack Obama. 

Go figure. 

And since then, every ‘conservative’ leader has been an imposter. Bush I, Bush II, Trump — all were firmly in the grip of the Big Spending/Big Empire elites. None ever broke a sweat trying to rein in deficits or US military adventures.  

And now, Dan Denning points out that the Chief Executive has been largely sidelined. That’s why Ms. Harris is a plausible candidate; she’s not really expected to do anything or have ideas of her own. Voters attach themselves to the candidates on the basis of shared cultural clues, not underlying policy. Besides, the basic policy choices for Republicans as well as Democrats are essentially the same. 

This, says Dan, is largely proven by the example of the last two years when “we’ve basically NOT had a president.” And we didn’t need one:  

In the absence of a real CEO (instead of an empty mind like Biden, an empty suit like Harris, an empty wallet like Trump) the State and its minions are more than capable of running themselves. The CEO comes and goes. The assistant secretaries for this and that... and the hundreds of thousands of civil servants and federal employees [along with lobbyists, special interests, think tanks, hacks, hangers-on, and has-beens]... they stay... they keep not working... or worse... working. Doing their damage to the Republic like termites in the Resolute Desk.  

But people still think it’s a civic duty to vote for one of the two candidates, no matter how bad the choice is. They must think that there’s some invisible genius to the system that elevates ordinary men (or women!) into worthy leaders of the free world. Even today many otherwise sensible people send out hopeful pleas to voters to elect Trump or Harris.  

Ellen Sauerbrey, for example, is a politician from Baltimore with a big smile. Among other things, she had been appointed as a US ambassador to the UN. Writing to Maryland voters, she urges them to pull the lever for Trump: 

“My mind is made up. I'm voting for him and here's why: He puts Americans and their well-being first. Kamala will not. He will bring @elonmusk into his cabinet to be the efficiency czar and get rid of waste. This alone may be the best single reason to vote for him.” 

We can’t remember the last time we heard a politician say he didn’t put the well-being of Americans first and foremost. But they all put on their pants one leg at a time like everyone else... and put their own well-being first — just as we would if we were in their shoes.  

The most remarkable credulity is the idea that an ‘efficiency czar’ would ‘get rid of waste.’    

This reveals an alarming lack of cynicalism. First, as we learned in the ‘80s, there is no such thing as ‘waste’ in Washington. All the money that comes into town ends up in someone’s pocket... which is the whole idea.

Second, inefficiency is often the only thing that makes it tolerable. Would the world have been a better place if Mussolini’s Italian government had been more efficient at rounding up Jews? Or Yamamoto’s bombers had done a better job on the US Pacific Fleet?  And no one was ever praised for his efficient love-making.   

Reagan understood that when it comes to government, it’s not efficiency that counts.  It’s size.  Less is more. And now... Donald Trump... with none of the Gipper’s charm... none of his warmth... and none of his philosophical and ideological principles -- is there any plausible hope that The Donald will succeed where The Gipper failed? 

Regards, 

Bill Bonner