Stump'n for Dump'n

With the president out stumping for dumping the Republican policies responsible for the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, voters must be stumped with policy alternatives that did little to dump the recession and pump a deflationary trend.

The Democratic alternative presents the unfaded image of Nancy Pelosi schleping an oversized gavel to bang-in an oversized healthcare reform bill in the midst of economic turmoil.

While Wall Street was provided with all the funding it needs to plunder Main Street (making markets to produce the "social value" of record debt and massive unemployment), the Democratic party, in a fit of compassionate conservatism, has also been sure to provide a healthcare program. Being poor does not have to mean being unhealthy in the neo-classical, neo-conservative world of capitalism.

The political picture is a farce of monumental proportion, but the consequences are all too tragic and familiar.

Despite the overwhelmingly tragic consequences, and with the political solution being classically reduced to either inflation or unemployment, and both of those being bad for the economy, both parties are nevertheless secure in the binomial domain of a perpetual partisan hypothesis.

"If not this, then always that" is anything but uncertainty. It is a low political volatility that ensures the current value of the risk.

The president's mid-term campaign rhetoric begs the question. If Republican policies are so obviously bad, why is it necessary to feverishly campaign to maintain a Democratic majority? The deficiency here is obviously not Republican.

The current choice (inflation or unemployment) is the classical alternative in neo-classical garb (a deficit or balanced budget). It is a false choice, a self-fulfilled prophecy, providing alternatives that achieve the same result with the false promise of continuous improvement.

Neo-classically, where are we now?

We are currently in a classical, recessionary, cyclical trend with a strong deflationary tendency being resisted with expanded debt.

So, where is the improvement?

What has improved is the complexity of the financial tools used to derive the value from the risk. The technology is made inscrutible to the average voter so that the classical alternative always has the promise of a simple and understandable solution reduced to an either-or hypothesis.

The result is the political eristic we see now, absurdly given the choice of two cross-effective alternatives that always confirms detrimental to the average voter and progressively beneficial in income class (the Hamiltonian model of political economy).

What is the average voter supposed to do when a supposedly wiser government authority always "re-presents" the average voter with the classical alternative, inflation or unemployment (Democrat or Republican)?

The "representative" form of government will either be considered fundamentally disfunctional or, most likely, considered better than alternative models, including democracy, and possible mob rule, a la The French Revolution and The Reign of Terror in which monarchy "re-presented" as the functional alternative.

Faced with one party prepared to inflate the deficit, and the other to deflate it, voters see a compromise coming that requires a whole lot of stump'n now for all the dump'n later.

The classical alternative is a false choice, but there is another choice that is not represented.