Will Rural Initiative Result In Additions To “The List”?
By: Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President
We recently wrote a piece on the White House Rural Council, seeking to put in context thoughts that instead of being a “one-world order conspiracy” it was more than likely an election platform that President Obama would attempt to use to boost his standing with rural America. That perspective seems to be gaining traction, given the Council’s first public documentation, primarily geared to suggest that the Obama Administration, using federal funds has and will continue to provide the necessary dollars for the economic prosperity that will certainly sweep across the countryside in unbelievable waves.
We’re told in this news blurb that the President is putting in motion his administration’s latest game-plan of rural economic enhancement (and continuing his campaign to convince voters that he should be re-elected…since he’s doing things so well) at the White House Rural Economic Forum today in Peosta, Iowa. As part of his announcement of the new jobs initiatives recommended by the White House Rural Council for growing the economy and creating jobs in rural America the President’s news release attributes the President as saying…
In the pursuit of redistributing resources from the private sector (acquired through taxes) and then spent on these projects and programs, it will be interesting to see if we will, at some day in the future, see examples of grandiose rural prosperity government projects find their way to this list of government spending boondoggles.
Although it’s not the stuff that politicians can take credit for, one has to wonder what could happen if government didn’t first have to over-tax the private sector that produces our economy in order to finance projects and activities that, while politically-correct, don’t have the ability to be economically feasible without the government funding that politicians are wanting to get credit for having financed. Supposedly, we’re to bow and be appreciative of all the bounty that government spending will accomplish to make our lives better. In the long-run we’d be better if we just got to keep more of what we earned and not have to send it off to government so they can give it back to us for things that would be better initiated from the ground up (instead of the top down).
We recently wrote a piece on the White House Rural Council, seeking to put in context thoughts that instead of being a “one-world order conspiracy” it was more than likely an election platform that President Obama would attempt to use to boost his standing with rural America. That perspective seems to be gaining traction, given the Council’s first public documentation, primarily geared to suggest that the Obama Administration, using federal funds has and will continue to provide the necessary dollars for the economic prosperity that will certainly sweep across the countryside in unbelievable waves.
We’re told in this news blurb that the President is putting in motion his administration’s latest game-plan of rural economic enhancement (and continuing his campaign to convince voters that he should be re-elected…since he’s doing things so well) at the White House Rural Economic Forum today in Peosta, Iowa. As part of his announcement of the new jobs initiatives recommended by the White House Rural Council for growing the economy and creating jobs in rural America the President’s news release attributes the President as saying…
“These are tough times for a lot of Americans—including those who live in our rural communities. That’s why my administration has put a special focus on helping rural families find jobs, grow their businesses and regain a sense of economic security.”The council’s recommendations, which leverage existing programs and funding, include committing $350 million in Small Business Administration funding to rural small businesses over the next five years, launching a series of conferences to connect private equity and venture capital investors with rural startups; creating capital marketing teams to pitch federal funding opportunities to private investors interested in making rural investments; making job search information available at 2,800 local USDA offices nationwide; making Health and Human Services loans available to help more than 1,300 Critical Access Hospitals recruit additional staff; and helping rural hospitals purchase software and hardware to implement health information technology.
In the pursuit of redistributing resources from the private sector (acquired through taxes) and then spent on these projects and programs, it will be interesting to see if we will, at some day in the future, see examples of grandiose rural prosperity government projects find their way to this list of government spending boondoggles.
Although it’s not the stuff that politicians can take credit for, one has to wonder what could happen if government didn’t first have to over-tax the private sector that produces our economy in order to finance projects and activities that, while politically-correct, don’t have the ability to be economically feasible without the government funding that politicians are wanting to get credit for having financed. Supposedly, we’re to bow and be appreciative of all the bounty that government spending will accomplish to make our lives better. In the long-run we’d be better if we just got to keep more of what we earned and not have to send it off to government so they can give it back to us for things that would be better initiated from the ground up (instead of the top down).
Posted by Doug Busselman at 8/16/2011 9:13 AM 
Categories: Federal Stimulus
Tags: Rural Development Economic Development White House Rural Council
Categories: Federal Stimulus
Tags: Rural Development Economic Development White House Rural Council
Comments