Tom the Dancing Bug by Ruben Bolling for April 08, 2011

As in most jobs, how much pain will you take for your pay.

Wow, a first! Mr. Bolling has demonstraterd comlpete ignorance in both economics and Psychology history, as well as sheeplike adherence to the orthodoxy of an outdated ideology that is now being repudiated in the very cuontries where it started! Congratulations! Tell me, Mr. Bolling; do you ever actually think for yourself?

Lighten up, Francis.

^ But that would require button A and he’s obviously not gonna press that one.

Apparently you don’t Mr. Dean

Well, let’s see. We extended unemployment benefits for up to 2 years, and unemployment didn’t go down for some reason. We went from massive deficit spending under George W. Bush to beyond massive defecit spending under Barrack Obama and unemployment went down eventually for a couple of months by a couple of tenths of a percent. If we continue deficit spending too long the unemployment rate will most definitely stabilize…at 100%, no matter who’s in office.

True. No matter who you vote for, Caesar always wins.

Well, we could adopt the ideal the author is pushing for in this comic, but I thought most of us knew that communism really is not a viable economic model? I wonder why the liberals continue to push such fiscal irresponsible programs?

He’s not pushing for anything in the comic; he’s just making fun of the sadistic side of capitalism. The winners like punishing the losers, but carrying it too far is risky. But as the comic suggests, if you pay them off a little after you’ve had your fun, they like it, and you can keep playing the game. Uncle Hollingsworth should have anticipated this tragic flaw in his enjoyment.

As for communism, the comic has nothing to do with it. I wonder if you know what the word means.

My American History teacher in 11th grade (1961), in Tustin CA (‘behind the Orange Curtain’) was a Corporal in WWII (in a Panzer battalion!), named Rudolf Roy Show. One of the brightest individuals in my life.

He spoke seven languages, and was flummoxed at why we were forbidden to have or read the step-by-step plan The Communist Manifesto and know something about ‘the enemy’, but required to go sit in the bleachers in Anaheim and be screamed at by rabid anti-communist organizers.

Of course, he didn’t last but the one year. I miss him still.

Finally just read The Ugly American which mentioned the same about Mao’s military writings - step-by-step, and nobody involved in Vietnam had, or was required to read them. Tragic.

Through unemployment the economy enjoyed the benefits of a stream of money moving in the economy–money is energy, created by the government (can you make change for a 10 Halliburton? A 20 Monsanto?) partly as a way to freely direct the energies inherent in a capital based system. Our herd behaviors can push to overspending and it can also lead to hyper-saving–the wealth now being hoarded by the few cannot move freely, and there aren’t enough batteries to store it, so it will seek other locations to get its kicks. China, anyone?

Night, I agree with nearly everything you say with one addition. Obama is only acting like a Corporate Right Wing Capitalist for “the enlightened companies”. Apparently even the Democrats know that most of their funding comes from the corporate world.

Doug Dean -

“Wow, a first! Mr. Bolling has demonstraterd comlpete ignorance in both economics and Psychology history,”

In fact the cartoon makes a sophisticated satirical reference to a famous psychology experiment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/StanleyMilgramshock_experiments

Technically, the cartoon does not advocate any economic policies, but there are many (non-communist) economists who do feel that the Obama administration’s response to unemployment has been too modest.

“as well as sheeplike adherence to the orthodoxy of an outdated ideology that is now being repudiated in the very cuontries where it started! Congratulations! ”

Yes, of course, let’s construct a simpleton false dichotomy, and label every economic policy that is not your arbitrary preference “communism” or “socialism”

All you achieve by this is to render terms like “socialism” meaningless.

“Tell me, Mr. Bolling; do you ever actually think for yourself?”

And while we’re creating false dichotomies and mis-defining terms, let’s call the process of parroting Fox News sound bites “thinking for yourself”.

Good job, Doug Dean, you’ve been mocked by the artist himself. http://gocomics.typepad.com/tomthedancingbugblog/2011/04/comment-of-the-week.html

Despite Republican opposition, Congress & President Obama extended unemployment benefits in order to help the millions made unemployed by the Great Republican Recession. This was one of the ways that the economy has begun to recover: Fewer people became destitute and lost their houses, and more people had a modicum of spending money.

Because of the President Obama’s stimulus (smaller than it should have been, due to the Republican opposition), employment has increased, and the Great Republican Recession is ending.

I agree with you, Night-Gaunt. Obama’s stimulus aimed too much at Wall Street and an insufficient amount at Main Street, but he entered office just as Bush-Dick’s economy tanked, and, unlike Franklin Roosevelt, he did not have the benefit of a strong & co-operative Congress.

LOL< Brian your fictional comedy is as funny as anything I’ve ever read. Just wait and see if the President’s policies do anything at all beyond the slight percentage points drop in unemployment. With oil prices rising again (Why doesn’t Obama stop the price of oil from going up? He can do it can’t he?) any slight hint of a recovery is down the drain. Of course, I suppose you’ll blame the rising oil prices on Republicans so you don’t have to admit that what you said is a bunch of horse dookey. It’s so amazing that the same deficit spending that George W. Bush did was so bad for the economy, yet when a Democrat does it, it’s the answer to all economic ills. Giving money back to the banks (which both stimulus bills did) was the most asinine thing the Congress could have done.Yes, more of them are solvent, but their “toxic assets” are still toxic, and as long as that is such, lending (which drives investment spending more substantially than “tax breaks for the rich and corporate” which the GOP love so much) will remain flat, and rising energy costs (which drive up ALL other costs) will stop most businesses from expanding. The economy is going nowhere, regardless of what President Obama does unless he finds a way to do 2 things; 1) curb oil price speculation. And of course the only real way to do that is to push the markets to severely increase the margin that speculators have to pony up to trade on oil futures. Making the speculators come up with a substantially higher percentage of the cost of the commodities they’re trading on would limit the number of players bidding oil prices so high. There is no shortage of oil supply, just expectations that production will lag due to political unrest, and 2) stop injecting so much fake money into the system so that the dollar loses value in the world money markets. US inflation is suppposedly low, but the index on which it is based neglects many of the most current pressure points on consumer costs. As US inflation rises (bankers and economists around the world see what’s actually going on, and aren’t fooled by the artificial indices the Fed puts out to try to assuage the uneducated US public) and the dollar drops in value, expect to see even more stagnation in the economy which no matter how you try, can’t be blamed on the previous administration.

Nola, I’m perfectly happy to see oil speculation curbed, although I cannot see Republicans (& many Democrats) in Congress agreeing to it.

I note that the rest of your remark had as much substance as did your arguments for “intelligent design”. In other words, it was empty blather.

Bush-Dick’s deficit spending was used to slaughter Iraqis, maim Americans, get our nation inextricably involved with re-creating Iraq, cost us future trillions, and line his friends’ pockets.

President Obama’s deficit spending is used to help Americans out of your Great Republican Recession. The spending should have gone less toward banks and more toward job-creation, but it was spending to help solve a crisis caused by Republican Congresses & a Republican president.

Look: You supported Bush-Dick & the Republicans for years. It’s all right to admit that you were wrong.

Party line. Nice reply Comrade. No need to think on your own when you can just parrot the mantra “Blame Bush.” Unlike you, I look at the real causes of economic events, not what’s force fed by the two major political parties. You should try it some time.

Thanks for conceding, Nola. I trust that you will vote in a more thoughtful manner in the future.

I look forward to other supporters of Bush-Dick to admit their mistake. Back in the 1970s, millions tried to deny that they voted for Nixon. I am glad that you are not like them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/StanleyMilgramshock_experiments