The premier cabinet positions and the ones that have the longest history are Defense, State and Treasury. Of course in the old and more honest days, Defense was called the War Department. It was only after WWII that political correctness started making inroads and euphemisms became the standard of the day and the War Department was changed to the Department of Defense. Over our history we have had some quite bright fellows as Secretary of the Treasury. Hamilton was the first leading light in this regard. Samual Chase during the War Between the States was the architect of the financial schemes that allowed the Yankees to fund their war effort to invade the South. He was clever, no doubt about it. He had greater resources at hand than his counter part in the South and used them well. The Yankees used their industrial base and control of finances to maximum advantage under Chase. By the way he and Lincoln were bitter political enemies and many speculated rightfully that he had his own ambitions for the White House. He was also a target of the Boothe conspiracy that ended in the assassination of Lincoln.
A little study of history and some common sense make it apparent that the only reason for a Treasury Department is if we have a capitalist economic system. That is its raison d’etre. If the Government is socialist or communist then you don’t need a Treasury department at all. A simple Comptroller to disburse funds would suffice. After all under such a system the Government owns everything and controls everything in the economy. The purpose of the Treasury is to support and nurture private enterprise. Yes, does issue Government debt but only for purposes of fostering a free flow of commerce throughout the nation which in turn produces tax revenues for the Government to function. It is there to sustain a banking system for the private economy. The whole idea of taxes implies a captitalist system. Stalin didn’t need taxes to run the Soviets. He owned everything already. There was no one to tax but the Government itself. Again if you don’t have a capitalist system their is no need for a banking system as we know it. A money dispensary to convert notes to cash would be sufficient. In a socialist system you don’t need a bank to start your small business venture. Under the capitalist system you go to a bank with your plan and proposals and projections and seek funding to start your barbershop. But in the socialist system you ask a bureaucrat if you can run 0ne of the state owned barbershops. There is no need for banks or a Treasury.
I fear our current Treasury is going very far afield from its intended purpose. Its mission is being changed to foster Government programs rather than the private economy. The bailouts and takeovers of private industry are occurring at break neck speed. Our Treasury will soon be that dispensary to hand out funds to those favored by those in power and for no other purpose. We are watching this transformation with our eyes wide open. But it is incremental in its growth and many are not looking at the big picture and nor looking far enough down the road. I think we are better off having some banks fail and yes, maybe have some temporary pain in our economy, than we are having the Government take over a vast majority of our banking system. Once the Government owns the banks then they have become nothing more than an arm of the Government. Regrettably the current Treasury department is helping with this program rather than opposing it. I suppose the only good news is that if we continue on this road we will eliminate at least one Government bureaucracy and all those employees because it simply won’t be needed anymore. We need Treasury to do its job to support private enterprise and not be a co-conspirator with Congress to socialize our economy.
Of all the statistics and numbers I have seen bandied about in the news over the last week or so, the most troubling was the information from the census bureau about the birth rate. Births are up substantially it appears. The largest increase if over 50 years according to the reports. What is so sad was the detail that of all those births about 40% were to unwed mothers. No matter what happens with anything else we are doomed as a nation if that number holds true. The family unit is vital. A mom and child (or children) are not a good unit for society in large numbers. The implications of those numbers overshadow so much else. They bode ill I fear for the future.