Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Economy’ Category


Where will the progressives go next – tax free speech with a blog or a youtube tax or will they lay a gun/ammunition tax to control the right to bear arms?

Where will this now unlimited ability for the federal government to tax its citizens as a behavior modification tool end?  If you wish to control free speech, tax certain types of blogs or youtube submissions and views.

Chief Justice John Roberts may not yet fully understand the full extent of the demise of this free Republic he has unleashed, with this unchecked ability for the progressives to tax, not to raise revenue, but to make behavior modification and pick and choose who is modified.

Can we now have an Article V Constitutional Convention by the states to take back the progressives 100 year assault on this Republic?

 

Advertisements

Read Full Post »


Twist and turns from an unpredictable Chief Justice of the supreme Court of the land – what does it mean?  While the health care mandate is struct down as unconstitutional under the commerce clause, it is Phoenix rising from the ashes as a tax, under the authority of Congress to lay and collect taxes.

What does this mean?  Simple, the Affordable Health Care Act survives mostly intact, with medicaid in jeopardy.  States cannot be punished for not expanding medicaid.  The real meaning of the Affordable Care Act decision is that the democrats in Congress and President Obama insisted, promised, that this new Act is not a tax, but when they went to court they argued that it was a tax – gross misrepresentation, again from this administration!

Since the President was adamant that this mandate was not a tax, repeatedly over time and in all forums, then argued in federal court and in the supreme Court that the mandate was justifed as a tax, will he pay the price for this massive deception?  Did he win a battle and perhaps lose the war?  The majority of americans are opposed to the mandate, and it appears that they are not opposed because it is a violation of the commerce clause, and that it really was a tax.  Americans just don’t want to be mandated by our federal government to do anything and don’t care by what means this was accomplished.

Has Chief Justice Roberts, as the swing jurist in this decision, created a mine field for President Obama?  Does the president have to explain his supreme misrepresentation to the american people?  In addition, the hidden decision here is that the federal government has been reined in under the commerce clause, limiting its commerce clause power, but unleashed as a taxing giant to use taxes to control the behavior of the citizens of this nation?

I am sure the founders never dreamed of a free nation under the thumb of the central government created by its states to make the states, as a whole, stronger, but with “limited” powers.  It appears that the federal government under the right to lay and collect taxes to influence the behavior of its citizens is now unchecked with unlimited powers – thank you, President Obama for the deception!

 

 

 

Read Full Post »


Recent pronouncements of President Obama and a three year trend of his administration have crystallized just where he stands on economics and job creation.

First, look at the three year history of his administration.  The never-ending onslaught of regulation on business and banking under the guise of protecting the consumer and the environment have used a regulatory and lending blanket to smother the small business job generator.  Small business has traditionally generated over 70% of the nation’s jobs.  Now small business is both being smothered by regulation and a dearth of lending availability from the nation’s banks.  The latter due to new banking regulations and Federal Reserve created opportunities to earn, outside of lending, by using the spread between borrowing from the Federal Reserve and then buying Treasuries.

The EPA is single handily ripping the life out of the coal industry, and its jobs.  Oil drilling has been seriously curtailed on federal land and off shore, killing high paying jobs.  Even fracking for natural gas and oil from shale is under attack by the EPA.  Have you wondered why recent reports of EPA action indicate that the EPA has armed SWAT teams and why EPA agents now are armed?  If this is true, what is next – armed truant officers and meter readers?

Now let’s look at two of the tenets of socialism.  In socialism:

  • the government controls big business and the banking industry
  • jobs come from big business with small business being generally non-existent

President Obama has recently provided additional insight to what he believes to be job creation.  His statement that the private sector is doing just fine was ludicrous but more so indicative of where he wants to take this country.  His new plan is his old plan.  He wants to create jobs by creating more non-federal government, but local government jobs, and we already know that federal jobs are up as well. CNN-Money reports: “…The number of federal employees grew by 123,000, or 6.2%, under President Obama, according to the White House’s Office of Management and Budget…”

To be fair and the article points this out that this is just a continuation of President Bush’s job growth in the federal government. I say, more of what is not good is bad.  A word about President Bush – he expanded government, yes, and this was the start of our move to bigger government.  This does not mean that it is good that President Obama doubled down on what was not a good trend in the first place.  My mother would have said: “Two wrongs don’t make a right”.

The article also points out a greater number of regulations were introduced during the term of Bush than Obama.  Don’t go by the number, but by the severity and impact.  The Obama administration is masterful at private sector killing regulation and the regulations that place big business under the thumb of the federal government – Affordable Health Care is one and Dodd Frank is another.  Each of these laws authorizes the bureaucrats of Obama’s administration to write extensive, binding, impactful regulations that destroy small business and gives the federal government unprecedented power over big business and the banks – key tenets of socialism.

Back to Mr. Obama’s pronouncements about creating jobs.  Rather than unleash the private sector and small business to grow and truly create economically productive jobs, he is pushing for a repeat of the failed $800+ Billion stimulus which was going to create police, fire, and teaching jobs, as well as apparently non-existent shovel ready jobs, by doubling down and borrowing more money to pour into local government, government sector unions, and economically unproductive jobs.  Remember the reason why police, fire, and teachers have been laid off is the inability of local government to pay the benefits and pensions resulting from these government sector union jobs.  More socialism!

Apparently Mr. Obama is incapable of or has no desire to foster private sector jobs, even private sector union jobs, and he just has to feed the government sector unions with more stimuli.  His solution to unemployment and the stagnant economic growth is to move into the only direction he knows and believes in; and that is to grow government, foster government sector unions, minimize or eliminate small business, have the banks do the bidding for the federal government, and ultimately raise taxes.  His desired action requires more taxes and more taxes shrink economies.

I can only suggest that anyone who disagrees with me look up how failed socialist states operated.  The plan Obama is using is the failed plan of the past, worldwide.  There has not been one socialist economy in history that has improved and sustained the quality of life and standard of living of the populace.  Government jobs, while a necessary pill which must be taken in great moderation, are not economically viable contributors to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and the standard of living of any economy – they require more taxes and again taxes shrink economies.  Yet he steadfastly refuses to unleash the 70% job creator – small business.

 

Read Full Post »


The state of the nation, our nation, is not so complicated as one might think.  We now have “Occupy Wall Street” (OWS) springing up almost out of nowhere, with no leadership, no funding, and no direction.  Believe this and I will sell you a bridge – call me, I hear the Brooklyn Bridge is available.

There is, however, one very cogent message coming from the occupiers.  It is that the top 1% of wealth in this country controls the power.  Abraham Lincoln was apparently wrong, at least for our time, when he proclaimed at Gettysburg: :”…government of the people, by the people, and for the people…”

Today and for over one hundred years, we do not have a free and independent Congress, unions bought and paid for our current President, and our Supreme Court suffers from “absolute power corrupts absolutely”, no longer deciding cases on their merits, but instead using ideology.  Money derived from the 1%, dictates who our candidates are, dictates how our representatives vote, and attempts to shape populist opinion through a media void of integrity.  We have a government monetary system perennially dictated by Goldman Sachs alumni, regardless of the administration.  It should be no suprise that Goldman Sachs is the common hobby horse of the 1%.  It is where they play.

While the world has always been about wealth retaining and wielding power.  This country, with brief lapses, has muddle through despite the wealthy for 222 years [the Republic we know was officially started March 1, 1789] , because we are a republic with a great founding document.

Now an amalgamation of often disassociated factions has come together to bring us “Occupy Wall Street”, with the only overriding theme being capitalism does not work and the 1% control the world.  The solutions from these folks stem from eliminating money to pure distribution of wealth in a socialist system.  Is this really grass roots with no leadership?  If you believe so, then answer this question, how do they manage to have a finance committee?

Here is a good question.  Is this a quest for the uber 1% to gain even more power by throwing off the yoke of that restraining document, the Constitution?  Someone has to be orchestrating this supposedly grass roots event and providing the money, so much money that they have a finance committee.  We have seen reports that George Soros, a long time proponent of abolishing the Constitution and creating a one world government under a new world order, has his various tentacled organizations heavily involved.  George Soros is one of the 1% of the 1% worldwide.  Is this their, the 1% of the 1%, world conquest using ultimate financial power?  Remember, we have prepared the masses for this by dumbing down the schools, offering only radical socialist speak at universities, and by a radical transformation of the media – we no longer have a fourth estate to keep folks and government honest.

Do we break the yoke, involving both major political parties, of the 1%, and lurch toward a one world new world order, without our Constitution, under socialism led by George Soros, et al., through the amalgamation of disassociated factions in favor of the 1% of the 1%, or do we modify our Constitution to provide term limits, lobbying controls, and elimination of contributions by any organization: union, corporation, or association?  Do we, by a Constitutional amendment, continue to limit individual contributions, and allow political speak (ads) only from individuals?

While the OWS people are right only about the 1%, their methods and resources are absolutely the wrong way for this country to go.  Ask yourself, are the occupiers useful idiots of the devious 1% of the 1%.

 

 

Read Full Post »


Well, if we tax every penny earned by the rich (above $250,000 in income), then of course they will be paying their fare share and we will close the deficit.  President Obama says taxing the rich in not class warfare – it’s math.  Okay, let’s look at the math.

It is becoming well known that if we taxed all those folks making $250,000 and up at a 100% tax rate and took all their earnings each year, we would yield only $900B annually, but would still leave us short of the $1.65T annual deficit and no hope of paying down the $14 plus trillion debt.

Obama’s math simply does not work so this must be class warfare of a socialist.  Keep in mind that President Obama’s parents were communists, by his own admission; his grandparents were communists, by his own admission; and his childhood/young adult mentor was a communist, by his own admission.  Keep in mind that he only hung around with communists at Columbia, by his own admission.  Keep in mind that share the wealth, pay their fare share, fat cats on wall street, and all his other phrases are the phrases of a communist or a socialist.  Keep in mind that communist Russia was called the Union of Soviet Socialists Republics.  Keep in mind that communists embrace socialism.

With all this in mind, is he steering economic solutions for a free market America or forcing us down a path to socialism?

 

 

 

Read Full Post »


Tax the rich! The rich must pay their fair share! No more private jets! We keep hearing these refrains from our President and others on the left.  Is our debt problem caused by the rich?  Is our deficit problem caused by the rich?  Is our spending problem caused by the rich.  Recently, I happened upon an interview of a gentleman named Robert Frank.  He wrote a book call “Richistan”.

It seems that he took a pencil to paper to calculate the affect on our deficit and debt “taxing the rich”to solve our problem of spending would have.  His calculation is stunning and would suggest that our President and the left need to break out their calculators – their solution simply does not work. I have always believed that the left attended the voodoo school of economics and maybe I am correct.  Really, the far left progressives are not as much concerned about economics as they are about insuring that the few dictate to the many, how to live, how to work, and how to play – economics and facts just get in their way.

  • In the interview, Mr. Frank was asked “If we reverse the Bush tax cuts would that solve our problem.
  • His answer: this would yield $100B annually against our $1.65T annual deficit.

 

  • What if we taxed all those folks making $250,000 annually and up at a 100% tax rate – take all their earnings?
  • Answer: this would yield $900B annually, but would still leave us short of the $1.65T annual deficit.

 

  • What if we confiscated all the wealth of the Forbes list of wealthy Americans?
  • Answer: This would net $1.6T and would solve the deficit for only one year.  (deficit, under our spending ways is annual)

 

  • How about if we were to end that corporate jet depreciation?
  • Answer: This would yield a couple billion against a $1.65T deficit.

We owe more than $14 Trillion and add to that debt at the rate of $1.65 Trillion annually.  We are increasing our debt at nearly 12% per year.  When will the reckless spending end?  We need to end the spending before we have any hope of lowering our debt.  To lower our debt we need a surplus every year and not a $1.65T deficit.  In Washington they are wringing their hands over proposals that might yield $2Trillion over ten years.  They do the Irish Jig if they achieve a 1% cut from the spending growth rate.  These “great” plans will not solve our annual deficit.  More taxes will not solve our deficit.  Only sustained substantial spending cuts are the answer.

We, the federal government, should be taking from the economy – the taxpayers – just enough to provide the basic obligations of the federal government as found in the Constitution.

 

Read Full Post »


Are our school districts/systems, run by educated education professionals, spending your money wisely?  Has the U.S. Department of Education had a positive impact on our kids?  Has too much money gone to support the teachers’ unions’ demands, and bigger government; has too little information gone into the area between the ears of our kids? You be the judge.

 

Many thanks to the brilliant folks at the Cato Institute for the work they have done on so many important issues.  This work was done by Andrew J. Coulson and the complete Cato article can be found at President to Call for Big New Ed. Spending Here’s a Look at How that’s Worked in the Past.  Charts republished with the permission of the Cato Institute.

Let’s start with the U.S. Department of Education, elevated from the Office of Education in 1979.  The Department’s website  states “The Department’s mission is to serve America’s students— to  by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.”  How is this working for you?

It has a $67 Billion budget, over 4,000 employees and distributes another $100 Billion in education support.  By the way, this $167 Billion is derived from tax revenue taken from tax payers in the fifty states and territories.  If this money is left in the states, the states can then collect and use this money as they see fit and not as directed by educators with a progressive bent on how our children should learn.  There are almost 60 million students enrolled in K-12 education in this country.  The elimination of the Department of Education’s operating budget would ensure another $1,100 per student in education funding.  Would you contribute to a charity that had a 40% overhead rate as does the Department of Education?  How much of your district’s budget is spent on U.S. Department of Education compliance?  Add these compliance expenses to the overhead and the amount freed up for students climbs even higher.

The states do not need the U.S. Department of Education; the states’ PhD’s are just as smart as the PhD’s at the Department of Education.  The department has miserably failed its mission because we have an abysmal return on our Federal investment and a relatively zero increase in student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness, as is the mission since 1979.  There is no education excellence in our children.  We need to shut it down and despite numerous tweaks by Congress it is an abject failure and a gargantuan waste of money.

Is money the answer in itself – No!  Much of the money provided to the students has gone to support the teacher unions’ contracts.  We cannot remove a bad teacher, we cannot improve work rules, and the unions even call the shots on how our children are prepared for the future.  Unless you consider socialist propaganda prepared, they are simply not prepared for the future.  We are not making widgets here; these children are the nation’s greatest resource.  They are not a cog in the wheel of a union contract.  The unions have benefited financially from favorable union contracts; have the children benefited?  If you think so, look at the charts again.  Are there good teachers?  Yes of course.  Are these good teachers allowed to innovate, no!

Stop throwing money at the problem and change the paradigm.  We need to focus heavily on English, Math, Sciences, History, and Social Studies above all else.  Yes art and music and others have their place, but the Titanic is sinking, so let’s not rearrange the deck chairs.  First we need a good hard look at the content of the books and then we need to actually teach our kids that passing or failing is important in life.  The real world requires critical thinking skills and believe it or not in non-government or non-academic careers success matters, so why not truly prepare our kids for the future.

Parents who care need to pressure their school boards to become totally transparent.  Put all budgets and salaries online.  Put the progress of each class online.  We need to measure our teachers by testing their classes at the start of the semester/school year and then again at the end of the semester/school year to judge whether the teacher has adequately promoted student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness. Since our children are important and our future lifeblood, we need to compensate our teachers based on quality control.  If they actually deliver student achievement  and prepare these kids for the global economy – pay them well.  General Electric became very successful after Jack Welch instituted a policy that each year the bottom 10% of managers were let go and replaced by new hires – remember this is the real world.  Why shouldn’t this real world accountability be applied to those entrusted to prepare our to children succeed for themselves and for this country?

 

 



Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: