Monday, July 25, 2011
The sub-prime bubble and the rise of BO accelerated the trend, but as Samuelson points out, the seeds of the demise were sown because the assumptions of the post WWII order were just wrong:
1) The Welfare State
2) Government controlled economic growth
3) Benefits of International trade
Now all three are in real trouble. Samuelson covers why -- and after his analysis, all but the committed lefty ideologues can see that "Real Change Is Here".
Saturday, July 23, 2011
Very sobering but very necessary. To even propose something for 2036 is a profound admission that BO has slipped the surly bonds long ago. We may not make 2012. If he is re-elected, nothing that anyone would recognize as America will be around in 2016.
"If that's the best offer, there isn't going to be a 2036, not for America. As the Europeans are beginning to grasp, eventually 'political reality' collides with real reality. The message from a delusional Washington these last weeks is that it won't be a gentle bump."
I suspect he will get worse yet before it is all over, but we have established a new baseline.
One thing I'd add, apparently, much like Dayton in MN, being a Democrat "leader" doesn't require you to be able to deliver a SINGLE vote from your own party to support what you bargain for. Dayton got zero Democrat votes in MN, BO got zero votes for his "budget" this spring (97-0 in the Senate), and now one of the reasons for the talks breaking off is that he is unable to promise any Democrat votes to cover a "deal".
Boehner is constantly castigated as "lacking leadership" by the left for failing to deliver up virtually all of the Tea Party votes. Yet BO is not required to deliver a single token Democrat.
Friday, July 22, 2011
It may, on the one hand, be the tactic of second-rung celebrities desperate for more attention, but it may at the same time represent the dismay of yet another generation of leftists waking from yet another utopian daydream to find themselves in a disaster of their own making.I remember their weird realization on Jimmy Carter, and their weirder hope that "Senator drown your sorrows" (Teddy) would come to the rescue. Rescue!? The cruelty of associating the murderer of Mary Joe Kopechne with "rescue" exceeds only the stupidity of same.
The left currently likes the analogy of "Republicans wanting a government so small you could drown it in a bathtub". Thinking that Teddy -- or BO are your "saviour" must mean you want a government so lost it might call it's own bluff, drive off a bridge, and drown itself. It would be OK if we weren't all along for the ride.
This time, the lefties just seem to be getting angrier and angrier at reality and reality based politics.
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Like many by Sowell, EXCELLENT!
The real effect of tax-rate reductions is to make the future prospects of profit look more favorable, leading to more current investments that generate more current economic activity and more jobs.
Every time that I see Sowell's super intelligent writing and proud black face, I think; God is truly good and great! Anyone that denies freedom of thought for all is the worst kind of racist possible.
Monday, July 18, 2011
Interesting little column on how tax rates are actually a bit higher than one is led to believe!
Sunday, July 17, 2011
"Ever since Franklin D. Roosevelt linked “freedom from want” to “freedom of speech” and “freedom of worship,” the left has been talking of everything that it thinks would be nice to have in terms of an utter and absolute right: a right to a job and a right to an income, a right to retire in comfort in Florida, a right to the most advanced health care without paying much for it, and a right to have your children taken care of while you work all day at your job. The problem is that these are all goods and services, though of varying importance, and goods and rights are not the same things. People tend to concur upon rights (except for the speech rights of those who oppose them), and they do not depend upon others to supply and pay for their rights. With goods, there is always a political argument: about the value of the good, who is to get it and who is to pay. And all this comes down to the question of “fairness,” about which there is no end of disputation and grief. "
Worth a read, it would be more funny if our situation wasn't so sorry. "Don't call my bluff" ... sounds like a campaign commercial to me.
"For the Most Gifted Orator in Human History, the president these days speaks largely in clichés, most of which he doesn't seem to be quite on top of. 'Eric, don't call my bluff,' he sternly reprimanded the GOP's Eric Cantor. Usually, if you're bluffing, the trick is not to announce it upfront. But, in fact, in his threat to have Granny eating dog food by Labor Day, Obama was calling his own bluff. The giant bluff against the future that is government spending."
Saturday, July 16, 2011
$500 in ceiling, $500 in cuts, take it or leave it. See you in '12 ... BTW, your anti-perspirant ain't cutting it.
Good column, worth the read. I hope the Republicans in the house are taking it to heart.
Thursday, July 14, 2011
I certainly hope that I'm never the family member of a major Democrat candidate -- they seem to be completely unable to avoid making use of family members for maudlin stories. Gore was a master -- his son, his sister, probably the gerbil he had as a kid for all I know. Edwards could almost make you sorry you didn't feel sorry for him or his kid, wife, etc -- of course it never made him sorry enough to stop boffing some staffer after his teary theatric performance.
I know, I know ... if you are using someone as a stage prop, it is a tiny step to just making it up out of whole cloth. But your mother? on her death bed? If you are willing to lie about that, it is really really hard to imagine where you would draw the line.
I guess nowhere ... and maybe, just maybe that is even enough to give the NYTs just tiny pause to have the supposed "leader" (pouter?) of the free world making up self serving stories about his own mother on her death bed?
Nah, Pinch must have just been drunk and let it slip through -- I really can't believe that the NYT has a conscience at this late date.
What a difference 3 years makes. In '08, "Change" was a brilliant mantra. Well, we got that change -- which BTW I and a lot of conserviatives thought was "crazy". What did we get? Long-term 9%+ unemployment after we spent a Trillion dollars we were told would prevent unemployment from rising above 8%. BOcare which is a giant tax increase on top of waves of uncertainly that kills especially small business. Less and less oil production and not surprisingly rising gas prices, plus general inflation starting with food. Home prices that continue in decline. A new undeclared war -- only this time, with a violation of the war powers act. At least we didn't get much of the change that BO actually promised -- Gitmo is still open, the Patriot Act is still in force, and Terrorists are being tried by military tribunals. It is just that those things are OK with the liberals and media now that their guy is doing them.
Trying to balance a budget though? "CRAZY!!!!". How in the heck are we still talking about "Bush Era Tax Cuts" after the Democrats held both houses of congress for 4 years and the WH for two of those?? Do you remember any sort of budget battle in '07 over raising taxes when the the Democrats were in charge of both houses and Bush was in the WH? Neither do I. In 2009, they owned all three branches -- they could have passed any tax policy they wanted -- Nada. In 2010, still owning both houses, they failed to pass a budget at all.
Now? The Republicans are CRAZY!! The world is all so simple when you are out in space to the left of it.
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
Somehow I suspect that if all it took to have a great economy was to spend future generations money, Portugal, Itally, Greece and Spain would have great economies ... instead, they have economies like we are heading for under BO. Maybe a successful economy just takes a wee bit more than massive deficits??? I wonder if Nancy, Harry and BO will ever be able to fathom that??
Great article, just read it. A teaser:
If our system is not yet “fair,” what will make it so? If the top 5 percent paid 75 percent of the total? Or 95 percent? If they could, would it be ideal for the top 1 percent to carry all the rest of us so we could finally have a tax code that is “fair and balanced”?
The point of the "levelers" is that our system would not be "fair" until there was some arbitrarity tiny difference between the top and the bottom -- even if that was achieved by bringing the average down to essentially zero. It would be fine with them -- "fair is fair".
Saturday, July 09, 2011
Currently, only seven states have a higher top income tax bracket than Minnesota, according to the Tax Policy Center.
Adding the governor's proposed 2 percent increase on the 7.85 percent top rate would rank Minnesota third, behind Hawaii and Oregon, both at 11 percent.
We are currently 7th highest, Governor Shutdown wants to make us 3rd.
Thursday, July 07, 2011
So rank speculation based on computer models becomes "settled science" and anyone who disagrees with your model is beyond the pale. "Progressivism" constantly pushes to politicize all aspects of life -- family, death, birth, the weather, how much water you flush in your toilet, EVERYTHING ... even the weather. It used to be that "sports and the weather" were nice safe conversations. Thanks to the progressives, they totally did the weather topic in -- they keep trying to get sports as well with Indian names and such.
Dear God, please do something to free us from the progressives!!
Wednesday, July 06, 2011
Is BO more hampered by his Ideology or his Incompetence? It gets hard to judge sometimes.