POLITICAL: Tax increases in a recession?

Sunday, February 22, 2009

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/21/AR2009022100911_pf.html

Obama’s First Budget Seeks To Trim Deficit
Plan Would Cut War Spending, Increase Taxes on the Wealthy
By Lori Montgomery and Ceci Connolly
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, February 22, 2009; A01

*** begin quote ***

President Obama is putting the finishing touches on an ambitious first budget that seeks to cut the federal deficit in half over the next four years, primarily by raising taxes on businesses and the wealthy and by slashing spending on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, administration officials said.

*** end quote ***

Companies don’t pay taxes; people do. So raising the corporate tax is essentially a tax increase for everyone; poor included.

Rich folks have the ability to defer income and shit it and even “coast”. Watch how revenues “fail to appear”!

Stupidity!

Ignores the lessons of Kennedy and Regan.

# # # # #


POLITICIAL: Ron Paul on Bill Mahr simple and direct!

Saturday, February 21, 2009

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5lb0l3sYBo&eurl=http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/025457.html&feature=player_embedded

Ron Paul rocks on Bill Mahr’s show!

# # # # #


POLITICAL: Abortion is genocide

Saturday, February 14, 2009

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=87549

The George Bailey Effect
Posted: January 31, 2009
1:00 am Eastern
By Larry Burkett

Editor’s note: The late Larry Burkett, popular Christian financial counselor and author, penned this article in 1998. It is a compelling “response” to Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s recent statement that the economy benefits from “family planning.” Joseph Slife contributed to this column.

*** begin quote ***

As the preceding evidence demonstrates, abortion is not simply a matter of private conscience, but of public concern. Abortion-on-demand has effects that are rippling throughout our society and could even threaten our future liberties.

This is why abortion, even if all moral arguments are totally discounted, cannot be ignored in framing public policy. Simply writing off abortion as a “moral” or a “religious” issue is a short-sighted approach that fails to reckon its economic and demographic consequences.

We can’t undo the past, of course. We can’t undo the fact that we have had 35 million George Baileys, people never born, people whose lives were never allowed to touch other lives. Indeed they have left an “awful hole.” But for the sake of our nation’s economic future and national security, as well as its moral character, we must resolve to promote from this time forward an ethic that is pro-family and pro-children. Only then can America continue to have a wonderful life.

*** end quote ***

When Pelosi and the Obama Democrat “liberals” advnace the pro-abortion agenda, everyone has to think of the “George Bailey” effect.

Have we aborted the future of America?

Like a self-imposed genocide.

# # # # #


MONEY: How does burdening future generations help us?

Friday, February 13, 2009

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/01/republicans_won.html

In the House Republicans’ meeting with Obama on January 27th, Maryland’s sole Republican Congressman, Roscoe Bartlett, said it best:

“Mr. President, I probably come at this from a slightly different perspective. I remember when FDR beat Hoover in 1932. So I remember the Great Depression very well. I don’t remember any of the many government programs affecting the course of the Depression. Government programs didn’t work then; I don’t know why we think they would work now. Mr. President, I think our obsessive borrowing has fully mortgaged my kids and my grandkids. Now we’re working on mortgaging my two great-grandkids. Mr. President, I think it’s more than a little bit selfish to try to solve our economic problems which we created by burdening future generations yet to be born.”

# – # – #

Sounds like this fellow should be Treasury Secretary!

# # # # #


INTERESTING: Should economists be held accountable for their forecasts

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

“How much should economists be held accountable for their forecasts?  Should we view them the same as TV weather forecasters, where the public acknowledges that the science of forecasting can be highly unpredictable and therefore all predictions should be taken with a grain of salt? Or should economists be held to a higher standard? For instance, their forecasts often dictate how a state spends, or saves, its money. At what point should they face some kind of penalty for incorrectly predicting economic changes?”

What’s next? Holding politician’s accountable? Don’t make me laff!

The joke in college was that “you could lay all the economists end to end from here to the moon and never reach a conclusion”!

Sort of like the archeologist’s theory about a dead civilization. Or, a scientist’s assumption how the world began. Who cares? But the question of economics is really important to our life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Economics is the dismal science. It tells us that there is NOT enough to go around. We have to share scarce resources. Make smart decisions. That there is no goose laying golden eggs.

So we have to have good economics. Good forecasts. Great ideas.

We have to hold them accountable. And, not just with the media driving it’s agenda.

Maybe we need “certified” forecasts. Where the economist bets a paycheck on that. Get it wrong and he has to become the WalMart greeter!

Same for politicians.

Barney Frank for his FannieMay and FreddieMac predictions, WalMart!

Argh!

# # # # #


MONEY: What is a dollar?

Tuesday, February 3, 2009

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rajiva/rajiva12.html

Fiat Law and Fiat Currencies – the Relic of Barbarians
by Lila Rajiva

*** begin quote ***

The free market arose wherever there were laws and systems like that – whether in Europe or Africa or Asia. One way to think about this difference would be to see it as the difference between a fiat money, like paper, and a real store of value, like gold. You can print all the money you want, but if there’s nothing to back it up, then you’re in a bit of trouble. Your creditors are unlikely to put much store in you as a credit risk, just as the world’s wringing its hands today over the dollar. Pretty soon, they come calling for their loans with cudgels and pitchforks.

Gold does not have the same problem, because there’s a limited supply of it. It has to occur in nature. It has to be found somewhere underground and then mined and refined. It’s an expensive business – that takes risk, time, and money. There are costs attached to it that someone has to pay. Paper money, on the other hand, can be printed any time you want. Just ask Ben Bernanke. He’s dropping it by the helicopter load from the clouds.

*** end quote ***

They are “counterfeiting value” by printing more money electronically. It’s slight of hand. To understand, you have to understand the answer to the question: “What is a dollar?” and proceed from there.

The answer is it’s NOW an imaginary unit, backed by the belief that you can exchange a green peice of paper for something. A Keynesian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian) will never talk about what the definition of money is. An Austrian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_School) will insist that the pricing mechanism in the economy have commodity money. It USED to be tied to gold.

Sadly, as an Austrian, I think you are in for hard times. O is going to “finance” 2T$ in current spending. By monetizing it. A fancy word for counterfeiting. And, the value of the dollar is going down even further.

To understand, you have to go to Robinson Crusoe’s island, that economist’s use to simplify ideas. A fisherman, egg gatherer, and a fruit gatherer are on the island. (Magic; don’t ask questions yet!) They barter between themselves. After a while, 1 fish = 2 eggs = 4 coconuts. Due to the relative difficulty of effort. But the fisherman and fruit gatherer don’t deal directly. The egg gather is the middle man. Then a banker arrives. He creates money so that the Fisherman can deal directly with the Egg guy. He uses seashells. Then the value equation is 1 fish = 2 eggs = 4 coconuts = 8 seashells. The evil banker after a while introduces more seashells into circulation by spending them. So he get more stuff. Similarly through out the ages, the King (Government) seeks to enrich itself that way. When the currency is gold coins, it’s much harder. (I first learned this when I saw an exhibit at the Smithsonian of French Francs over time. The French Franc of Louis I was a gold hockey puck; Louis XIV’s was a very thin button. Inflation!) When the currency is pretty green pieces of paper, it’s much easier.

So there you have how O44 is goign to spend 2T$ that we don’t have.

Basically, it’s a “tax” on anyone who has a dollar or dollar denominated assets. By adding a “seashell”, the value of all the other seashells is adulterated. Watered down.

So who get’s screwed?

The Chinese have 5T$. There’s a lot of dollars out there. The poor and people on fixed incomes (i.e., the purchasing power of their few dollars goes down) get less for their money.

Who makes out?

The US Government mostly. People who have “valuable stuff”. Commodities, commodity producers, land owners, people who produce stuff that others want.

So that’s how O will spend what he ain’t got.

He’s betting that before the inflation comes, the economy will “restart” and we won’t notice. (Think LBJ and Carter!) It worked for Kennedy because he lowered taxes on the productive class and everyone was motivated to get to work. His quote was: “A rising tide raise all boats!”

Sadly, I don’t see O or his staff being that smart.

# # # # #


INTERESTING: Probability lessons for weighing the odds

Monday, February 2, 2009

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/education/article5446920.ece  

From The Times
January 5, 2009
Probability lessons may teach children how to weigh life’s odds and be winners
Professor wants ‘risk literacy’ on the curriculum Risk literacy could be taught as part of maths, science, or civics and personal and social education
Mark Henderson, Science Editor

*** begin quote ***

Professor Spiegelhalter’s four rules of risk, which he says everyone should know

* Stuff happens We cannot predict exactly how every precise event will turn out, but we can often predict the overall pattern of events surprisingly well

* Compare like with like If you want to show that speed cameras reduce road traffic accident rates, don’t just put them in places that have just had a run of accidents

* What am I not being told? This person may well have got better after she took this wonder treatment, but how many other people’s stories are not being featured?

* Twice not-very-much is still not very much Increasing a tiny risk may not be so important: almost everything interesting might help and it might also harm. The trick is working out the balance for you

# # # # #


RANT: Smoot Hawley — the 2009 version?

Saturday, January 31, 2009

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20090131/D9624PL00.html

Obama facing dilemma over protectionism in bill

Jan 31, 8:01 AM (ET)

By DESMOND BUTLER

*** begin quote ***

WASHINGTON (AP) – Less than two weeks into office, President Barack Obama faces a dilemma over protectionist provisions in a massive economic stimulus bill: Backing the measures could set off a trade war, while opposing them could trigger a backlash from his supporters.

The choice involves “buy American” provisions attached to White House-backed stimulus legislation moving through Congress. They would require major public works projects to favor U.S. steel, iron and manufacturing over imports.

Some Democratic lawmakers and interest groups allied to the president support the measures, but international allies and trading partners are warning that favoring U.S. companies would breach U.S. trade commitments and could set off tit-for-tat countermeasures around the world.

*** end quote ***

What bunch of idiots we have in Congress.

Did anyone read about the Great Depression and Smoot Hawley?

The mere passage of that was the trigger that set off the Great Depression. That didn’t end until WW2.

How stupid are they?

Warm up the lines to the congress critters!

# # # # #


RANT: O versus L? The typical false choice.

Friday, January 30, 2009

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/18194_Page2.html  

Are you with Obama or Rush?
By JONATHAN MARTIN
1/29/09 8:00 PM EST
Updated: 1/30/09 4:37 AM EST

*** begin quote ***

Politico has learned that tomorrow Americans United for Change, a liberal group, will begin airing radio ads in three states Obama won — Ohio, Pennsylvania and Nevada — with a tough question aimed at the GOP senators there: Will you side with Obama or Rush Limbaugh?

“Every Republican member of the House chose to take Rush Limbaugh’s advice,” says the narrator after playing the conservative talk radio giant’s declaration that he hopes Obama “fails.”

“Every Republican voted with Limbaugh — and against creating 4 million new American jobs. We can understand why a extreme partisan like Rush Limbaugh wants President Obama’s Jobs program to fail — but the members of Congress elected to represent the citizens in their districts? That’s another matter. Now the Obama plan goes to the Senate, and the question is: Will our Senator”—here the ad is tailored by state to name George Voinovich in Ohio, Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania, and John Ensign in Nevada—”side with Rush Limbaugh too?”

Asked to respond, Limbaugh had a message for his party.

“Senate Republicans need to understand this is not about me,” he wrote in an email. “It is about them, about intimidating them, especially after the show of unity in House. It is about the 2010 and 2012 elections. This is an opportunity for Republicans to redefine themselves after a few years of wandering aimlessly looking for a ‘brand’ and identity.”

*** and ***

Senate Republicans acknowledge that they’ll lose some of their members on the first vote.

“We’re in a little different spot than the House in that we have a handful of Republicans who have all but committed to supporting the package,” said a Senate GOP aide.

The aide declined to say who, but speculation on both sides of the aisle is centered on a group of northeasterners — Senators Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine, Sen. Judd Gregg (NH) and Specter.

*** end quote ***

Everyone should be real clear. The “stimulus” bill is not about stimulus, jobs, or benefits for the “folks”.

It’s about socialism, pork spending, and making future voters for the democratic party.

Rahm told you that a crisis is a terrible thing to waste.

We’ve been hustled before — the Bush pre-rebate, the TARP, and now this!

And, the ad offers a false choice — O versus L?

I’m with neither.

The Republican Party NOW, when it’s out of power wants to “brand” itself as the party of smaller gooferment again. Where were they for eight years? We have the TSA, deficits, and out of control spending. All caused by a President who wouldn’t veto anything.

And, O wants to remake America on the basis of he “won” an election. Hey, guess what, more folks didn’t vote than voted. So you were elected by 28% to 24%. That should tell you that your plurality is very small.

More than half the Americans know they are getting screwed no matter which “side” won.

Not that there is much difference between EITHER “side”!

In this case, I am against the “gooferment enlargement” package.

You want to restart the economy. Shrink gooferment — Nuke the TSA, Kill whole gooferment department and agencies, stop the psuedo drug war, pardon all non-violent drug offenders, and return to normal. Cut the corporate tax to ZERO forever. It’s a sham; only real people pay taxes. Corporate taxes hide how much the gooferment is stealing from us.

Argh!

# # # # #


MONEY: Economy needs Austrian solution!

Thursday, January 29, 2009

http://www.centraljersey.com/articles/2009/01/27/opinions/doc497f83d8ae815184216560.txt

DISPATCHES: Economy needs Keynesian solution
Tuesday, January 27, 2009 5:06 PM EST
By Hank Kalet, Online Editor

*** begin quote ***

   The mood of the nation may be changing.

   A nation that for nearly three decades bought into a conservative ideology that painted government as the enemy is embracing the return of federal intervention in the economy as necessary to repair the damage caused by years of neglect.

   Polling over the last month shows that about two thirds of Americans support an economic stimulus package weighted toward government spending while a majority of Americans now favor increased regulation of the financial industry.

*** end quote ***

Yeah, they want more gooferment regulation to fix the problem that the gooferment regulation created in the first place. Argh! Theres an incestuaous relationship between the congresscritters, the regulatory agencies, and the companie being regulated. Argh! Follow the moeny and campaign contributions! And, you expect it to change?

*** begin quote ***

   The credit crunch has resulted in “trillions missing from the economy,” he said. “Money is not moving, and the government is in a position to make money move.”

   Direct investment — in the form of road and bridge repairs, construction of a 21st-century electrical grid and expanded broadband access — will not only get people working again, but also leave the nation better off down the road.

   A little more than a third of the $825 billion stimulus package on the table in Washington is slated to go toward what some are calling “make-work” projects, which also include building schools and providing funding to help local and state governments, as well as homeowners, make their buildings more energy efficient.

   The package also includes significant aid to the states, an expansion of unemployment benefits and assistance with health care — all of which not only puts money back in the economy, but alleviates some of the economic pain being felt by average Americans.

*** end quote ***

YEAH, every social program that can be thrown in has been. Please don’t make me laugh. The socialists of the R’s and D’s are using this crisis — as politicians have throughout the ages — to justify more and bigger intrusions on our lives, our pocketbooks, and our essential liberties. Argh!

*** begin quote ***  

   Without the federal aid, it is likely states will need to slash their budgets, drastically in some cases, to meet constitutional requirements. New Jersey, for instance, requires that its state budget be in balance, meaning falling revenue must be addressed either by cutting taxes or spending cuts — neither of which makes sense at a time of severe recession.

*** end quote ***

NJ finances are a joke. The crooks in Trenton spend like there is no tomorrow. And, the taxpayers get stuck.

*** begin quote ***

   While many tie the New Deal — Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s package of programs meant to battle the Great Depression — as Keynesian, Dr. Reich reminds us it was “not until the U.S. entered World War II” that the nation implemented “Keynes’ idea on a scale necessary to pull the nation out of the doldrums.”

*** end quote ***

FDR had to lure, cajole, and almost force the Japanese into the attack on Perl Harbor. To end the Great Depression. And, we’re left with the illusion that FDR was a “good guy”.

*** begin quote ***

   These results — and the long economic expansion that followed — are evidence we need bold action; we must inject public money into the economy regardless of its impact on the deficit. Once the economy is rescued, we can start thinking about reining in the deficit.

*** end quote ***

No we need to have a revolution!

# # # # #