The latest media attempt to provide normalcy for the radical, anti-capitalist viewpoints currently squawking at a city near you, emphasizes a substantial link between the “Tea Party” and “Occupy Wall Street” protestors. This is an obvious attempt to lend credibility and a grassroots feel to a movement made up largely of youth, union members, or pay-for-protest anarchists. When you listen to the arguments from Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street protestors there is a sliver of agreement on the issue of corporate bailouts, but the similarities end there.
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Friday, October 7, 2011
Wall Street Protestors= The Left Unhinged
Avowed socialists, trying to reproduce the grass roots effectiveness of the Tea Party, are staging a sit-in around Wall Street this week to protest corporate greed. As mentioned yesterday, I really believe the Left is pretty much unhinged. I’ve listened to at least a dozen of these protestors articulate their views on various radio programs while driving along shaking my head at the utter lack of common sense and sheer vitriol these people display towards successful Americans.
Much of their rhetoric is nothing more than one big circular argument. For instance, Sean Hannity asks the same question I often ask my friends on the Left, “How much tax would you consider enough for a “rich” person to pay so they can stop being taxed?”
Much of their rhetoric is nothing more than one big circular argument. For instance, Sean Hannity asks the same question I often ask my friends on the Left, “How much tax would you consider enough for a “rich” person to pay so they can stop being taxed?”
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
Bank of America: Villain to the Masses
Legislators, and much of the American public, are swinging clenched fists at Bank of America for daring to charge a $5 fee on debit card transactions. Congress must rectify this and quickly! Something must be done today! The heinous crime must be thwarted. Yet another corrupt U.S. company tries to pillage the common man’s back pocket. Senators rail in Washington about the proposed unfairness of debit card fees while mandating these same banks (and all employers) pay employees a federal minimum wage whether they make a profit or not. Apparently the irony of restricting revenue while mandating payroll expense is lost on these purveyors of fairness and justice.
Monday, September 26, 2011
Unwavering Support for Israel
Gathering storm clouds hover ominously over Israel as long-standing enemies unify around its destruction. Iran continues to deny the Holocaust while planning another one. As Egypt, Libya, Syria, Turkey, and other Middle Eastern nations become increasingly hostile to the Jewish state, heightened tensions push Israeli leaders for a permanent solution to their border problem. U.S. leaders, once unequivocally linked to the Jewish state, now chase after a more balanced diplomacy while increasing pressure on Benjamin Netanyahu to trade land for peace with the Palestinian Authority. Here in America once rock solid support for Israel continues to erode as another generation, largely removed from church, finds no secular reason worthy enough to back our longtime ally. An increasing number of people just want the Jews to go away.
Thursday, September 22, 2011
Elizabeth and the Factory Owner
According to Harvard law professor Elizabeth Warren, nobody gets rich on their own. Hot on the campaign trail for the 2012 Massachusetts senate, Ms. Warren waxed rambunctious about an imaginary rich factory owner who apparently isn't grateful for the vital role government plays in their wealth creation. She vigorously explains how government built the roads, provided the employee education, and paid for the police and fire services used by the factory owner to grow his business. Near the end of this stern lecture, Ms. Warren reminds the factory owner of his social contract necessitating government’s long arm into his back pocket.
It's bad enough this arrogant line of thinking infects Harvard's student body on a daily basis, but Ms. Warren is a key player in the upper echelon of Democratic public policy decisions.
It's bad enough this arrogant line of thinking infects Harvard's student body on a daily basis, but Ms. Warren is a key player in the upper echelon of Democratic public policy decisions.
Monday, September 19, 2011
Warren and the Receptionist
Warren Buffett’s musings on the inherent unfairness of his small federal tax bill primes the pump for our main stream media’s preconceived storyline that a burgeoning national debt should be partially addressed via tax increases on greedy rich people. Among other comments Mr. Buffet’s made on the subject includes this half-truth, “The 400 richest of us pay a lower part of our income in taxes than our receptionists do, or our cleaning ladies, for that matter. If you're in the luckiest 1 per cent of humanity, you owe it to the rest of humanity to think about the other 99 per cent.”
Mr. Buffett’s statement seems fair enough. When you are super rich while others struggle to make ends meet, paying a lower tax rate than your secretary does seem pretty appalling.
Mr. Buffett’s statement seems fair enough. When you are super rich while others struggle to make ends meet, paying a lower tax rate than your secretary does seem pretty appalling.
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
Social Security and Charles Ponzi
CDCJNKSDBFJJ
No doubt you have heard the uproar over Gov. Rick Perry’s assertion that Social Security operates much like a Ponzi scheme. Perry’s attempt to discuss the “third rail of American politics” once again thrusts the program’s solvency before the American electorate. True to form, rather than sparking honest debate, Perry’s comments elicited immediate scorn and mocking from liberal ideologues bent on preserving this longstanding entitlement program rather than dealing truthfully with its present predicament.
No doubt you have heard the uproar over Gov. Rick Perry’s assertion that Social Security operates much like a Ponzi scheme. Perry’s attempt to discuss the “third rail of American politics” once again thrusts the program’s solvency before the American electorate. True to form, rather than sparking honest debate, Perry’s comments elicited immediate scorn and mocking from liberal ideologues bent on preserving this longstanding entitlement program rather than dealing truthfully with its present predicament.
Thursday, September 1, 2011
Celebrate Risk Taking and Change Your Life
How many of you drive home from work wishing your day job was something other than what you just spent the last eight hours working on? Why do those lingering thoughts never motivate you in a new direction? What prevents you from taking that leap of faith into the unknown in pursuit of your dream? Are you grudgingly satisfied just to collect a pay check every two weeks? There could be various reasons to play it safe, but one of the biggest motivating factors is an aversion to risk. With new ventures comes the possibility of failure. Failure in business usually means substantial loss of income, reputation, and downsizing of lifestyle and so you play it safe.
Over the past few weeks I’ve been chatting with several friends about how much I love writing on current events and political issues. I’ve been bemoaning not figuring this out twenty years earlier at the ripe age of eighteen. I could have majored in journalism or writing instead of accounting and, my theory goes, be spending more time doing what I really want instead of moving from one dull spreadsheet to the next every day. The trouble is, I have never considered myself an entrepreneur or somebody excited by the thought of ‘starting over’ in my late thirties and so I balk. It’s daunting to consider the amount of time, energy, marketing, and money needed to turn this new obsession into anything other than just an every other day blog.
Isn’t this the picture of what America offers each of us? We all make decisions to press forward or remain secure in the background. America remains the land of opportunity, but we often must move beyond the risks to experience true fulfillment, both personal and monetary. So many times fear of failing stops people from living a happier life. Let’s face it, when you start a new business there are lots of things that can go wrong. Many fail in their first few years, and the ones that succeed often are not profitable for just as long. Such is the lot of the entrepreneur. Fortunately, there is need for both entrepreneur and average Joe to keep our economy humming. Each has a role to play.
Why then do those individuals who succeed get so much criticism heaped on them by the media, the left, and an ever larger share of the general public? The perception is rich people just wake up one morning rolling in their money. This is largely untrue. Many successful business owners toiled, borrowed, and sacrificed time with family and friends to get their ventures off the ground. Sure they might be out golfing several days a week now, but haven’t they earned it? We should celebrate their success not sit back in envy of it. If we are not willing to put ourselves out there and take big risks, we should not point fingers at those who do and succeed.
You have only one earthly life to live. If a dream keeps dancing in your head, take some chances and see where events take you. Pursue your passion with every fiber of your being. Work hard and see where the opportunities take you. And stop along the way to congratulate those who took chances before you and came out successful. Theirs is a story we should keep telling and keep repeating.
Over the past few weeks I’ve been chatting with several friends about how much I love writing on current events and political issues. I’ve been bemoaning not figuring this out twenty years earlier at the ripe age of eighteen. I could have majored in journalism or writing instead of accounting and, my theory goes, be spending more time doing what I really want instead of moving from one dull spreadsheet to the next every day. The trouble is, I have never considered myself an entrepreneur or somebody excited by the thought of ‘starting over’ in my late thirties and so I balk. It’s daunting to consider the amount of time, energy, marketing, and money needed to turn this new obsession into anything other than just an every other day blog.
Isn’t this the picture of what America offers each of us? We all make decisions to press forward or remain secure in the background. America remains the land of opportunity, but we often must move beyond the risks to experience true fulfillment, both personal and monetary. So many times fear of failing stops people from living a happier life. Let’s face it, when you start a new business there are lots of things that can go wrong. Many fail in their first few years, and the ones that succeed often are not profitable for just as long. Such is the lot of the entrepreneur. Fortunately, there is need for both entrepreneur and average Joe to keep our economy humming. Each has a role to play.
Why then do those individuals who succeed get so much criticism heaped on them by the media, the left, and an ever larger share of the general public? The perception is rich people just wake up one morning rolling in their money. This is largely untrue. Many successful business owners toiled, borrowed, and sacrificed time with family and friends to get their ventures off the ground. Sure they might be out golfing several days a week now, but haven’t they earned it? We should celebrate their success not sit back in envy of it. If we are not willing to put ourselves out there and take big risks, we should not point fingers at those who do and succeed.
You have only one earthly life to live. If a dream keeps dancing in your head, take some chances and see where events take you. Pursue your passion with every fiber of your being. Work hard and see where the opportunities take you. And stop along the way to congratulate those who took chances before you and came out successful. Theirs is a story we should keep telling and keep repeating.
Monday, August 29, 2011
Hurricane Irene: Our New Stimulus?
In a perverse assessment of last weekend’s tragedy, some in the media now report 4th Quarter GDP could rise by a full percentage point as a result of clean-up and infrastructure rebuilding. We are told the markets rallied on the news. This knowledge should provide us comfort during a very difficult time for many. At least through the tragedy something positive will come out of it is the implication. The billions of dollars in property lost to Irene’s wrath are going to lead to a construction boom. Somebody should check in with Louisiana and Mississippi to see how much money Hurricane Katrina brought in.
It would appear many journalists, already desperate for a third stimulus, will now use this event to triumph new jobs and root for a much needed recovery in time for President Obama’s 2012 re-election. In a bizarre, twisted, measure of thinking, Irene’s torrents of rain along the East coast are somehow a precursor to economic revitalization. Taking this to its logical conclusion, minus the human suffering and loss of life which nobody wants, more future natural disasters could be our lifeline out of this economic stalemate. It would appear the bigger the disaster, the more rebuilding needed and higher our future growth prospects. This is modern-day Democratic thought.
The logic behind this fake stimulus comes straight from the heart of John Maynard Keynes. This man’s destructive economic model keeps rearing its ugly head. Keynesian economics is our government’s “demand creating” machine at work, and the modern day Democratic Party takes most of their economic agenda straight from his playbook. In short, Mr. Keynes believed an economy’s demand determined its long-term structural employment. It doesn’t matter where the demand comes from just so long as there are dollars chasing goods. If the private sector experiences decline, the government should artificially inflate things by priming the pump with as much spending as is necessary. Instead of letting the free market run its course through natural highs and lows, government is the spender of last resort even if it has no money to spend. Where Keynes and most Democrats part ways is the endgame after this artificial demand is created. Keynes advocated government paying off the newly created debt at its first opportunity to do so. Democrats just continue spending.
In a similar vein, many on the left sounded the call for increased unemployment benefits last year as another means of spurring growth. Apparently, more unemployment benefits beget higher GDP. Maybe the government should just print each household a check for $100,000 and demand us to spend it all? Can you imagine our economic vitality then?
We need to be about the business of making things again in this country. When we stop giving credence to the notion that spending equals GDP, we can begin a process of putting together effective policies to encourage making more things others in the world actually want to buy. Only then will we have real GDP without the scourge of runaway debt, and I fear shortly, rampant inflation. Capitalism does not champion government spending. Just as people can’t spend their way out of debt, governments cannot either. The Tea Party understands this. I wish President Obama and his friends did too.
It would appear many journalists, already desperate for a third stimulus, will now use this event to triumph new jobs and root for a much needed recovery in time for President Obama’s 2012 re-election. In a bizarre, twisted, measure of thinking, Irene’s torrents of rain along the East coast are somehow a precursor to economic revitalization. Taking this to its logical conclusion, minus the human suffering and loss of life which nobody wants, more future natural disasters could be our lifeline out of this economic stalemate. It would appear the bigger the disaster, the more rebuilding needed and higher our future growth prospects. This is modern-day Democratic thought.
The logic behind this fake stimulus comes straight from the heart of John Maynard Keynes. This man’s destructive economic model keeps rearing its ugly head. Keynesian economics is our government’s “demand creating” machine at work, and the modern day Democratic Party takes most of their economic agenda straight from his playbook. In short, Mr. Keynes believed an economy’s demand determined its long-term structural employment. It doesn’t matter where the demand comes from just so long as there are dollars chasing goods. If the private sector experiences decline, the government should artificially inflate things by priming the pump with as much spending as is necessary. Instead of letting the free market run its course through natural highs and lows, government is the spender of last resort even if it has no money to spend. Where Keynes and most Democrats part ways is the endgame after this artificial demand is created. Keynes advocated government paying off the newly created debt at its first opportunity to do so. Democrats just continue spending.
In a similar vein, many on the left sounded the call for increased unemployment benefits last year as another means of spurring growth. Apparently, more unemployment benefits beget higher GDP. Maybe the government should just print each household a check for $100,000 and demand us to spend it all? Can you imagine our economic vitality then?
We need to be about the business of making things again in this country. When we stop giving credence to the notion that spending equals GDP, we can begin a process of putting together effective policies to encourage making more things others in the world actually want to buy. Only then will we have real GDP without the scourge of runaway debt, and I fear shortly, rampant inflation. Capitalism does not champion government spending. Just as people can’t spend their way out of debt, governments cannot either. The Tea Party understands this. I wish President Obama and his friends did too.
Sunday, August 28, 2011
Birth Control Nation
Free prescription birth control pills are coming to an insurance plan near you courtesy of our federal Department of Health and Human Services. HHS wants to force taxpayers to subsidize the entire cost of birth control along with controversial abortion drugs as a means of saving health care dollars. Apparently, the U.S. government believes it would be better off spending money on free pills than on free pregnancy services to mothers with little or no insurance. What’s next free crack pipes to drug addicts?
Assuming their math is correct, which I’m pretty positive it is not, I am appalled that personal responsibility is being tossed aside yet again at the altar of emotional arguments. Why do I have to take responsibility for my own actions while subsidizing the poor choices of other people? Then, if I balk at having even more of my hard-earned dollars taxed to pay for these services, I’m the bad, inconsiderate,and uncaring person while their poor behavior continues unabated.
If HHS wants to save on free pregnancy care they should be telling poor people not to make themselves even poorer by having sex with strangers. Or, they could be encouraging people indulging in illicit sex to run out to their local pharmacy and buy contraceptives with their own money. I realize abstinence outside of marriage is a concept all but lost on today’s youth, but this remains the best solution very few educators or legislators dare discuss. Heather Has Two Mommies is fine with the NEA but telling kids to keep their pants on is a radical and outdated notion.
Ours remains a somewhat free society so go ahead and indulge your cravings, but then please either deal with the consequences yourself or find some family, friends, or neighbors to chip in on the remedy. The government has no business picking our collective pockets to provide others with free contraceptives because they are unwilling to do so themselves.
As with so many legislative attempts to curb bad behavior, this one promotes more of the same. The answer to spiraling uninsured pregnancy costs lies not in encouraging more of the same damaging behavior, but in asking people to consider the potential consequences of their actions before moving ahead with them.
Outside of the moral argument, HHS also doesn’t understand simple supply and demand. If the government begins making prescription drugs available for nothing, you’ve instantly increased demand. Everybody will be out to get these freebies. How long will it be until birth control manufacturers are bilking the government ridiculous prices for these “free” pills because they can? As with every item billed to federal coffers, taxpayers pay infinitely more than fair market value. And as with every other entitlement, costs will be exponentially higher than originally estimated leaving no actual savings but much more expense.
Let’s start telling the truth instead of putting band-aids over bad behavior. The sooner we get back to promoting individual freedom, personal responsibility, and local problem solving the better off our country will be.
Friday, August 26, 2011
The Left Loves RINOs, You Should Not
I’m tired of the media picking GOP candidates. Michele Bachmann is too radical. Rick Perry has a sharp tongue. Rick Santorum is anti-science. Newt Gingerich is too crotchety. Sarah Palin is too stupid. Herman Cain is too much like a preacher. Our field is too weak and our candidates are too narrow-minded.
We are told Democrats would love for any one of these wacky conservatives to win the nomination because it would be clear sailing for President Obama. Never mind the paradox that if these candidates really had such serious character flaws there would be no need to keep pointing them out to everyone since they couldn’t possibly win in the first place. Or could they?
This is where our liberal charade begins. A quest to develop whatever narrative is most likely to steer the public toward their particular candidate. In order to clear the field, liberals must lift up those GOP contenders most likely to keep their entitlement agenda intact. Call it a win-win for the Democratic Party. If the RINO (Republican-in-name-only) wins the presidency, much of the previously laid Democratic legislative agenda stays intact. If the Democrat wins, it continues unabated. Either way, liberal policies become so entrenched over time there is no way to undue them. The great trap is sprung.
Enter John Huntsman and Mitt Romney. They are the moderate, fair-minded republicans who will work with Democrats. They are the really intelligent candidates most likely to appeal to a broad cross-section of Americans. President Obama’s campaign staff is most afraid of his re-election chances should either of them win. Heard any of these straw man statements recently? Why is it, right now, these two men are the sane Republicans while the rest of the field is so out-of-touch? It is because Huntsman and Romney are the most liberal of the pack.
Romney was governor of a very liberal blue state and was elected by flip-flopping on a bunch of social and some economic issues. Huntsman is a big global warming advocate as shown by his favoring of cap and tax. He also threw his support to the terribly pork-laden stimulus plan, and has no problem forcing people to buy health insurance even if they don’t want it. These guys almost make Obama blush.
What unnerves me about this agenda is how affective it really is. Our media hands us defeat and we run with it. Palin, Bachmann, Gingerich, Santorum, and other conservatives are not the crazies NBC wants them to be. Palin knows high oil prices are brought down by increasing supply not building wind mills. Bachmann understands the key to illegal immigration is actually securing the border not perpetually leaving it open. Gingerich understands you increase government revenue by finding more taxpayers not beating up on the ones you already have. Santorum knows you cut back spending during difficult times instead of doubling down on it. These are some very bright individuals, and conservatives should not be disappointed they represent us.
Don’t let liberal media elites pick our candidates. Get behind your favorite conservative and talk up their common sense solutions in the arena of public ideas. Our crumbling republic desperately needs another Ronald Reagan. Remember he was an idiot too.
We are told Democrats would love for any one of these wacky conservatives to win the nomination because it would be clear sailing for President Obama. Never mind the paradox that if these candidates really had such serious character flaws there would be no need to keep pointing them out to everyone since they couldn’t possibly win in the first place. Or could they?
This is where our liberal charade begins. A quest to develop whatever narrative is most likely to steer the public toward their particular candidate. In order to clear the field, liberals must lift up those GOP contenders most likely to keep their entitlement agenda intact. Call it a win-win for the Democratic Party. If the RINO (Republican-in-name-only) wins the presidency, much of the previously laid Democratic legislative agenda stays intact. If the Democrat wins, it continues unabated. Either way, liberal policies become so entrenched over time there is no way to undue them. The great trap is sprung.
Enter John Huntsman and Mitt Romney. They are the moderate, fair-minded republicans who will work with Democrats. They are the really intelligent candidates most likely to appeal to a broad cross-section of Americans. President Obama’s campaign staff is most afraid of his re-election chances should either of them win. Heard any of these straw man statements recently? Why is it, right now, these two men are the sane Republicans while the rest of the field is so out-of-touch? It is because Huntsman and Romney are the most liberal of the pack.
Romney was governor of a very liberal blue state and was elected by flip-flopping on a bunch of social and some economic issues. Huntsman is a big global warming advocate as shown by his favoring of cap and tax. He also threw his support to the terribly pork-laden stimulus plan, and has no problem forcing people to buy health insurance even if they don’t want it. These guys almost make Obama blush.
What unnerves me about this agenda is how affective it really is. Our media hands us defeat and we run with it. Palin, Bachmann, Gingerich, Santorum, and other conservatives are not the crazies NBC wants them to be. Palin knows high oil prices are brought down by increasing supply not building wind mills. Bachmann understands the key to illegal immigration is actually securing the border not perpetually leaving it open. Gingerich understands you increase government revenue by finding more taxpayers not beating up on the ones you already have. Santorum knows you cut back spending during difficult times instead of doubling down on it. These are some very bright individuals, and conservatives should not be disappointed they represent us.
Don’t let liberal media elites pick our candidates. Get behind your favorite conservative and talk up their common sense solutions in the arena of public ideas. Our crumbling republic desperately needs another Ronald Reagan. Remember he was an idiot too.
Monday, August 22, 2011
Social Issues. What Social Issues?
Where did social issues go? Much of the country’s conversation today centers around one all-encompassing subject: our economy’s precarious situation. Our news is about jobs, recessions, depressions, unemployment, GDP, and government spending. Little else seems to matter short of some tired liberal celebrity’s latest rant about the hateful Tea Party or what sac religious song Lady Gaga just released. When did issues of morality within the GOP take a backseat to Donald Trump's latest advice for fixing our economy?
Last time I checked, over a million babies a year were still being aborted in this country. Six states now legalize gay marriage. Recreational drug use is becoming more rampant. Divorce is now so common place we don’t even really give it a second thought. Women continue becoming more content to have the baby without the husband. Pornography on the internet slices up our relationships and makes sexual deviants out of more and more citizens. How many "To Catch a Predator" reruns does it take to crystalize the notion our young people are committing some pretty lewd acts?
I’m not blaming the Tea Party for keeping our national focus on the exponential spending occurring in Washington since 2008. In fact, I marched in Washington D.C. twice since November 2008 speaking out against destructive runaway spending. Mr. Obama, Ms. Pelosi, and Mr. Reid’s economic notions are extremely dangerous, and I applaud the Tea Party for keeping the crisis in front of average Americans. Our media certainly won’t do it in an intellectually honest way. Keynesian economics doesn’t work. Printing money to spend when you don’t have any is a sure fire way to find insolvency. Americans need to understand the effects of this crippling spending spree.
Yet, I wonder if we conservatives are focused too much on spending while leaving the back door open to continued erosion of our collective moral conscious. How did America rise to prominence in the first place? Was it our robust adherence to capitalist principles or our allegiance to a power greater than any one human being? Was it lower marginal tax rates or loving and helping our neighbors as ourselves? Was it supply side economics or self-reliance and individual responsibility? Does economic policy drive our success or could a moral, virtuous, people be the foundation for ultimate wealth creation? It would appear we need both. One or the other is not enough. We need capitalism and we need morality.
Don’t misunderstand me. I love capitalism. I understand its power to lift up the greatest number of people out of poverty. I’m all for the free market, and supply and demand. I know that many a moral people can live in socialist economies and not experience freedom like we have. But capitalism with no morality ultimately equals destruction. A republic will not stand unless its citizenry understands their very liberties come from God.
Lasting success does not come without integrity. It does not come without honesty. It does not come without a desire to serve other people. Each of us should strive as individuals to live and lead with moral clarity. We need to be models of integrity. We need to do the right thing even when it could lead to personal hardship. Our fellow neighbors, friends, and co-workers will be moved to change only when they see authentic people living their lives in such a way as to honor their fellow man. This is the real hope and change so many of us are looking for.
Last time I checked, over a million babies a year were still being aborted in this country. Six states now legalize gay marriage. Recreational drug use is becoming more rampant. Divorce is now so common place we don’t even really give it a second thought. Women continue becoming more content to have the baby without the husband. Pornography on the internet slices up our relationships and makes sexual deviants out of more and more citizens. How many "To Catch a Predator" reruns does it take to crystalize the notion our young people are committing some pretty lewd acts?
I’m not blaming the Tea Party for keeping our national focus on the exponential spending occurring in Washington since 2008. In fact, I marched in Washington D.C. twice since November 2008 speaking out against destructive runaway spending. Mr. Obama, Ms. Pelosi, and Mr. Reid’s economic notions are extremely dangerous, and I applaud the Tea Party for keeping the crisis in front of average Americans. Our media certainly won’t do it in an intellectually honest way. Keynesian economics doesn’t work. Printing money to spend when you don’t have any is a sure fire way to find insolvency. Americans need to understand the effects of this crippling spending spree.
Yet, I wonder if we conservatives are focused too much on spending while leaving the back door open to continued erosion of our collective moral conscious. How did America rise to prominence in the first place? Was it our robust adherence to capitalist principles or our allegiance to a power greater than any one human being? Was it lower marginal tax rates or loving and helping our neighbors as ourselves? Was it supply side economics or self-reliance and individual responsibility? Does economic policy drive our success or could a moral, virtuous, people be the foundation for ultimate wealth creation? It would appear we need both. One or the other is not enough. We need capitalism and we need morality.
Don’t misunderstand me. I love capitalism. I understand its power to lift up the greatest number of people out of poverty. I’m all for the free market, and supply and demand. I know that many a moral people can live in socialist economies and not experience freedom like we have. But capitalism with no morality ultimately equals destruction. A republic will not stand unless its citizenry understands their very liberties come from God.
Lasting success does not come without integrity. It does not come without honesty. It does not come without a desire to serve other people. Each of us should strive as individuals to live and lead with moral clarity. We need to be models of integrity. We need to do the right thing even when it could lead to personal hardship. Our fellow neighbors, friends, and co-workers will be moved to change only when they see authentic people living their lives in such a way as to honor their fellow man. This is the real hope and change so many of us are looking for.
Saturday, August 20, 2011
American Poverty
One in seven Americans lives in “poverty.” You’ve heard the sentence. Everybody has heard the sentence. Start talking about spending reform of any kind and you will hear the sentence. It is such a common talking point from the left and media elite that the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. Is this true? Who are the people in poverty and is the definition used by our government the same as Merriam-Webster’s-“the state of one who lacks a usual or socially acceptable amount of money or material possessions.”?
For many, the term poverty brings forth images of malnourished people living in dirty squalor or of homeless people eating in soup kitchens. Poverty suggests an inability to provide a family with basic nutrition, clothing and shelter. It suggests ragged citizens, in long lines, at health fairs searching desperately for needed care. Poverty basically denotes miserable living conditions and desperate people. Who wouldn’t want to reach out and help them? You certainly would. I certainly would. When the media tells you 14% of Americans live in poverty, is this how they are living?
According to the US Department of Energy, as of 2005, the average person living in poverty (note “average” and not every case as liberals will point out) has fourteen common items in their households:
*Air conditioning, a clothes washer, clothes dryer, ceiling fans, cordless phones, two color televisions, cable or satellite TV, a DVD player, refrigerator, and oven and stove, a microwave, and a coffee maker.
In addition to these items, poor families with children also usually had a computer, an Xbox or Play Station, and a cell phone. Remember these are items found in the typical poor household. These are the median lower 14% of our society. These are the folks we are led to believe have next to nothing. So, maybe the poor have stuff but still live in dilapidated squalor? Not according to the U.S. government’s own housing assessment.
“Poor Americans are well housed and rarely overcrowded.[20] In fact, the houses and apartments of America’s poor are quite spacious by international standards. The typical poor American has considerably more living space than does the average European.”
“Forty-three percent of all poor households own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.”[22]
Our own government says “The typical poor American has considerably more living space than does the average European.” Not the poorest European but the AVERAGE one. Thank you to capitalism for lifting up so many out of the depths of despair.
The living standards reported here are far different then the dire ones portrayed by liberal activists and our mainstream media. This is so unfortunate for the truly poor and desperate among us. Their own plight diminished by the false representations presented by our media and political elites. There are people living in some awful conditions in this country. Nobody disputes that. These people need our help. They need our generosity. We should give of our time, talents, and energy to help those truly impoverished to find a way out of their terrible living conditions. If we stand by and do nothing, as individuals, to help the truly poor our wealth condemns us to empty lives of just sitting back and playing with our toys. The poor will always be among us. Let’s stop asking government to intervene and go out ourselves into the world and SERVE them. Only then, will the truly poor get the help that can change their very existence.
For many, the term poverty brings forth images of malnourished people living in dirty squalor or of homeless people eating in soup kitchens. Poverty suggests an inability to provide a family with basic nutrition, clothing and shelter. It suggests ragged citizens, in long lines, at health fairs searching desperately for needed care. Poverty basically denotes miserable living conditions and desperate people. Who wouldn’t want to reach out and help them? You certainly would. I certainly would. When the media tells you 14% of Americans live in poverty, is this how they are living?
According to the US Department of Energy, as of 2005, the average person living in poverty (note “average” and not every case as liberals will point out) has fourteen common items in their households:
*Air conditioning, a clothes washer, clothes dryer, ceiling fans, cordless phones, two color televisions, cable or satellite TV, a DVD player, refrigerator, and oven and stove, a microwave, and a coffee maker.
In addition to these items, poor families with children also usually had a computer, an Xbox or Play Station, and a cell phone. Remember these are items found in the typical poor household. These are the median lower 14% of our society. These are the folks we are led to believe have next to nothing. So, maybe the poor have stuff but still live in dilapidated squalor? Not according to the U.S. government’s own housing assessment.
“Poor Americans are well housed and rarely overcrowded.[20] In fact, the houses and apartments of America’s poor are quite spacious by international standards. The typical poor American has considerably more living space than does the average European.”
“Forty-three percent of all poor households own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.”[22]
Our own government says “The typical poor American has considerably more living space than does the average European.” Not the poorest European but the AVERAGE one. Thank you to capitalism for lifting up so many out of the depths of despair.
The living standards reported here are far different then the dire ones portrayed by liberal activists and our mainstream media. This is so unfortunate for the truly poor and desperate among us. Their own plight diminished by the false representations presented by our media and political elites. There are people living in some awful conditions in this country. Nobody disputes that. These people need our help. They need our generosity. We should give of our time, talents, and energy to help those truly impoverished to find a way out of their terrible living conditions. If we stand by and do nothing, as individuals, to help the truly poor our wealth condemns us to empty lives of just sitting back and playing with our toys. The poor will always be among us. Let’s stop asking government to intervene and go out ourselves into the world and SERVE them. Only then, will the truly poor get the help that can change their very existence.
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Greedy U.S.A.
I keep hearing about greedy people these days. Pundits keep pointing to them as one of the solutions to our debt crisis. They make so much money, if we just taxed them more, they will never miss it and our debt crisis will be minimized. It seems the Warren Buffets’ of the world don’t pay their fair share. They don’t pay their workers enough. They don’t dole out enough in benefits. They are out to stomp on the rights of working men and women everywhere. They don’t deserve their money so it’s perfectly acceptable for others to determine who needs it more. I hear so much about these people I almost feel like there are more of ‘them’ then there are of ‘us.’ I’m left wondering if maybe capitalism does equals greed.
I’m further confused by the haphazard way in which greed is defined. Oil executives are greedy profiteers but bottled water manufacturers seem exempt from the label. Smartphone retailers load up monthly plans with various layers of fees with nary a complaint, but banks and other financial institutions profit on the backs of the common man. Drug companies are evil, but nobody mentions high-def TV profits. These stereotypes of evil oil, bank, and drug companies are ingrained in the culture by media elites who want divisive attitudes as a means to justify their social engineering. Even those of us who don’t believe it, still first think “big oil” when greedy executives are mentioned.
In a properly functioning capitalist economy, individuals make decisions based on their own self interest to produce goods and services which benefit their fellow man. There are two components to success: acting in your self interest and benefiting others. They are not mutually exclusive. When either part of the equation is missing, generally speaking, a person’s overall income will be lower than others who do both. The key to success then is doing something to benefit other people. This by very definition cannot be greedy behavior. This is perfectly rational. The best part is society benefits from all these individual decisions. In capitalism, most of the time, people cannot be successful unless they SERVE other citizens. Serving is the key to success. Ironic isn’t it? You don’t hear that on CNN do you?
Greedy people live everywhere. Greed exists in every institution, every government, every nation, and ultimately every human being. Greed is a part of the human condition and it cannot be extinguished. No matter what type of economic system studied rich and poor will be found. The gift of capitalism is its ability to collectively channel our “greedy” individual decisions into outcomes designed to benefit others. It is not a perfect system. It is better than anything else out there. In other economies there is no two way street. There is just greed. Let’s reconsider bashing the rich and spend our time figuring out how to better serve our fellow man so we might one day be rich ourselves.
I’m further confused by the haphazard way in which greed is defined. Oil executives are greedy profiteers but bottled water manufacturers seem exempt from the label. Smartphone retailers load up monthly plans with various layers of fees with nary a complaint, but banks and other financial institutions profit on the backs of the common man. Drug companies are evil, but nobody mentions high-def TV profits. These stereotypes of evil oil, bank, and drug companies are ingrained in the culture by media elites who want divisive attitudes as a means to justify their social engineering. Even those of us who don’t believe it, still first think “big oil” when greedy executives are mentioned.
In a properly functioning capitalist economy, individuals make decisions based on their own self interest to produce goods and services which benefit their fellow man. There are two components to success: acting in your self interest and benefiting others. They are not mutually exclusive. When either part of the equation is missing, generally speaking, a person’s overall income will be lower than others who do both. The key to success then is doing something to benefit other people. This by very definition cannot be greedy behavior. This is perfectly rational. The best part is society benefits from all these individual decisions. In capitalism, most of the time, people cannot be successful unless they SERVE other citizens. Serving is the key to success. Ironic isn’t it? You don’t hear that on CNN do you?
Greedy people live everywhere. Greed exists in every institution, every government, every nation, and ultimately every human being. Greed is a part of the human condition and it cannot be extinguished. No matter what type of economic system studied rich and poor will be found. The gift of capitalism is its ability to collectively channel our “greedy” individual decisions into outcomes designed to benefit others. It is not a perfect system. It is better than anything else out there. In other economies there is no two way street. There is just greed. Let’s reconsider bashing the rich and spend our time figuring out how to better serve our fellow man so we might one day be rich ourselves.
Sunday, August 14, 2011
Leadership: Who me?
Every single one of us has influence. Every single one of us is a leader. We can lead right where we are today. No waiting for the perfect time. No waiting for the perfect situation or perfect job. We have influence today with the people around us: family, friends, neighbors, co-workers, hurting people all waiting for a leader to step out and exert a positive influence in their lives.
Is all this really true? Have you given much thought to the people watching your daily actions and how you treat other people? Leading is really serving. Leading is not about self but about others. I believe every single one of us can serve and so we are all leaders. It doesn’t matter if you are a waitress, a painter, a manager, or a CEO we all have influence on the people we rub shoulders with.
These are sobering thoughts because they mean we all have a responsibility to use our influence for the good of our God and those people placed in our path. ‘Responsibility’ is a dirty word in our society. It implies effort. It implies struggle. It implies an imposition on our time. I believe lack of responsibility is a major reason why we have so few leaders. Most people make decisions on how the outcome affects them. Most people want their own needs met. Few spend their lives in service to others while forsaking themselves. So our families, schools, companies, churches and government suffer as potential leaders hide in the back and let others rule of us in authority.
Our government is seriously messed up. It is filled with politicians bent on ruling over us instead of serving us. So many leave for Washington with good intentions and they get drunk on power, perks, and authority. They lose truth and integrity in the quest to maintain power and control. The electorate hungers for a true leader. We long for somebody to tell us the truth irrespective of party affiliation. We long for somebody to serve the people without regard for the next election. We want someone to make the difficult decisions in the fairest manner possible without regard for polls and the latest re-election strategy.
Leadership is not a title. It is not a lofty position in a company. Leadership is servitude right where each one of us lives. You are a leader. You have influence. Don’t waste it. Begin serving others right where you are. Stop waiting for government to fix everybody’s problems. Stop waiting for others to step forward. Move out and lead right now. Our country will not be fixed until 300 million of us are each individually leading in our circles of influence. When many people step out and begin to lead, our nation’s fabric will be changed and I believe we will experience blessing beyond what any of us can imagine.
Don’t wait another day. We truly can change the world if we are bold enough to step out and assume the responsibility, and privilege, each of us has to make a difference and serve others.
“When the godly are in authority, the people rejoice. But when the wicked are in power they groan.” Proverbs 29:2
Is all this really true? Have you given much thought to the people watching your daily actions and how you treat other people? Leading is really serving. Leading is not about self but about others. I believe every single one of us can serve and so we are all leaders. It doesn’t matter if you are a waitress, a painter, a manager, or a CEO we all have influence on the people we rub shoulders with.
These are sobering thoughts because they mean we all have a responsibility to use our influence for the good of our God and those people placed in our path. ‘Responsibility’ is a dirty word in our society. It implies effort. It implies struggle. It implies an imposition on our time. I believe lack of responsibility is a major reason why we have so few leaders. Most people make decisions on how the outcome affects them. Most people want their own needs met. Few spend their lives in service to others while forsaking themselves. So our families, schools, companies, churches and government suffer as potential leaders hide in the back and let others rule of us in authority.
Our government is seriously messed up. It is filled with politicians bent on ruling over us instead of serving us. So many leave for Washington with good intentions and they get drunk on power, perks, and authority. They lose truth and integrity in the quest to maintain power and control. The electorate hungers for a true leader. We long for somebody to tell us the truth irrespective of party affiliation. We long for somebody to serve the people without regard for the next election. We want someone to make the difficult decisions in the fairest manner possible without regard for polls and the latest re-election strategy.
Leadership is not a title. It is not a lofty position in a company. Leadership is servitude right where each one of us lives. You are a leader. You have influence. Don’t waste it. Begin serving others right where you are. Stop waiting for government to fix everybody’s problems. Stop waiting for others to step forward. Move out and lead right now. Our country will not be fixed until 300 million of us are each individually leading in our circles of influence. When many people step out and begin to lead, our nation’s fabric will be changed and I believe we will experience blessing beyond what any of us can imagine.
Don’t wait another day. We truly can change the world if we are bold enough to step out and assume the responsibility, and privilege, each of us has to make a difference and serve others.
“When the godly are in authority, the people rejoice. But when the wicked are in power they groan.” Proverbs 29:2
Friday, August 12, 2011
Iowa Debate
The Iowa debate, now behind us, encourages me about the potential conservative leadership we could see running the country in 2012. Don’t listen to the media elites who define the Republican primary as Romney and a bunch of also-rans. Their implication is our field is weak and we should be disheartened. Their goal is to pick our candidate for us. They want any Republican-in-name-only (RINO) they can find. Romney is not really a conservative. He is a step above John McCain. Well, he does have business experience so maybe he is two steps above McCain. Make no mistake conservative candidates are what the Obama campaign and liberal elites fear most. Whenever Romney is feared and Bachmann is not, you know Bachmann should be the candidate and Romney not.
We have some seriously smart candidates who understand the precarious position our country is in. These candidates identify themselves as conservatives and I believe will govern as conservatives.
Newt Gingerich proved his thorough grasp of issues, both domestic and foreign. His ability to articulate common sense solutions should hearten any conservative. Conventional wisdom says Newt’s favorability ratings are too low for election. He is too emotional. He created too many enemies as Speaker of the House. With the rise of the Tea Party and the country’s overall mood being one of intense frustration, Newt’s passion just might resonate during this moment in history. If he can stay around long enough to get enough face time during debates, I predict his stock will rise quickly because clearly he articulates our values better than anyone else.
Michele Bachmann demonstrates continued strength under unrelenting pressure. The Left hates her. If the Left hates her, you know she would be good for the country. Her appeal for many lies in unwavering support of conservative values when many others fold. She doesn’t capitulate every time the other side uses scare tactics to push Republicans around. She’s been a bulldog against the Obama-Pelosi agenda at every turn. She’s from a blue state, in Minnesota, and grew up in another blue state, Iowa. Two blue states would be in play that otherwise would still likely go for President Obama. A calculation we should not lose sight of.
Herman Cain and Rick Santorum offer two different, yet equally compelling reasons to get excited Cain is a successful business man. He understands what conditions must exist if you want job growth and comes across as very practical. He would be a champion to the private sector. Santorum is a traditional social conservative. He believes social values are still every bit as important as economic ones. Much of the conservative movement seems to have ditched social issues with the errant belief jobs are more important than the human soul. Santorum reminds us this isn’t true.
What about Rick Perry and Sarah Palin? The media is terrified of a Palin candidacy. I know Sarah is portrayed as too dumb for the office, but the narrative is false and created by a media obsessed with making any conservative woman look stupid. Sarah is adored by many and would be a formidable opponent the moment her candidacy was announced. CNN knows it and so should you. Perry comes from a state, in Texas, that people flock to for jobs. Texas is one of the few job creating states in the country right now. His record on job growth is sorely needed to contrast with President Obama’s dismal numbers. Perry, like Santorum, considers social issues just as important as economic ones.
Conservatives should hold their heads high. I realize anything really would be better than what we have now, but we shouldn’t settle for Mitt Romney when so many true conservatives are ready and able to lead.
We have some seriously smart candidates who understand the precarious position our country is in. These candidates identify themselves as conservatives and I believe will govern as conservatives.
Newt Gingerich proved his thorough grasp of issues, both domestic and foreign. His ability to articulate common sense solutions should hearten any conservative. Conventional wisdom says Newt’s favorability ratings are too low for election. He is too emotional. He created too many enemies as Speaker of the House. With the rise of the Tea Party and the country’s overall mood being one of intense frustration, Newt’s passion just might resonate during this moment in history. If he can stay around long enough to get enough face time during debates, I predict his stock will rise quickly because clearly he articulates our values better than anyone else.
Michele Bachmann demonstrates continued strength under unrelenting pressure. The Left hates her. If the Left hates her, you know she would be good for the country. Her appeal for many lies in unwavering support of conservative values when many others fold. She doesn’t capitulate every time the other side uses scare tactics to push Republicans around. She’s been a bulldog against the Obama-Pelosi agenda at every turn. She’s from a blue state, in Minnesota, and grew up in another blue state, Iowa. Two blue states would be in play that otherwise would still likely go for President Obama. A calculation we should not lose sight of.
Herman Cain and Rick Santorum offer two different, yet equally compelling reasons to get excited Cain is a successful business man. He understands what conditions must exist if you want job growth and comes across as very practical. He would be a champion to the private sector. Santorum is a traditional social conservative. He believes social values are still every bit as important as economic ones. Much of the conservative movement seems to have ditched social issues with the errant belief jobs are more important than the human soul. Santorum reminds us this isn’t true.
What about Rick Perry and Sarah Palin? The media is terrified of a Palin candidacy. I know Sarah is portrayed as too dumb for the office, but the narrative is false and created by a media obsessed with making any conservative woman look stupid. Sarah is adored by many and would be a formidable opponent the moment her candidacy was announced. CNN knows it and so should you. Perry comes from a state, in Texas, that people flock to for jobs. Texas is one of the few job creating states in the country right now. His record on job growth is sorely needed to contrast with President Obama’s dismal numbers. Perry, like Santorum, considers social issues just as important as economic ones.
Conservatives should hold their heads high. I realize anything really would be better than what we have now, but we shouldn’t settle for Mitt Romney when so many true conservatives are ready and able to lead.
Tuesday, August 9, 2011
Fair Share
While fingers point over who is to blame for the recent U.S. credit downgrade, one talking point continually trotted out is we are in this mess because rich people don’t want to pay their fair share. Exactly what is “fair share”? Can this be quantified? And isn’t this the wrong starting question anyway? The question should be, “How much is needed to fund basic government services as specified by the powers reserved for congress in the Constitution”? The filter should never be, “We need to provide birth control for people so who do we find to pay for this”?
Evaluate the predicament we are in and most signs point back to egregious spending in areas the government should never be allowed into in the first place.
Let’s assume though, for sake of analysis, we need to assign a definition to “fair share.” I’ve asked many a person using this term what fair actually is. I never get an answer. Usually I get ignored or get a blank stare or a redirected question. Fair appears to be a floating term meant to change the conversation whenever more revenue is perceived to be needed. Fairness is also usually defined by the recipients and not the contributors. Fairness for how long and hard you make others work to pay for their own family plus the 50% who pay nothing in federal taxes is never even thought of.
I think most Americans, in fact I know most Americans, are a generous lot. We have no problem helping others in need. Remember Haiti’s earthquake and the $1billion+ the United States raised? The rub is when the government tries to be all things to all people. We’ve built up a government alter from which all with needs are supposed to seek. It’s becoming ingrained in our culture. Why would somebody “want to pay more” voluntarily when the expectation is somebody else (the government) will take care of the need?
Most of the rich as defined by the fair share crowd already pay close to 50% in federal, state, local & FICA taxes. They pay a lifetime of 6.2% FICA with no Social Security benefits of their own (taxed away) because they earn too much. They pay federal taxes when half the country pays none. If 50% isn’t fair, what percentage is? How much more work, stress, time away from family, and risk taking are expected of these people before they’ve paid their fair share?
The dialog needs to change in this country if we want our vibrant economy back. The 50% not paying tax now should be paying something even if it is 5%. They need skin in the game, especially since it would be human nature to vote for more entitlements and let somebody else pay for it.
Evaluate the predicament we are in and most signs point back to egregious spending in areas the government should never be allowed into in the first place.
Let’s assume though, for sake of analysis, we need to assign a definition to “fair share.” I’ve asked many a person using this term what fair actually is. I never get an answer. Usually I get ignored or get a blank stare or a redirected question. Fair appears to be a floating term meant to change the conversation whenever more revenue is perceived to be needed. Fairness is also usually defined by the recipients and not the contributors. Fairness for how long and hard you make others work to pay for their own family plus the 50% who pay nothing in federal taxes is never even thought of.
I think most Americans, in fact I know most Americans, are a generous lot. We have no problem helping others in need. Remember Haiti’s earthquake and the $1billion+ the United States raised? The rub is when the government tries to be all things to all people. We’ve built up a government alter from which all with needs are supposed to seek. It’s becoming ingrained in our culture. Why would somebody “want to pay more” voluntarily when the expectation is somebody else (the government) will take care of the need?
Most of the rich as defined by the fair share crowd already pay close to 50% in federal, state, local & FICA taxes. They pay a lifetime of 6.2% FICA with no Social Security benefits of their own (taxed away) because they earn too much. They pay federal taxes when half the country pays none. If 50% isn’t fair, what percentage is? How much more work, stress, time away from family, and risk taking are expected of these people before they’ve paid their fair share?
The dialog needs to change in this country if we want our vibrant economy back. The 50% not paying tax now should be paying something even if it is 5%. They need skin in the game, especially since it would be human nature to vote for more entitlements and let somebody else pay for it.
Monday, August 8, 2011
Bloodbath
Wasn’t a crisis supposed to be averted with the stroke of President Obama’s pen merely a week ago? We were certainly told so. Democrats and Republicans were touting the genius of their two-tiered $2.5 trillion spending reductions. Republicans, wanting additional spending cuts, won a “moral victory” by changing the dialog in Washington. Democrats, not happy there were no tax increases, won a “moral victory” because no meaningful entitlement reforms took place. Investors (many of which are US taxpayers) are now down $2 trillion in personal wealth in merely three days.
As touted during the debate by many of us using simple math this deal was inadequate. It kicked the can down the road. Our core problems were not addressed. Most of the dialog in the media was short-sighted and bent through the prism of class envy without a shred of honest math put forward. Many on the Right, ignoring why they were elected in 2010, ran scared by an artificial deadline and presidential scare tactics. They feared Americans were going to blame them for asking their government to stop the runaway spending.
Here are some simple insights on the topic as you discuss with your friends America’s first debt downgrade in ninety seven years.
• No amount of taxation is going to fix this. Our Gross Domestic Product (GDP), or sum of America’s total output, is $14 trillion dollars. This is not total PROFIT but total output. Total PROFITS are much less than total output. Our national debt is $14+ trillion dollars. It would take a 100% tax on everybody’s output to eradicate the debt. Of course then we would all be bankrupt and living in tent cities as none of us would have any money.
• Revenue is not the problem. Revenues have more than tripled since 1965. Adjusted for inflation, in 2010 we collected around $1.9 trillion. The highest dollars ever received were just four years ago at $2.4 trillion. To believe revenue shortfalls drive our debt problem ignores common sense and is often bandied about by those who want more of a say in how other people’s money is spent.
• Spending IS the problem. We borrow 40 cents of every dollar spent. Congress has not passed a budget in three years. Spending is up 27% in two years. AFTER the recent debt ceiling agreement, our debt is expected to be just $22 trillion instead of $25 trillion. In the next ten years our economy would have to increase by 57% just to keep pace with the debt. We are on an exponential spending spree already.
• Reduce spending by 1% a year from 2010 levels for six years and your deficit is balanced. This hardly tells grandma to drop dead.
America is the Earth’s last great hope for freedom. We remain a beacon of light in a very troubled world. While our reputation has been sullied our spirit does not have to. There is time to recover if we face our problems honestly. We need politicians who will do the same.
As touted during the debate by many of us using simple math this deal was inadequate. It kicked the can down the road. Our core problems were not addressed. Most of the dialog in the media was short-sighted and bent through the prism of class envy without a shred of honest math put forward. Many on the Right, ignoring why they were elected in 2010, ran scared by an artificial deadline and presidential scare tactics. They feared Americans were going to blame them for asking their government to stop the runaway spending.
Here are some simple insights on the topic as you discuss with your friends America’s first debt downgrade in ninety seven years.
• No amount of taxation is going to fix this. Our Gross Domestic Product (GDP), or sum of America’s total output, is $14 trillion dollars. This is not total PROFIT but total output. Total PROFITS are much less than total output. Our national debt is $14+ trillion dollars. It would take a 100% tax on everybody’s output to eradicate the debt. Of course then we would all be bankrupt and living in tent cities as none of us would have any money.
• Revenue is not the problem. Revenues have more than tripled since 1965. Adjusted for inflation, in 2010 we collected around $1.9 trillion. The highest dollars ever received were just four years ago at $2.4 trillion. To believe revenue shortfalls drive our debt problem ignores common sense and is often bandied about by those who want more of a say in how other people’s money is spent.
• Spending IS the problem. We borrow 40 cents of every dollar spent. Congress has not passed a budget in three years. Spending is up 27% in two years. AFTER the recent debt ceiling agreement, our debt is expected to be just $22 trillion instead of $25 trillion. In the next ten years our economy would have to increase by 57% just to keep pace with the debt. We are on an exponential spending spree already.
• Reduce spending by 1% a year from 2010 levels for six years and your deficit is balanced. This hardly tells grandma to drop dead.
America is the Earth’s last great hope for freedom. We remain a beacon of light in a very troubled world. While our reputation has been sullied our spirit does not have to. There is time to recover if we face our problems honestly. We need politicians who will do the same.
Friday, August 5, 2011
US Debt Debacle
All Americans need to be anxious over the long-term implications of S&P's US debt downgrade. This is a truly historic and very sad moment for our country. Our AAA rating has been in place since 1917. A rating maintained through the Great Depression and World War II. Many will try and soft pedal the downgrade but this is a potential interest rate tsunami. We now have to hope we "aren't as broke as Europe" in order to draw new money in and tamp down potential interest rate increases. The Chinese are laughing. Middle Eastern countries rejoicing. Tyrants around the world now more emboldened then ever to take down the paper tiger.
We are fast becoming impotent on the world stage. Once unthinkable, all signs point to future generations living a downwardly mobile lifestyle. I'm embarrassed for us. I'm angry. I'm ready to capitulate and throw in with the notion of a third party as the only way out.
We must stop the spending madness and do it immediately. We have few leaders willing to do so. Those who do stand up for fiscal restraint are labeled terrorists. Those who advocate entitlements for just about every ailment are hailed as compassionate. Facts are ignored at the holy grail of emotional spending. And we haven't even begun to implement the Obamacare entitlement yet. How can our Republic continue another few decades like this?
There is precious little time left to right our ship. The iceberg ahead is imminent. Many on the left have succeeded in implementing Saul Alinsky's vision to overload the system with so many handouts we simply can't continue without significant reductions in our personal freedoms. We must elect waves of fiscally constrained conservatives in 2012 (Reagan types not Bush types) or I fear the ditch will be too deep. Fellow conservatives should sit back, take a deep breath, lick your wounds, and then press harder than ever in the arena of public ideas. Now is the time to get involved. There is no more time for heads to be in the sand. Liberalism is a terrible disease that destroys everything in its path. If we don't change hearts and minds now, our Republic is in grave jeopardy.
We are fast becoming impotent on the world stage. Once unthinkable, all signs point to future generations living a downwardly mobile lifestyle. I'm embarrassed for us. I'm angry. I'm ready to capitulate and throw in with the notion of a third party as the only way out.
We must stop the spending madness and do it immediately. We have few leaders willing to do so. Those who do stand up for fiscal restraint are labeled terrorists. Those who advocate entitlements for just about every ailment are hailed as compassionate. Facts are ignored at the holy grail of emotional spending. And we haven't even begun to implement the Obamacare entitlement yet. How can our Republic continue another few decades like this?
There is precious little time left to right our ship. The iceberg ahead is imminent. Many on the left have succeeded in implementing Saul Alinsky's vision to overload the system with so many handouts we simply can't continue without significant reductions in our personal freedoms. We must elect waves of fiscally constrained conservatives in 2012 (Reagan types not Bush types) or I fear the ditch will be too deep. Fellow conservatives should sit back, take a deep breath, lick your wounds, and then press harder than ever in the arena of public ideas. Now is the time to get involved. There is no more time for heads to be in the sand. Liberalism is a terrible disease that destroys everything in its path. If we don't change hearts and minds now, our Republic is in grave jeopardy.
Thursday, September 3, 2009
A Video Is Worth a Thousand Words
I will be pithy today and just say that recently I've been debating a few liberal friends who keep telling me how paranoid I am. Despite all the associations, the government take over of banks and car companies, and the White House's 'rat out website', we are crazy wackos to think Mr. Obama might actually try to indoctrinate children to go home and tell their parents to believe this and that.
The first two minutes of this video have some really good ideas and I wish our Hollywood friends would've consented to make such a video under the Bush administration.
But, after two minutes you start to hear some very liberal sounding ideas and at the end of the video you find out we are going to pledge allegiance to Barack Obama and to "change." In this entire video, you hear nothing about the benefits of capitalism which has taken more people out of poverty and lifted more people out of tyranny then any nation on earth. Apparently, this is not something to be celebrated.
I pledge allegiance to no man and I give up my life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness to no one. I live in a country of freedom, and I plan to keep it that way.
The first two minutes of this video have some really good ideas and I wish our Hollywood friends would've consented to make such a video under the Bush administration.
But, after two minutes you start to hear some very liberal sounding ideas and at the end of the video you find out we are going to pledge allegiance to Barack Obama and to "change." In this entire video, you hear nothing about the benefits of capitalism which has taken more people out of poverty and lifted more people out of tyranny then any nation on earth. Apparently, this is not something to be celebrated.
I pledge allegiance to no man and I give up my life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness to no one. I live in a country of freedom, and I plan to keep it that way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
