Republicans will cave, fearing the repercussions of taking blame for sequestration.
$85 billion in "cuts" (no other entity describes a reduction in the rate of increase a a cut) is nothing in a trillion dollar budget. The fiscal armageddon described by the government is just another fear tactic. Federal employees will not need to be furloughed, but they will be for political gain. Sequestration would spell the end for the GOP and conservatism generally. Why? Because for decades, Republicans have described themselves as "conservative", but helped continue down the Big Government path. Any time the Democrats blamed Republicans, the GOP failed to defend itself or they caved to the pressure. Bottom line, no one believes Republicans anymore. No one believes what the Party says. $85 billion in cuts. The end of government funded research, teachers and firefighters laid off. Cats and Dogs...Living together....Mass Hysteria!
It's all bullshit. It's a lie, yet the Republicans have again failed to defend their position to the public.
Tomorrow, the sun will rise and just as predictably, the GOP will have caved and government will continue its inexorable climb to control your life and your wallet.
Thursday, February 28, 2013
Wednesday, February 27, 2013
Scalia and the Voting Rights Act
I'm sitting here late, with a beer in front of me and the cycling season not far off. I also have a new computer with a "chicklet" keyboard that routinely misses th "s" and the "e". So if you se a missing lettr, I got tired of chaing it. The ber is a Porter, Home Brewed.
I've needed to get back to this because the thought left on Facebook are incomplete. They are snippets of idea that I never really fleh out. It is a corruption of the creative process.
Onward.
Scalia spoke truth about racial entitlement. How do I know it was truth? It brought out the race-baiters. All of them, claiming to be "Civil Right Leaders". Indignant that anyone would claim that there is racial entitlement in this country. At the front of the line, those "great protectors" of "Civil Rights", Jesse Jackson, Ben Jealous (what a perfect name for him). "They spit on me" John Lewis, coward and liar. And let's not forget Al Sharpton. He of the Tawana Brawley lie. They ride around in their fancy limos, wearing their $3000 suits, claiming to protect Black folks from Whitey who wants them back in servitude. These guys don't care about other Blacks. They don't care about Civil Rights. They care about how much money they make and how to ensure that gravy train continues.
Racial entitlement? Plenty of that. Race-based defacto quota systems at Universities and in hiring. Race-based academic achievement standards. Race-based voting requirements. Voter ID. Funded and directed by the Democrat Party, these race-baiters and their programs help drive more dependence, bigger government and more unthinking, uncritical generations of Democrat voters.
Scalia spoke truth. It's obvious.
I've needed to get back to this because the thought left on Facebook are incomplete. They are snippets of idea that I never really fleh out. It is a corruption of the creative process.
Onward.
Scalia spoke truth about racial entitlement. How do I know it was truth? It brought out the race-baiters. All of them, claiming to be "Civil Right Leaders". Indignant that anyone would claim that there is racial entitlement in this country. At the front of the line, those "great protectors" of "Civil Rights", Jesse Jackson, Ben Jealous (what a perfect name for him). "They spit on me" John Lewis, coward and liar. And let's not forget Al Sharpton. He of the Tawana Brawley lie. They ride around in their fancy limos, wearing their $3000 suits, claiming to protect Black folks from Whitey who wants them back in servitude. These guys don't care about other Blacks. They don't care about Civil Rights. They care about how much money they make and how to ensure that gravy train continues.
Racial entitlement? Plenty of that. Race-based defacto quota systems at Universities and in hiring. Race-based academic achievement standards. Race-based voting requirements. Voter ID. Funded and directed by the Democrat Party, these race-baiters and their programs help drive more dependence, bigger government and more unthinking, uncritical generations of Democrat voters.
Scalia spoke truth. It's obvious.
Monday, February 25, 2013
Corporations and Government
This contains some serious absurdity.
The very idea that anyone other than the consumer pays the tax is ridiculous on it's face. Taxes are a cost of doing business. The cost of doing business is always passed on to the consumer. If it is not, the business goes bankrupt. The author claims that all economists reject this idea. They might, but they're wrong. He uses the example that if a "corporation" raises prices due to increated corporate tax, a small company will undercut them. That is true until there is no where to go.
(Corporations) are legal entities that exist only because governments permit them to and are artificial vehicles through which sales, wages and profits flow. I submit this is one of the greater absurdities in the column. Corporations are not "allowed" by government. Their incorporation provides them with certain tax treatment, but they are not "allowed".
People will do business with each other, regardless of what government does or does not allow. It is either business done in the open or "underground". you have something I want or need and rather than take it from you by force, it is much more simple to trade for it. I can trade my labor to my employer for something of value (money), then give you that money for something you have that I want. We both retreat alive and have something of value that we did not have before. What I provide you can be anything agreed upon as having a value equivalent to that which you are supplying me. We can pay the government for the "privledge" of doing business (taxes) or we can be far enough underground to avoid them.
The very idea that anyone other than the consumer pays the tax is ridiculous on it's face. Taxes are a cost of doing business. The cost of doing business is always passed on to the consumer. If it is not, the business goes bankrupt. The author claims that all economists reject this idea. They might, but they're wrong. He uses the example that if a "corporation" raises prices due to increated corporate tax, a small company will undercut them. That is true until there is no where to go.
(Corporations) are legal entities that exist only because governments permit them to and are artificial vehicles through which sales, wages and profits flow. I submit this is one of the greater absurdities in the column. Corporations are not "allowed" by government. Their incorporation provides them with certain tax treatment, but they are not "allowed".
People will do business with each other, regardless of what government does or does not allow. It is either business done in the open or "underground". you have something I want or need and rather than take it from you by force, it is much more simple to trade for it. I can trade my labor to my employer for something of value (money), then give you that money for something you have that I want. We both retreat alive and have something of value that we did not have before. What I provide you can be anything agreed upon as having a value equivalent to that which you are supplying me. We can pay the government for the "privledge" of doing business (taxes) or we can be far enough underground to avoid them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)