Observations of a Conservative Absentee.

Yeah, I know I’ve detached myself from politics for over a year, but a certain league of individuals has recently admonished me for not having posted here in so long. So while I won’t discuss topical political issues in this post, I still have points concerning politics I’d like to address… mostly points concerning my distancing from politics.

1. The forums in which we debate politics (media sources, the floors of congress, the dinner table) have welcomed discussions fueled by almost only emotions, rather than rationale and the search for truth. The core tenet behind the multiple party system in America was the idea that through thorough and earnest debate, the truth will seep through as through a strainer. The problem is that the majority of debates don’t let the truth through because either side is looking to merely win, lockstep with a laundry list of ideals written by a party, as opposed to coming to the best solution for our nation.  Members from opposite parties will brandish the others moronic, only because they were unsuccessful in changing your mind to think as they do. How do they rationalize this? “They are simply too stupid to understand that what I espouse is the only correct/just/effective way.” Pride does not equal truth, and many are too scared of the hypocrisy tag to be able to say “I believe in this point my party believes in, but I don’t believe in that other thing it believes in.”

Possible Solution? Go into debates not looking to change the other person’s mind, but only with the goal to most honestly and clearly express your beliefs and opinions. If they don’t agree… so what? You walk away happy that you stood on your beliefs with integrity. And who knows… they might have gone away disagreeing with every word you said, but you planted a small seed that may grow into the deep-rooted memory that you were a sincere and amicable representative of your party, beliefs, whatever. Just remember, the second you tell someone they’re wrong, is the second before they stop listening to you.

I have to go to work, but I’ll continue the observations from my political hiatus… which I’m still happily engaged in.

– Julian

5 Freedoms You’d Lose in Health Care Reform

In my continued effort to avoid the news and discussions of political nature, I post this link with my hand over my eyes. I am, however, peeking through my fingers to make sure I post this right.

5 Freedoms You’d Lose in Health Care Reform

I was sent this link by a true conservative, so it should be on the up and up.

Back to my hiatus! <Julian continues to manage his fantasy football league>

– Julian

Congress: Not pro small business.

“ If Congress is so Pro-Small Business, then how come they spent $4 Trillion and there are NO new low interest loan programs available from the Gov for business owners, No Tax Cuts, No rules on litigation by Greedy Trail Lawyers, Nothing to help small business owners to create jobs or even stay in business? Congress is in fact Pro-Socialist, Anti-American Capitalist. WAKE UP! Speak Out Before you lose your job.”

This is a Facebook status change Michael Pinson is asking his supporters to use on their facebook for 24 hours. I’m still not exactly sure who he is, but whoever wrote this is tops in my book.

Ok, back to my “avoiding politics/avoiding news” phase!

Julian

Minimum Wage V.S. Inflation

I have always wondered why liberals don’t understand that increases in minimum wage cause inflation and therefore are non productive as a stimulus to the economy.  This redistribution effort has no effect on the standard of living of the lower classes because of its effect on inflation.  Companies forced to increase the bottom line will balance that increase with a proportional increase in sale price.  Overall effect is a devaluation of the Dollar.  The graph below is a correlation between minimum wage (Blue) and the value of a dollar compared to its 2009 value (red).  As it is clearly seen as minimum wage increases the value of the dollar decreases.  The end result of increasing minimum wage is the devaluation of the dollar which leaves the intended beneficiaries in the same place while decreasing our global buying power and negatively impacting those of us that have worked hard to move up in the world.  It’s clearly a political scheme to win elections by promising higher wages and distribution of wealth.

Joel Mesa

The case for tax cuts in our recession.

“Our true choice is not between tax reduction, on the one hand, and the avoidance of large Federal deficits on the other…..It is between two kinds of deficits- a chronic deficit of inertia, as the unwanted results of inadequate revenues and a restricted economy- or a temporary deficit of transition, resulting from a tax cut designed to boost the economy, produce revenues, and achieve a budget surplus. The first type of deficit is a sign of waste and weakness- the second reflect an investment in the future.”

– John F. Kennedy, 1962

(additional reading… http://www.heritage.org/research/taxes/bg161.cfm )

Khrushchev on Socialism/Communism

“We cannot expect the Americans to jump from capitalism to Communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving Americans small doses of socialism until they suddenly awake to find they have Communism.”

–Soviet Leader Nikita Khrushchev, 1959

lol… Obama Win Causes Obsessive Supporters To Realize How Empty Their Lives Are

What will they do now?

Watch here.

Taxing the People

Sometimes politicians, journalists and the liberal left exclaim; “It’s just a tax cut for the rich!” and it is just accepted to be fact.

But what does that really mean?

Just in case you are not completely clear on this issue, I hope the following will help. Please read it carefully.

Let’s put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand.

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for dinner and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

a. The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
b. The fifth would pay $1
c. The sixth would pay $3
d. The seventh would pay $7
e. The eighth would pay $12
f.  The ninth would pay $18
g. The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that’s what they decided to do.

The ten men ate dinner in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve.

“Since you are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20.” Dinner for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still eat for free. But what about the other six men – the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his “fair share?”

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to eat their meal.

So, the restaurant owner suggested:
a. The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
b. The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% savings).
c. The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% savings).
d. The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
e. The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
f. The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59  (16% savings… the least proportionate savings).

Each of the six was better off than before.  The first four continued to eat for free, but once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings:

“I only got a dollar out of the $20,”  declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,” but he got $10!”

“Yeah, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a dollar, too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more than me!”

“That’s true!!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!”

“Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison. “We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!”

The first nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for dinner, so the nine sat down and ate without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works.   The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start eating overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D
Professor of Economics
University of Georgia

A “Sound” Economy?

A “Sound” Economy?

by Thomas Sowell

(reposted from here.)

“The truest thing that Senator John McCain said during this election campaign is what got him into the most trouble: “The economy is sound.”

“Sound” does not mean bullet-proof. Nor does it mean that everything is going wonderfully at the moment or that nothing needs to be done.

You may be as sick as a dog from having eaten the wrong thing. But that does not mean that you need to have your arm amputated or to receive massive doses of morphine. In other words, your body may be perfectly sound– and radical medical treatment can do more lasting damage than your temporary suffering will.

The political left has always known how to exploit temporary economic problems to create lasting institutions reflecting their ideology. The “progressives” did that during the brief time that America was involved in the First World War, less than a year and a half.

In that brief time, they clamped on all kinds of economic controls and even restrictions on free speech that led to landmark Supreme Court cases.

When the Great Depression of the 1930s brought many of those same “progressives” back to power, led by one of the “progressives” from Woodrow Wilson’s administration, Franklin D. Roosevelt, they brought the same mindset to government again, calling themselves “liberals,” now that the label “progressives” had been discredited by their previous actions.

By the end of the 20th century, “liberals” had again discredited themselves, to the point where they went back to calling themselves “progressives” to escape their past, much as people do when they declare bankruptcy.

Wars, economic crises and other disruptions all provide opportunities for the left to seize on current problems to create enduring changes in the institutions of society. That is what we are witnessing today.

The media have hyped current economic problems to the point where you might think we were heading for a replay of the Great Depression of the 1930s. They have been dying to use the word “recession” but there is a clear definition of recession– two consecutive quarters of negative growth– and we have yet to reach that.

If the meaning of words can be changed to suit political convenience, then discussions become an exercise in futility.

Official data show that the output of the economy in the most recent quarter is down– by less than one-half of one percent– but at last the media have one of those two quarters required to qualify as a recession.

Whether they will get the other quarter that they need, in order to start using the word “recession” legitimately, is another story. In fact, the data-gathering process is by no means so precise that we can expect the one-half of one percent decline to hold up, since such statistics often get revised later.

It is not just a question of being able to put scare headlines on newspapers or alarmist rhetoric on television. Such things are just the prelude to massive political “change” in fundamentally sound institutions that have for more than two centuries made the American economy the envy of most of the world.

If the left succeeds, it will be like amputating your arm because of a stomach ache.

To add to the painful irony, many of those who are most eager to have a massive government intrusion into the market are among those whose previous intrusions into the market are largely responsible for the current financial crisis.

It was the left– the “liberals” or “progressives”– who led the charge to force lending institutions to lend to people whose credit history made them eligible only for “subprime” loans that were risky for both borrowers and lenders.

It started way back in the Carter administration, with the Community Reinvestment Act, and gained momentum over the years with legal threats from Attorney General Janet Reno and thuggery from ACORN, all to force lenders to lend where third parties wanted them to lend. Now we have a bad stomach ache– and now the left wants to start amputating the market.”

– reposted by Julian

Election day humor. Read, then go vote. Have fun!

While walking down the street one day a US senator is tragically hit by a truck and dies.

His soul arrives in heaven and is met by St. Peter at the entrance.

‘Welcome to heaven,’ says St. Peter. ‘Before you settle in, it seems there is a problem . We seldom see a high official around these parts, you see, so we’re not sure what to do with you.’

‘No problem, just let me in,’ says the senator.

‘Well, I’d like to, but I have orders from higher up. What we’ll do is have you spend one day in hell and one in heaven. Then you can choose where to spend eternity.’

‘Really, I’ve made up my mind. I want to be in heaven, ‘ says the senator.

‘I’m sorry, but we have our rules.’

And with that, St. Peter escorts him to the elevator and he goes down, down, down to hell. The doors open and he finds himself in the middle of a green golf course. In the distance is a clubhouse and standing in front of it are all his friends and other politicians who had worked with him.

Everyone is very happy and in evening dress. They run to greet him, shake his hand, and reminisce about the good times they had while getting rich at the expense of the people.

They play a friendly game of golf and then dine on lobster, caviar and champagne.

Also present is the devil, who really is a very friendly guy who has a good time dancing and telling jokes. They are having such a good time that before he realizes it, it is time to go.

Everyone gives him a hearty farewell and waves while the elevator rises .

The elevator goes up, up, up and the door reopens on heaven where St. Peter is waiting for him.

‘Now it’s time to visit heaven.’

So, 24 hours pass with the senator joining a group of contented souls moving from cloud to cloud, playing the harp and singing. They have a good time and, before he realizes it, the 24 hours have gone by and St. Peter returns.

‘Well, then, you’ve spent a day in hell and another in heaven. Now choose your eternity.’

The senator reflects for a minute, then answers: ‘Well, I would never have said it before, I mean heaven has been delightful, but I think I would be better off in hell.’

So St. Peter escorts him to the elevator and he goes down, down, down to hell.

Now the doors of the elevator open and he’s in the middle of a barren land covered with waste and garbage.

He sees all his friends, dressed in rags, picking up the trash and putting it in black bags as more trash falls from above…

The devil comes over to him and puts his arm around his shoulder. ‘I don’t understand,’ stammers the senator. ‘Yesterday I was here and there was a golf course and clubhouse , and we ate lobster and caviar, drank champagne, and danced and had a great time. Now there’s just a wasteland full of garbage and my friends look miserable. What happened?’

The devil looks at him, smiles and says “Yesterday we were campaigning. Today you voted.”