Liberty 101

Our Vampire Government

2012-01-14T01:25:00.001-05:00

The federal government’s primary role is to protect the people and their private property; instead it is draining the life-blood out of the real economy at a staggering velocity. In 2011 the Federal Government spent $1.3 trillion more than it took in to pay for programs that it cannot afford and has no Constitutional authority to do. In 2012 our national debt will climb to a record $16.8 trillion dollars and the Obama Administration has promised to maintain this spending and borrowing spree indefinitely.

Each year the Federal Government spends billions of dollars on boondoggle projects such as President Obama’s failed “stimulus” program, annual aid to foreign dictators, and subsidies for special interest businesses like Solyndra. Each year the Federal Government drains billions of dollars from the real economy through its inefficient and corrupt monopoly agencies like the department of education that has yet to educate one child and the National Labor Board that does its best to make American Workers uncompetitive in the global market. When unions and/or politically-favored private sector companies like General Motors get into trouble billions of dollars in bailout money (i.e. your tax dollars) are exchanged for votes.

Right now the Federal Government monopoly entity called the Post Office is in the red to the tune of at least $10 billion. No problem, more tax money will be drained vampire-like from your wallet to bail out its failure. The corrupt and failed government monopoly entities Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac are bleeding billions of tax payer dollars but they have been nationalized by Mr. Obama and thus bailed out. The Federal Government has had its teeth in the retirement business for decades in the form of the so-called Social Security Program. Social Security and Medicare are government-run monopolies. Together these programs have amassed trillions in unfunded liabilities and are unsustainable. These and other “entitlement” programs are sucking the life-blood out of the economy (i.e. your wallet) at record speed.

In 2014 a new, far-reaching law, known popularly as Obama Care, will take effect. Obama Care will give government vast control over the already heavily socialized US Health Care Industry. With this massive bite into what’s left of the private health care and health insurance industries the Federal Government has laid the groundwork for a socialist style take over of this huge section of our economy.

The primary role of the Federal Government is to protect the people and their private property. In 2011 the Federal Government spent $1.3 trillion more than it took in to pay for programs that it cannot afford and has no Constitutional authority to do. Rather than protecting us our Federal Government has become a vampire bent on draining the life-blood out of the real economy.

By Mark Van Schuyver

Self-Interest Vs. Selflessness

2012-01-06T22:26:00.000-05:00

Proponents of two distinctly opposite world views are at war with one another here in the United States and all around the planet. These two world views can be summarized as follows. 1) Selflessness is good. 2) Self-Interest is good. Which world view is better? Let’s contrast the two before we decide.

World View Number One, based on selflessness, postulates that the collective is sovereign. A good citizen of a selfless society lives by the following rules. 1) Others are worth more than I am therefore I am worth less. 2) The needs of the many always outweigh the needs of the one (i.e. me) therefore I must surrender all that I am and all that I have to support the many, 3) The fruits of my labor belong to the many, and therefore the many have the right to take from me by force that which I have, 4) I am worth less. Only the collective has worth therefore the collective has the right to harm me or steal from me and from everyone else in the collective. 5) I am part of the collective therefore the world owes me a living and if anything goes wrong in my life it’s not my fault.

World View Number Two, based on Self-Interest, postulates that the individual person is sovereign. The individual is sovereign and therefore other individuals are also sovereign. A good citizen of a self-interested society lives by the following rules. 1) I have worth. I am not worth less than you. 2) I am the sovereign of me and you are the sovereign of you. 3) My freedom ends where your nose begins. 4) My body and the fruits of my labor belong to me and your body and the fruits of your labor belong to you and no one has the right harm me or you or to steal from me or from you or from anyone else. 5) I am a sovereign individual responsible for me and accountable for my actions.

Self-Interest, is often confused with Selfishness. But selfishness is quite different from self-interest. The selfish person believes that ripping people off is okay. Selfish folk have no problem taking something from others by force or by trickery. Selfishness is the philosophy of the thief, i.e. one who does not value the life or the property anyone else. Bernie Madoff comes to mind.

Now let’s take these two world views of selflessness and self-interest to their extreme. What would become of a truly selfless person? The only possible answer is a miserable life and an early death. How could a truly selfless person sleep on a bed at night knowing others in the world are homeless? She must surrender her bed. How could a truly selfless person eat knowing some people somewhere are starving? She must surrender all food and starve likewise. How could a truly selfless person wear clothing, own or rent a house, own a car, hold a job, or do anything of kind knowing that others in the world are doing without? She must surrender it all. How could a truly selfless person live knowing that others will die unless she gives them her organs? She must surrender her organs. A truly selfless person must surrender her very life or else admit that she is not truly selfless. Should this selfless person happen to live long enough to have children she would most likely pass along her world view of selflessness to her offspring thus contributing to a new generation of dependant, non-productive, selfless individuals.

Now consider what might become of a truly self-interested person? She would likely study and work hard to build the best life possible for herself. She might buy a house, start a family, buy a car, and earn a high income. She might move to an even bigger house with a bigger yard for her children to play in. She might work hard to earn a raise so that she could provide a better living for her family. She might start a business of her own seeking an even higher income and in the process end up employing several other self-interested and productive individuals. She might make enough money to put her kids through college. Perhaps she will donate part of her earnings to her church and to the charities of her choosing because it makes her feel good to do so. With increasing success she might generate enough wealth to give a family member or a friend a hand up. After years of serving her own self interest she might retire comfortably at 65 and spend her remaining decades doing volunteer work helping others learn now to make better lives for themselves. During her life this self-interested person would likely have passed on this world view to her children and grand children thus contributing to a new generation of responsible, productive, self-interested individuals.

Proponents of these opposite world views have been at war with one another for hundreds of years. Which world view will you live by and fight for? The one based on Selflessness or the one based on Self-Interest? That is for you to decide but if you choose Selflessness as your operational ideology please turn off your computer right now and donate it along with the rest of your possessions and your very life to your new master, the collective.

By Mark Van Schuyver

It’s Not Fair!

2012-01-06T00:34:00.003-05:00

News flash! The countries that are most “fair” are the poorest countries in the world! Why is this so? Countries who have adopted a “fair” system of government seek to create a collectivist world where everyone has a right to all kinds of free stuff. These countries promise free housing, free medical care, free food, free clothing, free education, i.e. they promise “social justice.” Their goal is equality of outcome. In these “fair” societies it is said that every person “deserves” a certain standard of living regardless of his or her productivity. “Fair” governments do not hesitate to take money and property from the producers by force and give it to the non-producers (i.e. spread the wealth around, or wealth re-distribution). Their philosophy is best summarized by the following catchy quote from a long dead philosopher named Karl Marx, “From each according to his ability; to each according to his need.”

Surprisingly the countries that are the least “fair” are the wealthiest, have the largest middle classes, and have the lowest rates of poverty! Why is this so? Countries that have adopted an “un-fair” system of government seek to maintain an individualist world. Realizing that stuff is not free and that there is always a limited supply of stuff the people and their leaders in these “unfair” countries seek to create a level playing field where every individual has a right to pursue stuff but no one has a right to free stuff taken by force from other people. The goal of these individualist countries is equality of opportunity. The “un-fair” individualist philosophy is best summarized by the following catchy quote from a former American President named Thomas Jefferson. “A wise and frugal government which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.”

For comparison let’s contrast one of the world’s most “fair” countries, North Korea with one of the world’s most un-fair countries The United States of America. In collectivist/socialist North Korea everyone gets a fair share of the nation’s stuff. No one, other than the leader and his cronies, is allowed to own property or keep more than he or she needs for subsistence (by the way millions have starved to death under this plan). There is no middle class in collectivist and “fair” North Korea. Everyone except for the leader and his crew is dirt poor. The Per Capita Income in collectivist North Korea is approximately $400 per person per year.

The United States, one of the world’s most “un-fair” countries, generally follows an individualist/capitalistic mode (with much room for improvement). The United States has poor people to be sure but even the very poor in the USA are wildly rich by world standards. The middle class is very large in the USA and staggeringly rich by world standards. The US has a disproportionate number of millionaires and billionaires and yes they absolutely do create thousands of jobs. Per Capita income in the United States is approximately $46,040 ($46k for every man, woman, and child per year). Only Luxembourg has a higher per capita income. In fact, The United States of America is so rich that it is home to half of the world’s richest 1% (about 29 million of the world’s richest 1% live in America). In other words, the citizens of the USA include 50% of the world’s richest 1%.

Again and again we see that countries that embrace “fairness” as an operational principle (i.e. collectivism/socialism) experience only misery and poverty as a result. Examples of the failure of "fairness" include North Korea, Sudan, Zimbabwe, Cuba, Venezuela, Libya, Iran, and of course the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Again and again we see that countries that embrace “un-fairness” as an operational principle (i.e. individualism/capitalism/liberty) enjoy prosperity and minimal real poverty as a result. Examples include The USA, Hong Kong, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and

Ireland

.

Surprisingly, “Fairness” (collectivism/socialism/social justice -equality of outcome) has proven itself to be the engine of poverty and “un-fairness” (individualism/capitalism/liberty-equality of opportunity) has proven itself to be the engine of prosperity.

By Mark Van Schuyver

Occupy Island A, B, C, or D?

2011-11-10T22:46:00.002-05:00

You decide to occupy one of four beautiful Islands, Island A, B, C, or D. You are all packed but which one will you move to? Each of the four Islands has perfect weather. Each has a population of approximately 10,000 people. They are alike in every way accept for their economic and political systems. Before you make your decision on where to live let’s take a look at life on each of the four Islands.

Island A is governed by a “Ruling Family Council.” The Family Council cannot be removed from power. The Council has determined that life shall be fair for everyone one on the Island. From inside their opulent palace the Family Council enforces a strict system of “economic equality” and “social justice.” All property on Island A is owned by all citizens equally, i.e. the Ruling Family Council owns all property on behalf of the citizens. On Island A all citizens are guaranteed a job for life at a subsistence wage. Jobs are assigned by the ruling family council. Citizens who have the ability to earn more are required to give anything they earn above subsistence to other citizens who need it more, the rule being “from each according to her ability to each according to her need.” Communal housing is assigned by the government. On Island A, the church, the school system, the health care system, the banking system, the monetary system, the media, the transportation system, in fact every system, every organization, and every provider of every product or service is a monopoly that is strictly owned and operated by the government. The Ruling Family Council owns the means of production therefore every job is a government job. Competition is illegal on Island A. Black market trading is punishable by death or long unpleasant stay in the gulag. Trade with other Islands or other nations is prohibited. Citizens are not allowed to leave the Island. It is unlawful to criticize the government or to say anything that the Ruling Family Council does not like. For the good of the Island members of the Ruling Family Council are exempt from the laws and rules that apply to ordinary citizens. The Island is very poor. Poverty rate is estimated at 99%.

Island B has a democratic form of government and a Constitution that is not enforced. Laws that are enforced on citizens do not apply to politicians. The citizens own about half of the property on the Island and the government owns the rest. Everyone votes but about half of the population pays no taxes. The wealthiest one percent of the population earns about nineteen percent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The government manages massive entitlement programs that operate at a staggering loss. Government-related entities back 96% of all home loans and 40 percent of mortgages are underwater. Corporations and other organizations deemed “too big to fail” are routinely bailed out by the government using tax payer dollars. Taxpayer dollars are routinely redistributed to money losing special interests corporations deemed to be “good investments” by the government. Companies that support politicians with significant donations are given special tax breaks and protection from competition. Excessive regulations cripple businesses and stifle innovation. Starting a new business requires paying off government agencies and buying your way through miles of red tape. Businesses are taxed at the highest rate of any country in the world and many companies have already moved off Island. Laws favor unions and other anti-business organizations making it more profitable for businesses owners to move off-Island. Entitlement programs, bureaucratic spending, government agencies, and wasteful government spending have resulted in massive unsustainable and exponentially rising debt. At this moment the Island is not poor by world standards but the poverty rate is hovering near 16% and the Island is technically bankrupt.

Island C is a Constitutional Republic. On Island C the Constitution is strictly enforced. The government is manned by elected officials sworn to uphold the Constitution and legally bound to do so. The laws of the land are widely understood and widely accepted by all. Every law applies equally to the governed and the governing. The Constitution restricts the government to the execution of a small but important number of duties including national defense, security, the court systems, and the protection of private property rights. A low flat tax is collected from all working citizens. There are no other taxes and the tax rate cannot be increased except by Constitutional Amendment. The government cannot spend beyond its means because it is required by law to balance its budget in real terms each year. On Island C people are free to work where they want, say what the want, and keep almost all of what they earn. Business owners are allowed to succeed or fail. There are no bailouts for any company no matter how big or how small. There are no tax breaks for corporations. There are no subsides for businesses of any sort. There are no barriers to entry and no special favors for any business. On Island C there are no restrictions on trade with other Islands and there are no tariffs on trade whether domestic or international. Anyone can start a business on Island C so long as she obeys the law. Island C is fantastically wealthy. At 6% the poverty rate on Island C is the lowest of any nation on the earth.

Island D has no government. It exists in a state of anarchy. There are no markets on Island D save cutthroat black markets and high seas piracy. Ninety nine percent of the population lives in poverty. A few warlords live in luxury. 100% of the population lives in fear. Life expectancy is very short.

There you have it. Islands A, B, C, and D. Now it is time to choose which Island you would like to occupy. . .

If you picked Island A you are a Marxist. Pack light because whatever you take will be confiscated anyway.

If you picked Island B you favor a system economists describe as a mixed economy, part capitalist and part socialist. Some economists call this type of system Corporatism or Crony Capitalism. No need to pack because you are already on this Island.

If you picked Island C you are a classical liberal or what we now refer to as a libertarian. Pack anything you want and prepare to live long and prosper.

If you picked Island D you are an anarchist. Remember to pack body armor.
By Mark Van Schuyver

Occupy Wall Street Protesters Seek “Equality of Outcome”

2011-11-06T09:41:00.003-05:00

There is much in the news these days about how unfair life is. The Wall Street Protesters call them selves the 99% to emphasize that some people have a lot more stuff than other people and “that’s just not fair.” This sentiment is strongest on the left of the political spectrum. President Obama expressed it perfectly during the 08 campaign when he said, “I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody." At the heart of this philosophy is the belief that if one person has more stuff than another person then she must have stolen it and therefore she must give it back. Wealth beyond a subsistence amount cannot be justified regardless of whether it was earned on the farm or on Wall Street because it’s “just not fair.” Those who follow this belief system seek equality of outcome otherwise known as “social justice.” Robin Hood might have said it this way, “Let’s steal from the rich and give what we steal to the poor and do it and do it until there ain’t no rich no more.”

This philosophy is not new. From time immemorial those who have had less have been jealous of those who had more. Politicians on the left and right have sought to remedy so called “income inequality” for decades with devices such as progressive taxation, i.e. the more you make the greater percentage the politicians take; subsidies, i.e. taking your tax money and giving it to special interests that appear beneficial like Solyndra to get more votes; tax breaks, i.e. lower taxes for those special interests that help politicians get reelected; trade barriers, i.e. protection for special interests at taxpayer expense; barrier to entry, i.e. you cannot start a business unless the politicians say so because your competitors have already paid the politicians off; legislation favoring unions that result in fewer jobs and higher costs for consumers, i.e. special laws for those who help politicians get reelected; bailouts for American Workers, i.e. your tax dollars redistributed to car companies and big banks; Social Security and Medicare, i.e. spending trillions of your tax dollars to buy billions of dollars worth of services; and stimulus spending, i.e. spending your tax money on boondoggles that look good on paper but actually toss your tax dollars down the drain.

For example, “According to the CBO report, 600,000 to 2 million people have jobs as of now that were created or retained’ because of the $825 billion stimulus. If the maximum number of 2 million is accepted, that works out to a cost of $412,500 per job. If the minimum number of 600,000 is accepted, that works out to a cost of $1,375,000 per job.” Long story short, government intervention into the market has only made the perceived income gap worse.

History has never created a society with equality of outcome. Several nations have tried this and all have failed miserably. The biggest and most dramatic failure of all was attempted by the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Those who would remake the world on the model of equality of outcome are up against an insurmountable economic reality that economist call scarcity, “the fundamental economic reality of having humans who have unlimited wants and needs in a world of limited resources.” Welcome to the real world Neo. Thus seeking equality of outcome is not and cannot be “fair.”

Sorry to break it to you Occupying Folks but life is not fair. The Founders of our great Nation realized this fact. They addressed it in the opening lines of the Declaration of Independence when they wrote “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. . .” The Founders knew that life is not fair and that equality of outcome is not possible nor is it desirable. Their solution? Establish and ordain a Constitution that provides everyone with equality of opportunity to pursue happiness while never guaranteeing equality of outcome.

Liberty and Justice for All does not mean “Let’s steal from the rich and redistribute what we steal to special interests and do it and do it until there ain’t no rich no more.”

By Mark Van Schuyver

Occupy Wall Street Jiu-Jitsu!

2011-10-12T21:38:00.009-04:00

I’ve been watching the “occupy Wall Street" protests on TV. As near as I can tell the message of these protestors boils down to this: I was born. I do not want to take responsible for myself. Other people have been responsible for themselves and some of them have earned stuff. They have stuff that I want therefore they should give their stuff to me because I don’t want to take personal responsibility and earn stuff for myself. That just about sums it up. Therefore I suggest a new moniker for the “occupy Wall Street” protestors. I suggest the world owes me a living protest movement. Sorry, this is not very interesting I must admit.

What is interesting? The fact that the New York City Police have (as demonstrated in hundreds of hippie protestor arrests made so far) what looks like some pretty good Jiu-Jitsu moves! As a long time practitioner of Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu I must say that to me this is the most interesting part of the world owes me a living protest movement phenomenon. Here are some examples. Go cops!

On the left see one cop taking the hippie's back. On the right see two cops in a
scramble to get the hippie in a shoulder lock. Keep fighting hippie protestor!

Here we see a knee on back stabilization and control the
wrists and shoulders move. Go cops!

Cop puts his knee ont the protestor's throat. This is a great
hippie control move. Go cops!

Shoulder lock. Another great hippie control move. Go cops!

Party over. Come back for more Jiu-Jitsu lessons from NYPD
tomorrow world owes me a living protestors!

Hippie goes for a rear naked choke! What a great training day!

Officer goes for a shoulder lock! Oops. Hippie going down!

Scramble and mayhem! This is what the octagon, I mean, the

"World Owes Me a Living" protest is all about! Woo hoo!!!

If nothing else this World Owes Me a Living protest is a great workout for everyone involved.
Keep scrambling hippie protestors and go cops!

Herman Cain Should Drop One Nine!

2011-10-11T22:26:00.000-04:00

Herman Cain’s 999 plan has one two many nines. In other words his plan is two parts excellent and one part problematic. Mr. Cain’s plan is excellent because it eliminates the current tax code and that means an end to subsidies, tax breaks, and “corporate welfare.” It is excellent because it introduces an individual flat tax that gives everyone skin in the game. Right now almost fifty percent of the voters pay zero federal income tax. This means fifty percent of the population can vote to increase the taxes on the other fifty percent at no personal cost; a recipe for disaster!

Mr. Cain’s plan reduces the payroll tax. This is excellent because Social Security and Medicare are socialist budget-busting boondoggles that should be phased out and privatized as quickly as possible.

Mr. Cain’s plan is excellent because it gets rid of capital gains tax. Capital gains taxes are a form of double taxation that destroy investment incentives and stifle economic growth.

Mr. Cain’s plan is excellent because it lowers corporate income tax to a level that would be among the lowest on the planet. Right now the United States has the highest corporate income tax in the world. High corporate income taxes drive businesses and jobs overseas. High corporate income taxes destroy incentive. High corporate income taxes are a kind of stealth tax on consumers because corporations are forced to raise prices to recoup some of their loses.

Mr. Cain’s 999 plan is problematic because it introduces a national sales tax. While in the short term this nine percent “value added tax (VAT)” seems benign, it opens a Pandora’s Box of long term double-trouble. Future Presidents and future congresses will be free to add on to this national sales tax until it becomes an economy killer similar to that which exists in the UK and other European Socialist Democracies today. The VAT must not be allowed!

So I respectfully submit the following suggestion to presidential candidate Herman Cain. Drop one nine! How about a 99 plan! Nine percent personal flat tax. Nine percent corporate flat tax. Zero deductions and zero subsidies. The economic growth created by this new 99 tax code will more than make up for the problematic nine percent national sales tax.

By Mark Van Schuyver

Herman Cain?

2011-10-09T23:21:00.001-04:00

Ron Paul won the "Values Voter poll," by a very wide margin and once again was ignored by the media. Gee I wonder why? Perhaps because Dr. Paul opposes military interventionism as well as economic interventionism. Darn that Constitution!

Ron Paul - 37%
Herman Cain - 23%
Rick Santorum - 16%
Rick Perrry - 8%
Michele Bachmann - 8%
Mitt Romney - 4%
Newt Gingrich - 3%
Jon Huntsman - 0% Undecided - 1%

By Mark Van Schuyver

Obama's New $450 Billion Stimulus #2 Plan!

2011-09-08T21:19:00.001-04:00

President Obama’s socialistic “Stimulus” Package #1 cost American taxpayers $835 billion dollars and delivered massive unemployment, nearly three years of economic malaise, and added $835 billion plus interest to the national debt. Tonight Mr. Obama proposed a new $450 billion dollar “stimulus” spending plan euphemistically entitled “The American Jobs Act.” According to the president this new “stimulus” plan will restore the economy pronto and create lots of jobs.

This is cause for wonder given that many leading liberal politicians are on record saying that the reason that Obama’s first Keynesian stimulus package failed so miserably was because at $835 billion it was too small. If that is so then how will a new infusion of borrowed money totaling less than half of the original amount do the trick? If borrowing billions of dollars and spending it here and there on this and that special interest project or tax gimmick is the way to prosperity and the way out of debt then why didn’t Mr. Obama propose a Paul Krugman style supersized “stimulus” package of two trillion or more borrowed dollars?

Who can say why President Obama went for a pint size "stimulus" package this time around? As for me I have given up on the President. I think that the best thing he and his vice president could do for the economy and for the nation is to resign. How much malaise do we need to confirm that which we already know? Goverment intervention, wealth redistribution, and socialistic programs do not create prosperity.

By Mark Van Schuyver

Big Brother

2011-09-06T08:56:00.000-04:00

Say no to Big Brother's "Smart Meters." Video here.

Who Owns You?

2011-08-30T10:25:00.008-04:00

If you don't own yourself then who does? The State? The "majority?" A slave owner?

I believe that every person has "a property in his own person." In other words, every person is a self-proprietor, a self-owner. I believe that self-ownership is the essential and most fundamental element of liberty. I believe that you own you and I own me. My freedom ends where your nose begins. But not everyone agrees with me. The argument about who owns you and who owns me has been raging for centuries.

This argument about "who owns you" is the fundamental element upon which virtually all political arguments are based. The question of “who owns you” is the ground zero point of difference in two competing world views that philosophers describe as individualism vs. collectivism.

In his Second Treatise of Government, the philosopher John Locke, whose writings greatly influenced Thomas Jefferson, wrote:

Though the earth and all inferior creatures be common to all men, yet every man has a "property" in his own "person." This nobody has any right to but himself. The "labour" of his body and the "work" of his hands, we may say, are properly his. - John Locke, 1690

Thomas Jefferson and the Founders established the individualist world-view as the basis of our government when they wrote,

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

So there's just one question you have to ask yourself. Do you believe in individualism or collectivism (i.e. capitalism or socialism, liberty or serfdom, self-ownership or slavery)? Where do you stand?

By Mark Van Schuyver

I respectfully call upon President Obama to resign

2011-08-07T23:27:00.002-04:00

I respectfully call upon President Obama to resign. Mr. Obama’s socialist policies are destroying our nation. It is no longer possible to stand by politely and hope that the President will learn that personal and economic liberties are both the moral path and the utilitarian path that we must follow if we seek peace and prosperity. Socialism, Mr. President, is not and never can be the answer to our difficulties or the promise of a brighter future.

Today the United States of America lost its AAA rating as a direct result of socialist policies taken to new heights by President Obama and the Keynesian/Socialists in Congress. Tomorrow the markets will likely crash even more and soon our country will likely slip into a double dip recession as a result of President Obama’s socialist policies.

As our nation collapses under the weight of the socialist, nanny state, welfare state, warfare programs of President Obama and his allies on the left I humbly offer this reminder that I sent to the president in a BLOG letter on January 23^rd, 2009.

Dear President Obama,

Congratulations on your new job. I wish you well and hope that you will consider a few suggestions I have for what to do to end the recession and restore

America

to greatness. I offer these suggestions to you with humility and with great sincerity.

1) Reduce taxes on everyone, rich and poor, to a flat rate of 10% or less, and eliminate all tax breaks and loopholes. No more progressive taxation. This will stimulate the economy, encourage productivity, reduce bureaucracy, virtually eliminate tax cheats, reduce tax crime, cut the IRS in half, and save everyone a lot of time. Gradually move to a low-rate, all-voluntary tax of some sort.

2) Reduce corporate taxes so that they are the lowest in the world. This will quickly end the recession, drive productivity through the roof in virtually all business sectors, attract businesses to locate in the

USA

. Draw investments of all sorts from all over the world, create thousands and thousands and thousands of jobs, and keep

America

strong.

3) Eliminate capital gain taxes. This will stimulate investment, stimulate trade, increase productivity, and help to heal the capital markets.

4) Eliminate all subsidies including farm subsidies and energy subsidies. This will force businesses to compete on a level playing field without special favor. It will allow those businesses that are making the best use of limited resources to prevail while at the same time allowing unprofitable businesses that are wasting limited resources to fail. Eliminating subsidies will cause prices for food, energy, and other things to stay low and go lower as a result of improved market efficiencies from competition.

5) Eliminate all corporate tax breaks. This will force businesses to focus on serving consumers rather than soliciting Congress. Put an end to corporate welfare.

6) Gradually phase out and ultimately privatize virtually all “entitlements” e.g. social security, Medicare, etc. Stop the slide toward Socialism before it is too late. End the Nanny State.

7) Get our army out of

Iraq

and Afghanistan ASAP and return our forces from any foreign bases that are not necessary for national defense. Destroy any enemy that attacks us but please end the “war on terror.” Terror is not an enemy; terror is a tactic.

8) Eliminate all trade barriers and tariffs. This will increase our prosperity and make the world a safer place. This will inspire many other nations to do the same. Avoid trade protectionism.

9) Make a Constitutional Amendment requiring a balanced federal budget (with an exception for real, and legally declared wars in which we are attacked by another nation). Stop borrowing and pay down the debt. Living within our means will ensure the long-term survival of our nation. Living within our means will ensure a better world for our posterity.

10) Uphold the Constitution. The Constitution is not a living document. Uphold it with strict obedience. If you don't like it, then seek a super majority to change it.

11) Appoint judges who are strict constructionists. If the law means whatever a judge wants it to mean then the rule of law is lost and so is the Republic.

12) Sell all government owned property and government run entities that are not essential to national security or expressly authorized by the Constitution to the private sector. Apply the money to the National Debt. The private sector will make far better use of land and other assets than the ever inefficient and wasteful government.

13) Eliminate all of the Federal “alphabet” agencies unless they are specifically authorized by the Constitution.

14) Eliminate and outlaw all price controls. Price controls always cause market inefficiencies. Eliminating them will ensure market efficiencies and reduce waste.

15) Phase out the Federal Reserve. Let interest rates float with the markets. Reestablish sound money. Avoid another Great Depression.

16) Eliminate the minimum wage. The minimum wage costs jobs and cripples business development. Eliminating it will create new jobs and new opportunities for those just entering the workforce.

17) Eliminate Sarbanes Oxley and hundreds of other value destroying regulations and pieces of bureaucratic legislation. Put the government back into the role of policing the market rather than crippling and trying to own and run the market.

18) Eliminate affirmative action. The government’s role is to provide a level playing field with an equal opportunity for all to participate. The government’s role is not to guarantee the outcome. Guaranteed opportunity for all; guaranteed outcome for none.

19) Overturn the Patriot act and restore habeas corpus and other constitutionally guaranteed rights. Uphold the Constitution.

20) Make it a crime for Congress to pass “price gouging,” legislation, “windfall profits taxes” legislation, or any other arbitrary form of profit seizure. Let the market forces work so that citizens can enjoy the benefits of that most efficient of systems, capitalism. Don’t punish prosperity and more people will prosper.

21) Overturn the Kelo Act and restore private property rights to their Constitutional standard. Freedom will soon be lost without solid property rights.

22) Overturn all gun control laws that prevent honest citizens from purchasing, keeping, and bearing personal self-defense weapons and ammunition on their private property. The right to life means nothing if one is denied the ability to defend that life.

23) Overturn McCain Feingold and all other unconstitutional legislation. Protect the First Amendment.

24) Forbid the government from paying for faith-based initiatives or any other activities not authorized by the Constitution.

25) Get the government completely out of the health care business and all other businesses not expressly permitted by the Constitution. Socialism never works. Don’t doom the American People to long lines and shortages.

26) Eliminate all government monopolies that are not expressly permitted by the Constitution. Allow private industry to compete directly with constitutionally authorized government entities e.g. the post office, fire departments, and utilities. Competition makes every type of business more efficient.

27) End the so called "war on drugs." Stop the madness.

28) Create an easy to use guest worker program. This will destroy the illegal immigration black market, improve relationships with our neighbors to the south, make it easier to watch for terrorists, and save thousands of lives.

29) Monitor and protect our borders but do not build an iron curtain on our border with Mexico.

30) Allow drilling off our coasts and in Alaska. This will increase the world’s supply of energy, keep fuel prices lower, and create thousands of new private sector jobs.

31) Privatize virtually all public schools and universities. Competition will ensure excellence, increase efficiencies, and increase teacher pay.

32) Veto the Union card check law and overturn Wagner and other legislation that gives unions unfair negotiation advantages. This will increase prosperity, create jobs, and reduce violence and entitlement in our society.

33) Never give a bailout or a stimulus package to any individual or firm. The market will self correct. The government created the housing and credit “bubble” with bad policy and socialistic interventions (Freddy Mack, Fannie Mae, Federal Reserve, Community Reinvestment Act, etc, etc). The government, by picking and choosing winners in the market, by bailing out failure, and by embracing nationalization and selective-socialism can only slow and prolong the recovery. No bailouts, and no stimulus packages. No more socialistic wealth redistribution.

I’m sure I’ll think of more things later. But, for now if you would please consider this short list I will be most grateful. Congratulations again on your new job and thanks for your service to our Country.
Sincerely,
Mark Van Schuyver, Citizen

USA January 23^rd, 2009.

www.liberty101.us

PS If you have time to read a good book, please consider reading F. A. Hayek's masterpiece, The Fatal Conceit. Thank you Mr. President.

To this list I would now add many things including overturning the socialist program commonly called Obama Care and the atrocious Frank, Todd financial reform act.

----------------------
Socialism is not and never can be the answer to our difficulties or the promise of a brighter future. The tax and spend socialist policies of President Obama and his socialist/welfare state allies in Congress are destroying the United States of America. Therefore I respectfully call upon President Obama to resign. Allow someone to assume leadership who understands that personal and economic liberties are both the moral path and the utilitarian path that we must follow if we seek peace and prosperity for the long-term.

President Obama’s Socialist Policies Spell Doom

2011-06-11T21:26:00.001-04:00

President Obama’s socialist policies are economically bankrupt and morally corrupt. His pro-big-government programs and anti-private sector policies have delivered nothing but unemployment, misery, and economic decline. Two and 1/2 years into his term it is evident that Mr. Obama’s socialist ideology is more important to him than the well-being of the citizens of the United States of America.

The $850+ billion dollar “stimulus” spending bill that President Obama said would keep unemployment from rising above 8% and restore economic growth has done just the opposite. The stimulus has prolonged the recession, delayed recovery, increased the national debt, benefited only a very few favored special interests, and driven unemployment up to 9.1%. When you count those that have given up looking the actual number of unemployed is much closer to 20%.

President Obama’s Fed Chairman, Keynesian Economist Ben Bernanke, has provided even more Government “Stimulus” in the form of “Quantitative Easing.” Quantitative easing is a euphemism for printing money out of thin air and injecting it into the economy to try and stimulate growth. We are now coming to the end of the second round of massive “quantitative easing.” The result? Another economic bubble waiting to burst and the very real possibility of a government induced double-dip recession.

While real estate prices continue to plunge as a result of interest rates being held artificially low by Mr. Obama’s central planners at the Federal Reserve, prices for food, gas, and most everything else are going up and going up fast. Some economists call this “stagflation.” The last time we experienced this ugly government caused phenomenon was under the leadership of another very socialistic president Mr. Jimmy Carter.

President Obama sees government as the solution to all things. With the passing of his socialist health care bill euphemistically entitled “The Patient Protection and Affordable Health Care Act (i.e. ObamaCare),” the president established the mechanism for effectively socializing an additional 1/6th of the economy. Imagine that, 1/6th of the economy removed from the private sector and placed in the hands of government bureaucrats. 1/6th of the economy soon to be run essentially as a giant monopoly similar to the post office or the department of motor vehicles. ObamaCare does not fully kick in until 2014 but already taxes are being levied in advance to pay for this socialist abomination. Hundreds of exemptions to ObamaCare have already been awarded to specially connected businesses. Health care costs are rising faster than ever as the healthcare industry struggles to cope with this massive intervention. A recent survey conducted by McKinsey “indicates that 30 percent of the companies surveyed plan to stop offering employer sponsored insurance in 2014. The survey also suggests that even more employers will drop coverage as they learn more about the Act,” GLG Research.

The National Debt, now at $14,352,946,120,172.64 (14 trillion plus dollars), has grown faster under Obama that under any president in history. The Federal Government is now borrowing more than forty cents for every dollar it spends. This year alone an additional 1.6 trillion dollars will be added to the National Debt. The existing entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare are in the red to the tune of trillions of dollars in unfunded liabilities and are financially unsustainable. Virtually every politician agrees that this exponentially rising level of borrowing cannot be sustained. President Obama knows this but he has done nothing to reduce spending and he continues to propose expansions in government at every level. Ironically Communist China is now lecturing the President of the United States on his destructive socialist economic policies.

President Obama was elected in part for his promise to get us out of Iraq and Afghanistan. Two and one half years into his administration not only are we still stuck in Iraq and Afghanistan we are now engaged in a third war with Libya. We have every right to pursue the 911 attackers but massive occupations, nation-building, and preemptive military interventionism are unconstitutional, immoral, and financially unsustainable.

President Obama’s socialist policies are economically bankrupt and morally corrupt. His pro-tax, pro-borrowing, pro-spending, pro-big-government programs and anti-private sector policies have delayed recovery and delivered nothing but unemployment, misery, and economic decline. After two and ½ years it is evident that Mr. Obama’s socialist ideology is more important to him than the well-being of the citizens of the United States of America. – Mark Van Schuyver

Government Stimulus Never Works

2011-06-01T21:26:00.001-04:00

By Larry Kudlow - CNBC, an excerpt: “The economy now looks like a Government Motors engine that’s stalling out. Or perhaps, with energy and food inflation, and housing deflation at the same time, the economy is acting like a pinball machine on permanent tilt. There’s a key message here: Big-government stimulus never works.

First there was the massive Obama stimulus spending. Then QE1 (The Fed's quantitative-easing program). And now QE2 is winding down. And what did we get for all this? Slower growth overall, paltry job creation, more energy and commodities inflation, continued housing deflation, and virtually no new business start-up entrepreneurship.

We know the Obama spending package failed to create a 7 to 8 percent unemployment rate, as advertised. And now we’re learning that the Fed’s QE2 has actually done more harm than good.

All that money-printing stimulus worked to depreciate the dollar and jack-up commodity prices, especially oil and gasoline, but also food. So both companies and consumers have been punished.” (COMPLETE)

You Are Not Alone

2011-05-10T18:32:00.005-04:00

If you do not like the fact that many large and well-connected businesses are given tax havens, tax breaks, subsidies, protection from competition, monopoly contracts, and sometimes direct cash transfers from your pocket to their bank accounts then you are not alone. If you see this as problem, as I do, then I suggest that before we seek a solution to the problem we begin by first asking several direct questions to see if we can determine the problem’s root cause. Let’s try it.

Problem Statement
Many large and well-connected businesses receive tax havens, tax breaks, subsidies, monopoly contracts, protection from competition, and cash transfers from taxpayers into their bank accounts.

Question: Why do big businesses want these special favors?

Answer: To make money without having to work for it.

Question: Whom do they ask for these special favors?

Answer: The Federal Government.

Question: Why does the Federal Government grant these favors?

Answer: To get financial donations.

Question: Why do the politicians want financial donations?

Answer: To get re-elected.

Question: Why do they want to be re-elected?

Answer: So that they can keep and maintain their personal power.

Question: Why is the Federal Government allowed to do this?

Answer: Rules prohibiting the dispensation of these special favors by the Federal Government to special interests are not in place or not followed.

Root Cause
The Federal Government is not prohibited by law (and/or is not following the law) from dispensing tax havens, tax breaks, subsidies, monopoly contracts, protection from competition, cash transfers from taxpayers into the bank accounts of large businesses, and bailouts for the well connected. In other words the Government is the problem.

Solution
Amend the Constitution (and enforce existing laws) to make it a criminal act for any branch or extension of the Federal Government to create tax havens, offer tax breaks, dispense subsidies, award monopoly contracts, provide protection from competition domestic or foreign, transfer money or other sources of value or offer bailouts of any sort into the bank accounts of any firm regardless of size or stature.

by Mark Van Schuyver

Fight of the Century: Keynes vs. Hayek Round Two (video)

2011-05-06T16:07:00.000-04:00

Fight of the Century: Keynes vs. Hayek Round Two

If Supermarkets Were Like Public Schools, What if groceries were paid for by taxes, and you were assigned a store based on where you live?

2011-05-05T07:52:00.001-04:00

Artilce by economist Don Boudreaux. WSJ, an excerpt: Suppose that groceries were supplied in the same way as K-12 education. Residents of each county would pay taxes on their properties. Nearly half of those tax revenues would then be spent by government officials to build and operate supermarkets. Each family would be assigned to a particular supermarket according to its home address. And each family would get its weekly allotment of groceries—"for free"—from its neighborhood public supermarket. . .

Of course, the quality of public supermarkets would play a major role in families' choices about where to live. Real-estate agents and chambers of commerce in prosperous neighborhoods would brag about the high quality of public supermarkets to which families in their cities and towns are assigned.

Being largely protected from consumer choice, almost all public supermarkets would be worse than private ones. In poor counties the quality of public supermarkets would be downright abysmal. Poor people—entitled in principle to excellent supermarkets—would in fact suffer unusually poor supermarket quality. . .

In reality, of course, groceries and many other staples of daily life are distributed with extraordinary effectiveness by competitive markets responding to consumer choice. The same could be true of education—the unions' self-serving protestations notwithstanding. . . by economist Don Boudreaux(complete)

Well Done Mr. President

2011-05-02T21:38:00.000-04:00

My plane touched down last night and a few seconds later the flight attendant announced that it was now “safe” to use cell phones. My phone buzzed immediately with a text from my wife. “Osama Bin Laden is dead!” she wrote. “It’s all over the news!”

"Osama Bin Laden is dead." I said to those sitting next to me. Within seconds folks all around were getting the news on their IPods and cell phones. Up and down the isles I heard people saying, “Osama Bin Laden is dead.”

Another plane was stuck in our dock and we were stranded on the tarmac for about 30 minutes. In that time we passengers gathered quite a bit of information from our wireless devices. No one clapped or cheered but there was a very palpable feeling of pride in the air. “We finally got him,” the man behind me told his young son. The fellow next to me got some new information from the Huffington Post on his IPod. “They shot him,” he said. Then that same fellow jumped to Fox News. He turned up the volume on his IPod so that I could hear the President’s speech. For those 30 minutes that we were stuck on the tarmac there was no left and no right; there was no socialist utopia vs. individual liberty battle going on. It was a rare and wonderful, unified American moment.

And so, tonight I am writing to offer my heartfelt thanks to the Navy Seals and others who risked their lives to bring down the mass murderer Osama Bin Laden. And I am writing to thank every member of our military in every branch active and inactive for their service to our country.

Tonight I offer my congratulations and thanks to President Obama for engaging the power of the State in accordance with his authority under the Constitution to defend our nation by destroying the Islamic Terrorist responsible for the death of so many Americans, Osama Bin Laden. Well done Mr. President.

By Mark Van Schuyver

Tax Day 2011

2011-04-19T00:45:00.007-04:00

It is immoral, wrong, unethical, and illegal for one person to steal from another person or persons.

It is immoral, wrong, unethical, and illegal for a gang of persons to steal from another person or persons.

It is immoral, wrong, unethical, and unconstitutional for the federal government to steal, i.e. collect taxes by force on anything not expressly authorized by the federal constitution, from you or any other person or persons.

Yesterday was tax day. Now that you have involuntarily given a significant portion of your income to the federal government ask yourself this question. What portion of your tax dollars will be applied to constitutionally authorized expenditures? The Constitution articulates 18 specific things that the federal government may spend money on (see Article One Section Eight). The Sixteenth Amendment authorizes the federal government to collect taxes from you for the purpose of paying for these 18 articulated federal powers. Every penny of your federal tax money that goes toward anything that is not clearly constitutionally authorized is theft pure and simple.

To be clear the vast majority of stuff that the federal government spends your tax money on is unconstitutional, including Medicare, No Child Left Behind, the Department of Education, Department of Energy, and virtually all of the rest of the “alphabet agencies,” welfare, subsidies to corporations and farms, Planned Parenthood, Medicaid, Social Security, block grants to states, military interventions, and much more.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. – Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America.

It is immoral, wrong, unethical, and illegal for the federal government to steal from you. Altruistic arguments, utopian arguments, arguments for the necessity of paying for crushing debt, e.g. crushing debt owed for things that the federal government had no authority to spend on in the first place, or any other kind of argument cannot make stealing from you okay. Just because it is the federal government who puts a gun to your head does not make it right. – by Mark Van Schuyver

President Obama's Justification for War in Libya

2011-04-17T22:17:00.000-04:00

Video by Cato Institute's John Samples. Here.

Remembering the Real Ayn Rand

2011-04-14T12:08:00.000-04:00

By Donald L. Luskin, WSJ, an excerpt:

Tomorrow's release of the movie version of "Atlas Shrugged" is focusing attention on Ayn Rand's 1957 opus and the free-market ideas it espouses. Book sales for "Atlas" have always been brisk—and all the more so in the past few years, as actual events have mirrored Rand's nightmare vision of economic collapse amid massive government expansion. Conservatives are now hailing Rand as a tea party Nostradamus, hence the timing of the movie's premiere on tax day.

When Rand created the character of Wesley Mouch, it's as though she was anticipating Barney Frank (D., Mass). Mouch is the economic czar in "Atlas Shrugged" whose every move weakens the economy, which in turn gives him the excuse to demand broader powers. Mr. Frank steered Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to disaster with mandates for more lending to low-income borrowers. After Fannie and Freddie collapsed under the weight of their subprime mortgage books, Mr. Frank proclaimed last year: "The way to cure that is to give us more authority." Mouch couldn't have said it better himself.

But it's a misreading of "Atlas" to claim that it is simply an antigovernment tract or an uncritical celebration of big business. In fact, the real villain of "Atlas" is a big businessman, railroad CEO James Taggart, whose crony capitalism does more to bring down the economy than all of Mouch's regulations. With Taggart, Rand was anticipating figures like Angelo Mozilo, the CEO of Countrywide Financial, the subprime lender that proved to be a toxic mortgage factory. Like Taggart, Mr. Mozilo engineered government subsidies for his company in the name of noble-sounding virtues like home ownership for all. . . (complete)

The Presidential Divider - Obama's toxic speech

2011-04-14T12:01:00.000-04:00

Wall Street Journal, an excpert:

Did someone move the 2012 election to June 1? We ask because President Obama's extraordinary response to Paul Ryan's budget yesterday—with its blistering partisanship and multiple distortions—was the kind Presidents usually outsource to some junior lieutenant. Mr. Obama's fundamentally political document would have been unusual even for a Vice President in the fervor of a campaign.

The immediate political goal was to inoculate the White House from criticism that it is not serious about the fiscal crisis, after ignoring its own deficit commission last year and tossing off a $3.73 trillion budget in February that increased spending amid a record deficit of $1.65 trillion. Mr. Obama was chased to George Washington University yesterday because Mr. Ryan and the Republicans outflanked him on fiscal discipline and are now setting the national political agenda.

Mr. Obama did not deign to propose an alternative to rival Mr. Ryan's plan, even as he categorically rejected all its reform ideas, repeatedly vilifying them as essentially un-American. "Their vision is less about reducing the deficit than it is about changing the basic social compact in America," he said, supposedly pitting "children with autism or Down's syndrome" against "every millionaire and billionaire in our society." The President was not attempting to join the debate Mr. Ryan has started, but to close it off just as it begins and banish House GOP ideas to political Siberia.

Mr. Obama then packaged his poison in the rhetoric of bipartisanship—which "starts," he said, "by being honest about what's causing our deficit." The speech he chose to deliver was dishonest even by modern political standards. . . (complete)

Obma's Unconstitutional War in Libya Rages On

2011-04-14T00:03:00.000-04:00

(CBS/AP) WASHINGTON - The Pentagon revealed for the first time Wednesday that U.S. fighter jets have continued to strike Libyan air defenses after turning the mission over to NATO. Pentagon spokesman Col. Dave Lapan said the jets were assigned to NATO and are operating under NATO command. They can be used when needed to take out enemy defenses as part of the enforcement of the no-fly zone.

CBS News National Security correspondent David Martin reported the missions, announced in an oh-by-the-way fashion by the Pentagon, have involved a handful of F-16s that have dropped a half-dozen bombs. While officials may claim American is taking a back seat in the campaign, U.S. jets have attacked Libyan targets three times in the last 10 days. Add in aerial refueling, reconnaissance and electronic jamming missions and the U.S. is flying 35 percent of all the NATO missions. . . (complete)

New video exposing a reckless IRS proposal

2011-04-13T22:59:00.000-04:00

From the Cato Institute's Dan Mitchell,

Here's a new video exposing a reckless IRS proposal to force American banks to put foreign tax law above American tax law - even though it will cause capital to flee the American economy. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPVVoqDkLHw

Also, here's a brief analysis of the last week's semi-disappointing budget deal, along with some explanation that there are bigger and more important fiscal fights still ahead.

http://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2011/04/09/the-kiss-your-sister-budget-deal-is-finalized-but-claudia-schiffer-still-aint-your-sibling/

Please feel free to post the video and share the fiscal analysis.

Best,

Daniel J. Mitchell, Ph.D.

Senior Fellow
The Cato Institute
1000 Mass. Ave., NW
Wash., DC 20001
(202) 842-0200
dmitchell@cato.org
http://www.cato.org/

A Nation of Takers, Not Makers

2011-04-02T01:05:00.000-04:00

We've Become a Nation of Takers, Not Makers. More Americans work for the government than in manufacturing, farming, fishing, forestry, mining and utilities combined says Economist Stephen Moore. Here's an excerpt from his WSJ article:

If you want to understand better why so many states—from New York to Wisconsin to California—are teetering on the brink of bankruptcy, consider this depressing statistic: Today in America there are nearly twice as many people working for the government (22.5 million) than in all of manufacturing (11.5 million). This is an almost exact reversal of the situation in 1960, when there were 15 million workers in manufacturing and 8.7 million collecting a paycheck from the government.

It gets worse. More Americans work for the government than work in construction, farming, fishing, forestry, manufacturing, mining and utilities combined. We have moved decisively from a nation of makers to a nation of takers. Nearly half of the $2.2 trillion cost of state and local governments is the $1 trillion-a-year tab for pay and benefits of state and local employees. Is it any wonder that so many states and cities cannot pay their bills?

Every state in America today except for two—Indiana and Wisconsin—has more government workers on the payroll than people manufacturing industrial goods. Consider California, which has the highest budget deficit in the history of the states. The not-so Golden State now has an incredible 2.4 million government employees—twice as many as people at work in manufacturing. New Jersey has just under two-and-a-half as many government employees as manufacturers. Florida's ratio is more than 3 to 1. So is New York's . . . (complete)

Killing Our Way To a Better America

2011-03-31T13:18:00.000-04:00

Killing Our Way To a Better America, by Daniel Larison. An excerpt:

It doesn’t make it any better if Obama conceives of this as a struggle to make America more idealistic and moral. In fact, it makes it worse in some ways. . . The ease with which humanitarian interventionists seem to forget that they are cheering on the deliberate killing of people who have done nothing to them and theirs is bad enough, but the notion that America is making great moral progress if it uses force to kill the right sorts of people for the right reasons, and especially when the conflict has nothing to do with us, is simply evil. . . (complete)

G.E.’s (corporate welfare) Strategies Let It Avoid Taxes Altogether

2011-03-27T02:25:00.000-04:00

New York Times: An excerpt: The company reported worldwide profits of $14.2 billion, and said $5.1 billion of the total came from its operations in the United States. Its American tax bill? None. In fact, G.E. claimed a tax benefit of $3.2 billion.

That may be hard to fathom for the millions of American business owners and households now preparing their own returns, but low taxes are nothing new for G.E. The company has been cutting the percentage of its American profits paid to the Internal Revenue Service for years, resulting in a far lower rate than at most multinational companies.

Its extraordinary success is based on an aggressive strategy that mixes fierce lobbying for tax breaks and innovative accounting that enables it to concentrate its profits offshore. . . (complete)

UK - Peaceful (not) Protests from the Socialist Left

2011-03-27T02:07:00.000-04:00

Mail Online excerpt: Defiant Labour leader Ed Miliband told demonstrators at yesterday’s anti-cuts rally in London that he was ‘proud to stand with them’ – just as the protest turned violent.

More than 250,000 people marched on the capital to object to the Government’s programme to tackle the deficit. Anarchists later broke away, bringing chaos to the city and targeting buildings such as The Ritz and Fortnum & Mason. . .

On the streets outside, anarchists battled police. Some officers in Oxford Street were attacked with lightbulbs filled with ammonia, a sinister new weapon that can be assembled by following simple instructions on the internet. Other officers were hit with paint and flying bottles. By the end of the day 75 protesters had been arrested and 28 people injured. Five police officers were also hurt and one was one taken to hospital. . .

Several splinter groups brought chaos and violence to what was the largest public protest since the 2003 anti-Iraq war rally. . .

Organisers estimated between 400,000 and 500,000 teachers, nurses, firefighters, council and NHS workers, other public sector employees, students, pensioners and campaign groups converged on the capital . . (complete) - Mailonline.

The United (socialist) Nations and the War in Libya

2011-03-21T16:33:00.000-04:00

Right now our military is bombing Libya without consent of the Congress and in clear violation of our Constitution. The President’s rationale for this intervention is subservience to United Nations resolution 1973. United Nations resolutions do not trump the Constitution nor does the United Nation’s Declaration of (socialist) Rights.

Before I make the case that the UN is a socialist entity please recall that human rights are negative rights. Negative rights such as the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness do not guarantee an outcome. Negative rights, many of which are articulated in the Declaration of Independence, impose no duty on others save leaving others alone. Your freedom ends where my nose and my property begin and vice versa.

Socialists (e.g. Progressives, Leftists, Interventionists, Fascists, Marxists, Collectivists) have long fought for positive rights. Positive rights guarantee the delivery of a particular resource or service. These resources and services must be paid for and provided by others. A positive right imposes a duty upon you to provide stuff for me. The UN Declaration of Rights contains many “positive” rights that impose duties upon others. But who shall pay for the UN’s pre-determined outcomes? What penalty shall those who refuse to pay for these UN pre-determined (positive right) outcomes suffer? Who shall deliver punishment to those who fail to provide these promised services and products? If, for example, everyone has a “right” to leisure (Article 24), who shall be made to pay for my leisure? If everyone has a right to a standard of living (Article 25) adequate for the health and well being of himself and his family who shall be made to pay my living? If everyone has a “right” to education (Article 26) who shall be made to pay for my education? Someone has to pay.

In a world of limited resources and unlimited wants the UN suggests that we take from each according to his ability and give it to each according to his need. This is otherwise known as socialism. Some examples of positive rights promised in the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights are highlighted below.

Article 22.

Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.

Article 23.

(1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.

• (2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.

• (3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.

• (4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

Article 24.

• Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.

Article 25.

• (1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

• (2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

Article 26.

• (1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.

• (2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.

• (3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

Article 27.

• (1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.

• (2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.

Article 28.

• Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.

Article 29.

• (1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.

• (2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.

• (3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 30.

• Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

By obeying a UN mandate for which there is no Constitutional authority and for going to war in Libya without authorization from the Congress, President Obama has personally surrendered our sovereignty to the United Nations. The unconstitutional bombing of Libya places our Nation in subservience to the United Nations. United Nations resolution 1973 and the United Nation’s Declaration of (socialist) Rights do not trump the Constitution.

By Mark Van Schuyver

Not Another War!

2011-03-19T22:01:00.002-04:00

President Obama just committed us to yet another unjust and illegal war. Right now our military is bombing Libya. This war is unjust because we are not acting in self defense. It is illegal because, regardless of how evil Libya’s dictator is, our Constitution does not grant our government the authority to use force against other countries for any reason other than self defense.

United Nations resolution 1973 authorizing member states to attack Libya is not a justification for our involvement. UN Resolutions do not trump the US Constitution. If we as a nation want to legitimize pre-emptive war and other forms of military interventionism then we must first amend the Constitution to all allow it.

Our invasion of Afghanistan following 911 was a just and legal action because it was done in self defense. Our continued military actions against Al Qaeda and its affiliates in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and anywhere else they reside on this planet are just and legal uses of force because we are still acting in self defense. Our nation building activities in Afghanistan are illegal because our Constitution does not give our government the authority to nation build.

The invasion of Iraq was an unjust and illegal action because, no matter how evil their dictator, we were not acting in self defense. Our ongoing occupation of Iraq is illegal because our Constitution does not give our government the authority to occupy other nations and it does not authorize our government to engage in taxpayer funded nation building.

President Obama's brand new war with Libya is not motivated by self defense and it was not authorized by Congress. Mr. Obama's new war with Libya is therefore unconstitutional. The president's war with Libya is yet another unjust and illegal military intervention.

By Mark Van Schuyver

Cafe Hayek — where orders emerge

2011-03-17T11:40:00.001-04:00

Cafe Hayek — where orders emerge by Don Boudreaux on March 16, 2011

Running the risk of over-simplifying only a teeny bit, I propose that the key difference between the Keynesian/man-in-the-street view of the economic problem and a non-Keynesian view of the economic problem is the following: Keynesians/men-(and-women)-in-the-street sense that the dominant economic problem is super-abundance (and its attendant problem, excess capacity), while non-Keynesians understand that the dominant economic problem is, and will always be, the ubiquity of scarcity. . . (complete)

The 'Redevelopment' Hoax by Thomas Sowell

2011-03-16T08:09:00.000-04:00

The 'Redevelopment' Hoax by Thomas Sowell

Real Capitalism

2011-03-06T15:27:00.005-05:00

What would you call it if the government

established a single, very low flat tax that applied to all individuals and all businesses,
eliminated all tax breaks for all individuals and all businesses,
eliminated all subsidies (e.g. farm subsidies, ethanol subsidies, oil company subsidies, wind farm subsidies, green car subsidies, all subsidies gone)
eliminated all tariffs and other trade barriers,
eliminated all of the government alphabet bureaucracies and replaced them with strictly enforced private property rights so that any person or company who does damage to any other person or company’s property must pay those damages. (if you pollute you must pay)
eliminated all price controls,
privatized all government monopolies not expressly authorized by the Constitution, e.g. The Federal Reserve, Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, Social Security, Medicare, General Motors, and the public schools,
limited military action to national defense,
established sound money,
passed and enforced a balanced budget amendment, and
maintained rule of law?

Answer: Real Capitalism

By Mark Van Schuyver

Spending Restraint, Part II: Lessons from Canada, Ireland, Slovakia, and New Zealand

2011-02-25T20:20:00.000-05:00

Excellent video from Cato's Dan Mitchell: Restraint, Part II: Lessons from Canada, Ireland, Slovakia, and New Zealand

Central Economic Planning at its Worst by Ron Paul

2011-02-22T13:21:00.000-05:00

An excerpt: Without the Federal Reserve's massive expansion of credit throughout the 1990s and early 2000s, there could have been no excessive borrowing or explosion of subprime lending. Through easy credit, the Fed initiated the economic boom that created the dot-com bubble. When that bubble burst the Fed pumped additional liquidity into the system, which led to a new boom that created the housing bubble. And now the Fed's additional trillions of dollars in monetary pumping is creating yet another bubble. This is the exact opposite of stability in the marketplace and has nothing to do with free markets. It is central economic planning at its worst. . . (complete)

Atlas Shrugged Movie Trailer

2011-02-21T09:15:00.000-05:00

http://www.atlasshruggedpart1.com/trailer?gclid=CIKKi5-PkqcCFa1d7AodG2k2cg

ObamaCare by Any Other Name. . .

2011-02-20T00:02:00.000-05:00

House Republicans and Democrats started Friday morning's debate over whether to defund last year's healthcare law, and as part of this debate sparred over whether members should be allowed to call that law "ObamaCare." . . .

"So we call it what it is," he (Rep. Denny Rehberg) continued. "It is ObamaCare. It's a travesty. It is big government. It is not controlling healthcare costs, and it needs to be repealed and today we're going to try to defund it to the best of our ability. And if we're not successful this time, we're going to try again and again and again until we either have a Senate that's willing to pass it or a president that understands that we cannot do this to the American people." (complete)

Excellent!

2011-02-19T23:54:00.000-05:00

The GOP-led House voted today to block funding to implement the nation's health care law. . . . Specifically, the House voted to prohibit any funds be used by the Internal Revenue Service to carry out the law's mandate that Americans buy health insurance. The individual mandate, one of the law's key tenets, has been struck down by federal courts. . . (complete)

A Sure-Fire Solution to the Wisconsin Teacher’s Union Crisis

2011-02-18T21:49:00.001-05:00

Representatives of the Wisconsin Teacher’s Union and other public service unions in Wisconsin are right, the state government should honor its contracts. Governor Walker and the Wisconsin Legislature should recognize the existing union contracts and simply fire as many government workers as needed to balance the state budget. Better still Governor Walker and the Wisconsin Legislature should privatize all of the schools in Wisconsin and fire all of the public school teachers. This would go a long way toward eliminating the state's budget deficit and it would free Wisconsin school children from the pathetic yoke of a failed socialist education program.

Returning schools, and where possible other public services to the private sector will ensure excellence, innovation, and world class efficiencies via the tried and true mechanism of free market competition.

President Obama on track for a record federal deficit

2011-02-15T01:22:00.000-05:00

President Obama‘s budget, released Monday, was conceived as a blueprint for future spending, but it also paints the bleakest picture yet of the current fiscal year, which is on track for a record federal deficit and will see the government’s overall debt surpass the size of the total U.S. economy.

Washington Times: Mr. Obama‘s budget projects that 2011 will see the biggest one-year debt jump in history, or nearly $2 trillion, to reach $15.476 trillion by Sept. 30, the end of the fiscal year. That would be 102.6 percent of GDP - the first time since World War II that dubious figure has been reached.

And the budget projects the government will run a deficit of $1.645 trillion this year, topping 2009’s previous record by more than $230 billion. By contrast, 2007’s deficit was just $160 billion altogether. . . (complete)

USA Drops to 9th Place on Economic Freedom Index

2011-02-14T11:08:00.000-05:00

The United States’ economic freedom score is 77.8, making its economy the 9th freest in the 2011 Index. Its score is 0.2 point lower than last year, reflecting deteriorating business freedom, trade freedom, government spending, and monetary freedom. The U.S. is ranked 2nd out of three countries in the North America region. . .

Economic freedom is the fundamental right of every human to control his or her own labor and property. In an economically free society, individuals are free to work, produce, consume, and invest in any way they please, with that freedom both protected by the state and unconstrained by the state. In economically free societies, governments allow labor, capital and goods to move freely, and refrain from coercion or constraint of liberty beyond the extent necessary to protect and maintain liberty itself. - Index of Economic Freedom

Should President Obama Keep Raising Our Taxes?

2011-02-11T00:06:00.001-05:00

This year our government will spend 1.5 trillion dollars that we don't have. Our government will do this with borrowed money. This is borrowed money that our children and grandchildren will have to repay with interest.

This 1.5 trillion dollars of borrowed money is being used to pay for wasteful and unsustainable nanny state entitlements and interventionist military government programs that we do not need and cannot afford. Should we raise taxes to support this waste? Or, should we eliminate deficit spending and lower taxes on individuals and businesses to foster economic growth?

Did President Obama Raise Your Taxes?

2011-02-08T23:54:00.000-05:00

(CNSNews.com), an excert:

President Obama’s assertion on Sunday that he “didn’t raise taxes once” is “blatantly false,” a taxpayer watchdog group says. According to Americans for Tax Reform (ATR), President Obama has signed into law at least two dozen tax increases. The first one – a federal tobacco tax hike – came just 16 days into his presidency.

ATR says the $1 trillion health care overhaul alone added numerous taxes, including the individual mandate that requires most Americans to purchase health insurance or else pay a fine.

During the legislative debate, Obama and Democrats in Congress argued that a penalty for not carrying insurance is not a tax. But in recent attempts to defend Obamacare as constitutional, the Obama Justice Department has called the penalty a tax. The health care law’s employer mandate provision also should be considered a tax, ATR said. That provision requires companies to report all business-to-business sales of goods and services exceeding $600 to the Internal Revenue Service. In a bipartisan vote, the Senate recently voted to repeal the so-called 1099 provision, and Obama says he supports the repeal.

The health care law also includes a tax on medical device manufacturers, as well as a higher tax on withdrawals from health savings accounts and a cap on flexible spending accounts.

Other taxes in the health care law cited by ATR include a surtax on investment income, an excise tax on comprehensive health insurance plans, a hike the in the Medicare payroll tax and a tax on indoor tanning services. (See complete list of increases on your taxes) . . . (complete article) - CNSNews.com.

Can Our Nation Be Saved?

2011-02-07T12:39:00.000-05:00

Can Our Nation Be Saved? - By Economist Walter Williams. An excpert:

National debt is over $14 trillion, the federal budget deficit is $1.4 trillion and, depending on whose estimates are used, the unfunded liability or indebtedness of the federal government (mostly in the form of obligations for Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and prescription drugs) is estimated to be between $60 and $100 trillion.

Those entitlements along with others account for nearly 60 percent of federal spending. They are what Congress calls mandatory or non-discretionary spending. Then there's discretionary spending, half of which is for national defense. Each year, non-discretionary spending consumes a higher and higher percent of the federal budget. The spending path that Congress has chosen for the last half-century is unsustainable and will end up with economic collapse but little or nothing can be done about it unless . . . (complete)

Student Explains Obamanomics in 1 Minute

2011-02-05T20:25:00.000-05:00

Visualizing Obama's budget cuts. Student Explains Obamanomics in 1 Minute on YouTube

Federal Budget Cuts

2011-02-04T12:52:00.000-05:00

Author Unknown: The President ordered the cabinet to cut a whopping $100 million from the $3.5 trillion federal budget!

I'm so impressed by this sacrifice that I have decided to do the same thing with my personal budget. I spend about $4000 a month on groceries, medicine, bills, etc, but it's time to get out the budget cutting ax, go line by line through my expenses, and go to work.

I'm going to cut my spending at exactly the same ratio -1/35,000 of my total budget. After doing the math,it looks like instead of spending $4000 a month; I'm going to have to cut that number by twelve cents!

Yes, I'm going to have to get by with $3999.88, but that's what sacrifice is all about. I'll just have to do without some things, that are, frankly, luxuries.

I hope you'll try to cut back too. - Author Unknown

Socialism Vs Capitalism (reprinted for Jeff)

2011-01-16T23:56:00.003-05:00

Reprint from last year: Socialism and capitalism are opposites. Socialism is an economic system in which the government owns or directly controls the means of production and property in general. Capitalism is an economic system in which the means of production are privately owned and operated. Many politicians say that a blend of these two economic systems is the solution to the world’s problems. They call for a “mixed economy.” But mixing opposites is a recipe for disaster. Socialism and capitalism are like oil and water. Either the government owns and/or controls a business or private owners own and operate a business. Socialism or capitalism, there can be only one.

Broadly speaking there are two main types of socialism Marxist Socialism and National Socialism (and there are countless variations of each). Marxism is the form of socialism in which the government assumes ownership of the means of production, i.e. nationalization. This is the model that the Soviet Union (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics), China, Cuba, North Korea, and many other nations have embraced. Marx talked about socialism as a stage between capitalism and communism but in my opinion communism is a political party that favors full-blown socialism.

National Socialism is the form of socialism in which the government assumes control of the means of production without formally taking ownership (think post office, Fannie Mae before it was nationalized last year, and the Federal Reserve). This is the model employed by Mussolini in Italy and by Hitler in Germany. Mussolini didn’t want to call his system socialism. He used the terms corporatism and fascism. Hitler’s party was the National Socialist German Workers’ Party or NAZI Party for short. Hitler also used the term fascism to describe his form of socialism.

We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions. —Adolf Hitler, [144] 1927 speech.

On paper socialism looks great. It looks like utopia. You simply put a benevolent philosopher king into power and let him and his chosen few centrally plan all things toward the north star of “the greater good.” Unfortunately for socialists everywhere socialism does not work in the real world, just ask the North Koreans, the Cubans and the former East Germans. The greater the percentage of the means of production that is controlled by the government the lower the level of prosperity (i.e. greater good) the people enjoy (see Index of Economic Freedom).

To address this shortcoming modern day socialists (except for Chavez, Castro, Kim and a few others) have been forced to allow private ownership of at least some of the means of production. This has been the path of England, France and many other left leaning countries who may call themselves socialist but in fact are not. France, England, USA and most other Western nations are “mixed economies” who have socialized large segments of their markets favoring the National Socialist model while leaving other segments mostly in private hands. In other words these are market economies with a high percentage of socialized sectors and a high percentage of socialistic policies.

Those who argue for a “mixed economy” are in my opinion arguing for an inherently unstable and corrupt social system because capitalism and socialism are like oil and water. Either the government owns and/or controls a business or private owners own and operate a business.

Now consider this fact. Capitalism is not perfect but capitalism, even when poorly administered, is the system that has created more prosperity for more people than any system ever tried in the history of man kind. Socialism, even when expertly administered has never created prosperity. Socialism, whether Marxist Socialism or National Socialism has done more harm to more people than any system ever tried in the history of the world.

The battle lines are drawn. It's time to choose. Socialism or capitalism; slavery or freedom, There can be only one. Which shall it be?

Comprehensive List of Tax Hikes in Obamacare

2011-01-15T01:00:00.000-05:00

Next week, the U.S. House of Representatives will be voting on an historic repeal of the Obamacare law. While there are many reasons to oppose this flawed government health insurance law, it is important to remember that Obamacare is also one of the largest tax increases in American history. Below is a comprehensive list of the two dozen new or higher taxes that pay for Obamcare’s expansion of government spending and interference between doctors and patients. . .

Comprehensive List of Tax Hikes in Obamacare:

http://www.atr.org/files/files/011111PR-Obama%20Care%20Full%20Tax%20List(1).pdf

Liberty in decline; socialism/statism on the rise . . .

2011-01-13T21:35:00.000-05:00

Freedom in decline worldwide, Breitbart.com. An excerpt:

Global freedom declined for a fifth straight year in 2010 as authoritarian regimes dug in worldwide and crime and unrest plagued democracies like Mexico, a US watchdog said Thursday.

In "Freedom in the World 2011" the Washington-based Freedom House said it had documented the longest continuous period of decline since it began compiling the annual index nearly 40 years ago.

"A total of 25 countries showed significant declines in 2010, more than double the 11 countries exhibiting noteworthy gains," the group said.

"Authoritarian regimes like those in China, Egypt, Iran, Russia, and Venezuela continued to step up repressive measures with little significant resistance from the democratic world," it said.

The recent decline "threatens gains dating to the post-Cold War era in Africa, Latin America, Asia and the former Soviet bloc. . . " (Complete)

Social Security Fix

2011-01-12T17:48:00.000-05:00

A Letter from Dan Mitchell of the Cato Institute:

Here's a new mini-documentary explaining why personal accounts are the only way of dealing with Social Security's huge long-run unfunded liability while also giving workers a chance to enjoy a safer and more secure retirement.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRh5zKleh0I

Happy New Year,

Dan

Daniel J. Mitchell, Ph.D.

Senior Fellow
The Cato Institute
1000 Mass. Ave., NW
Wash., DC 20001
(202) 842-0200
dmitchell@cato.org
http://www.cato.org/
Read my blog at http://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/
Follow me on twitter at @danieljmitchell

Constitutional Chemotherapy

2011-01-06T23:13:00.000-05:00

I was asked this question by a dear friend recently: “What's with all the spending? What's with all the borrowing? What's with this take over of health care? What in the world is going on with our government?” To answer the question I handed him a copy of an essay that I wrote in 2007 entitled, "Constitutional Chemotherapy." Here it is.

Our great success as a nation and as a people is due to the fact that we in the United States have had one of the least intrusive governments in the history of the world. I believe that our amazing economic success is due to the fact that the Founders created a government that successfully established the rule of law (rather than the rule of tyrant or king) without much interference in the lives of the people, the means of production, and the free market in general. I think that our future as a free and productive society is at great risk now, not especially from this particular administration, but from the government itself because we have allowed our government to expand far, far beyond its constitutional mandate. I believe that the growth of government beyond its constitutional mandate is like a cancer in the body of our nation and that it must be reversed very soon or else we will, sooner or later, slide in to a socialist/totalitarian state.

We the people have delegated too much of our freedom to the local, state, and federal government. I believe that the current federal government and its abuses are only the latest contribution to a long and gradual surrender of our freedom toward a socialist/totalitarian system. I believe that this current administration, as deeply flawed as it is, is only a shadow of what we will face in 20 years regardless of which party is in power if this trend toward socialism/collectivism does not stop. I believe that our government officials have been able to get this far because we the people have been lazy. I believe that we the people have forgotten the Founders’ mandate of a limited government and Thomas Jefferson’s warning that “most bad government results from too much government.”

Even though the government does not produce anything and is not intended to produce anything we have forgotten this and have gradually and foolishly empowered it to control over 50% of the spending and a huge amount of the means of production. I believe that government transfer of wealth beyond its constitutional mandate by force is coercion pure and simple and cannot be justified by any legal or moral argument. I believe that there is nothing that government can do better than the free market can do it. The Founders knew this and they decreed that government interference must therefore be limited to those very, very few things that they identified as appropriate e.g. the military (see Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution for a list of those few things). I believe that our gradual surrender of the means of production, property rights, rule of law, and of our personal freedom to the government is fast eroding our personal liberty and our economic strength and if not checked will ultimately result in our fall into a socialist/collectivist/totalitarian state.

Now we have government that is expanding rapidly with each new administration and assuming unconstitutional powers at the request of liberals/progressives who demand “social justice,” and equal distribution of wealth. This is by liberals who obviously have no understanding of economics who do not realize that this will destroy all prosperity, destroy the free market, and destroy all real fairness of opportunity (i.e. the equal opportunity to prosper that is provided by economic freedom) and result ultimately in a socialist/totalitarian state.

Today we have a government wherein both parties operate in blatant violation of constitutional mandate by engaging in “legal” collusion with various business owners that result in unfair advantages and a disruption of the level playing field that is essential for the free market to work and to continue to generate prosperity. Both parties are guilty of creating unconstitutional and unsustainable entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare and of wealth redistribution in the form of subsidies, taxes, trade barriers. This is the opposite of the role of government envisioned by the Founders which is intended to keep the playing field level and enforce the rule of law.

Simply put, the problem is the government. We have allowed our government to expand beyond all rational and constitutional bounds. We have allowed our government to become something that it was expressly designed not to be. We are gradually allowing our government to rule us, the people. We have forgotten that our government was carefully designed to be of a strictly limited nature; of the people, for the people, and by the people. In other words, we have forgotten that government gets its mandate from the people rather than the other way around. Government was designed to serve us, not to be served by us.

So, I say we must use all of our smarts and personal influence and all of our political energy to reign in the federal, state, and local governments regardless of which party is in power. In my opinion the answer is to do all we can to limit government action to the powers given to it by the constitution and fiercely deny it control over anything outside of those boundaries. I believe that the growth of government has spread far beyond its constitutional mandate and that this growth is like a cancer in the body of our nation. In my opinion our government needs “constitutional chemotherapy.” If we want a healthy body politic and a healthy and free America we must trust in freedom, just as the Founders did. Or, as Lord Acton put it we must remember and act on this truth, Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end.

Mark Van Schuyver - 3/6/2007

Government Take Over of Health Care?

2011-01-04T16:32:00.000-05:00

President Obama has emphatically denied that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (known as ObamaCare) is a government take over of health care in the United States of America. Is his claim true? We think not. And we strongly urge the Congress and Mr. Obama to repeal this socialistic law.

First we need to acknowledge that approximately 50% of health care in America had already been taken over by government (socialized) prior to the passage of ObamaCare in the form of Medicare, Medicaid, Indian Health Care, Veteran’s Health Care, and a host other government run services. The remaining 50% of the health care industry was heavily regulated and hampered by government intervention prior to the passage of ObamaCare. Only a small percentage of the health care industry was operating within a free market context prior to the passage of ObamaCare. It is a fact that government had already taken majority control of the health care industry prior to ObamaCare. Government control and intervention into the health care industry prior to ObamaCare is, by the way, the reason why health care costs have risen dramatically each year while the cost of most other goods and services have fallen, stayed flat, or risen very slowly.

Now to the question at hand, does ObamaCare represent a government take over of health care? We think so. Let’s consider just a few of the ObamaCare mandates that will be imposed in 2014.

Under ObamaCare you will be forced to buy health insurance whether you want it or not and you will face fines and/or jail time if you fail to comply.

Under ObamaCare the insurance industry will be effectively socialized within the construct of new government run Health Insurance Exchanges.

Even if you are a single man with no children you will be forced to buy a policy that covers ambulatory patient services, emergency services, hospitalization, maternity and newborn care, mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment; prescription drugs; rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices; laboratory services; preventive and wellness services; chronic disease management; and pediatric services, including oral and vision care.

If you are a large employer (defined as at least 50 employees) and you do not want to provide health insurance to your employees, then you will pay a stiff fine for each employee.

The Secretary of Health and Human Services is authorized to use physician claims data to issue reports that measure the resources the physician uses, provide information on the quality of care the physician provides, and compare the resources the physician uses to those used by other physicians.

Health insurance companies will not be allowed to raise premiums to meet costs unless the increase is deemed “reasonable” by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, i.e. price controls.

The government will extract a fee of $2.3 billion annually from the pharmaceutical industry. Industry experts point out that this will reduce available funds for research. Economists note that a portion of this tax will be passed on to consumers.

The government will extract a fee of $2 billion annually from medical device makers. Industry experts point out that this will reduce available funds for research. Economists note that a portion of this tax will be passed on to consumers.

The government will extract a fee of $6.7 billion annually from insurance companies. Economists note that a portion of this tax will be passed on to consumers.

Compensation for insurance company CEOs will be capped under ObamaCare (wage controls). Economists warn that limiting compensation will provide industry executives with incentives to seek employment outside of the country.

President Obama continues to deny that theThe Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) is a government take over of health care in the United States of America. Is his claim true? We think not. And we strongly urge the Congress and Mr. Obama to repeal this destructive, socialistic law.

Mark Van Schuyver

Is Health Care a Right or Isn't It?

2011-01-04T09:26:00.000-05:00

By Ross Kaminsky. “In an October, 2008 debate against John McCain, Barack Obama said that health care 'should be a right for every American.'

In rights parlance, his assertion is one of a 'positive right' meaning that others may be compelled to provide a person's health care. This is distinguished from essentially every right laid out for Americans in our Constitution: these are 'negative rights,' meaning that they proscribe others from inhibiting you from exercising your right but do not otherwise require active cooperation of others. Your right to free speech does not require others to help you breathe; it simply requires them to leave you alone (except in a few very specific circumstances where your speech is likely to cause imminent harm to others, thus infringing on their negative right not to be killed, beaten, or robbed).

On the other hand, if health care is a right, that means that an American who for whatever reason does not have access to a doctor must be provided that access, whether that means redistributing taxpayer money to the would-be patient or even the potential of forcing a doctor to provide his services in an area ‘underserved’ by health care professionals.

The problem with Obama's positive right formulation, as with all positive rights, is that one never knows where such a right ends, if or when such a right might be curtailed when it conflicts with citizens' other (usually negative) rights. . .” (complete)

Moral or Immoral Government

2011-01-03T23:00:00.000-05:00

Economist Walter E. Williams, "My initial assumption is that we each own ourselves. I am my private property and you are yours. If we accept the notion that people own themselves, then it's easy to discover what forms of conduct are moral and immoral. Immoral acts are those that violate self-ownership. Murder, rape, assault and slavery are immoral because those acts violate private property. So is theft, broadly defined as taking the rightful property of one person and giving it to another.

If it is your belief that people do not belong to themselves, they are in whole or in part the property of the U.S. Congress, or people are owned by God, who has placed the U.S. Congress in charge of managing them, then all of my observations are simply nonsense.

Let's look at some congressional actions in light of self-ownership. Do farmers and businessmen have a right to congressional handouts? Does a person have a right to congressional handouts for housing, food and medical care?

First, let's ask: Where does Congress get handout money? One thing for sure, it's not from the Tooth Fairy or Santa Claus nor is it congressmen reaching into their own pockets. The only way for Congress to give one American one dollar is to first, through the tax code, take that dollar from some other American. It must forcibly use one American to serve another American. Forcibly using one person to serve another is one way to describe slavery. As such, it violates self-ownership. . . " (complete)

Tyranny by Decree

2011-01-03T17:32:00.000-05:00

By Robert Knight: Over the past year, it has become obvious that what leftists cannot win at the ballot box, they will accomplish via bureaucratic dictate. After the U.S. Senate in 2009 rejected the massive cap-and-tax scheme on carbon credits, the Obama administration rode to the rescue of global-warming fanatics. On Dec. 7, 2009, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lisa P. Jackson issued a ruling that the EPA would begin regulating five "anthropogenic" (man-made) greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide, the air we exhale. The EPA based its finding on research from the now discredited U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and rejected at least 10 petitions for reconsideration.

So the EPA is now preparing to hound power plants and refineries by drafting carbon-emissions limits by July 2011, with a final rule due by May 2012. Never mind the faltering U.S. economy and China's growing economic power. The greenhouse gods must be appeased.

Not to be outdone, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in December began regulating the Internet. Ignoring a recent court decision and Congress' pointed refusal to grant the FCC this power, the Democrat-dominated body simply voted 3-2 on Dec. 21 (the darkest day of the year) to adopt "net neutrality" rules.

They stopped just short of redefining the Internet as a telecommunication carrier, much like telephone services. But the FCC's move puts the federal government in a position to begin meddling with content, something the left has salivated over ever since President Obama began stacking the FCC staff with veterans of Marxist Robert McChesney's Free Press think tank and the far-left Center for American Progress.

Finally, the dreaded "death panels" are back. Recall that on Christmas Eve 2009, Nevada Democratic Sen. Harry Reid's U.S. Senate rammed through the national health care system takeover. They ignored public opposition and mocked the idea that federal bureaucrats would institute end-of-life counseling. But, in deference to the public's growing alarm, they took out Section 1233.

It was a bait-and-switch. A year later, on Christmas Day 2010, the New York Times broke the story that Donald Berwick, Mr. Obama's unvetted czar who heads the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, issued a rule to pay doctors for end-of-life counseling. That was the essence of Section 1233. The Times acknowledged that the counseling "may include advance directives to forgo aggressive life-sustaining treatment." Exactly.

This is the same New York Times that devoted a lengthy article in 2009 disparaging The Washington Times editorial board, the American Spectator, Sarah Palin and health-policy expert Betsy McCaughey for sounding the alarm on death panels.

This time around, New York Timesreporter Robert Pear, acting like an actual reporter for a reputable news service, related that supporters of the policy fear the public will find out what they've done. Rep. Earl Blumenauer, Oregon Democrat, and Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV, West Virginia Democrat, had urged the adoption of the policy under the Medicare wellness benefit.

As Mr. Pear reports:" After learning of the administration's decision, Mr. Blumenauer's office celebrated 'a quiet victory,' but urged supporters not to crow about it."

"While we are happy with the result, we won't be shouting it from the rooftops," Mr. Blumenauer's office said in a November e-mail. "We would ask that you not broadcast this accomplishment out to any of your lists, even if they are 'supporters' ... Thus far, it seems that no press or blogs have discovered it, but we will be keeping a close watch and may be calling on you if we need a rapid, targeted response. The longer this goes unnoticed, the better our chances of keeping it."

With such allies, the "most transparent administration in history" is seizing ever more power by bureaucratic fiat and scheming to keep it from the public.

In the American Spectator, Phil Klein reported that the 2,700-page health care bill includes more than 1,000 power-granting references to the Health and Human Services (HHS) secretary. Here's the breakdown: The secretary "shall" (700 references); the secretary "may" (200) and the secretary "determines" (139).

This gives HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, who issued threatening letters to insurance companies during the health care debate, enormous unilateral power to set policy.

No wonder Mr. Blumenauer's office doesn't want to let the cat out of the bag on the death panels. No wonder the FCC kept the discussion of their Internet takeover behind closed doors. No wonder Mr. Reid and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's Congress cheered on the EPA's massive power grab.

The incoming Congress has several ways to deal with these usurpations. They can defund any of the rogue agencies or portions of their budgets that fuel the policies. The 1996 Congressional Review Act also gives Congress the authority to veto bureaucratic rulemaking that exceeds authorized powers.

The new House should propose legislation and hold hearings as soon as possible, before the sticky web of bureaucratic tendrils gets too dense to penetrate. Knowing they're on a shorter leash, bureaucrats at the EPA, HHS and FCC and countless other agencies are busy concocting ever more rules as the new year dawns. Tyranny by decree is so much easier than having to persuade the people.

Robert Knight is senior writer for Coral Ridge Ministries and a senior fellow for the American Civil Rights Union. © Copyright 2011 The Washington Times, LLC

Reprinted by permission

Free Wesley Snipes!

2010-12-23T21:48:00.000-05:00

http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/8182783

Trickle Up Economics

2010-12-23T18:48:00.000-05:00

http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/8115543/

Cafe Hayek — where orders emerge

2010-12-21T10:24:00.000-05:00

Cafe Hayek — where orders emerge

Obama tells lawmakers not passing tax deal could end presidency, Dem says - The Hill's Blog Briefing Room

2010-12-17T00:39:00.001-05:00

Obama tells lawmakers not passing tax deal could end presidency, Dem says - The Hill's Blog Briefing Room

Obama's push shows that the president is going to the mat in order to push through Congress the compromise brokered with Republicans.

RealClearPolitics - Video - McConnell: Dems Using "Christmas Break As An Inducement" To Pass Omnibus

2010-12-17T00:17:00.001-05:00

RealClearPolitics - Video - McConnell: Dems Using "Christmas Break As An Inducement" To Pass Omnibus

"I would hope that it would make sense on a bipartisan basis, this one-page continuing resolution on Feb 18th as an alternative to this 2,000-page monstrosity that spends a half a billion dollars a page," McConnell said on the Senate floor (here)

Wesley Snipes, Charlie Rangel and the Rule of Law

2010-12-11T19:46:00.003-05:00

Rule of Law is the principle whereby society is governed according to widely known and accepted rules followed by all, the governed as well as those governing. The Rule of Law is not a specific law; rather it is a general standard by which all laws can be measured.

Rule of Man is the opposite of Rule of Law. Rule of Man is a construct wherein one man or group of men make and enforce laws upon others that they themselves are not subject to. King George, for example, was not subject to the same laws as were his national and colonial subjects. North Korean Dictator Kim Jong Il is not subject to the laws that he imposes upon the people. Socialist dictator Fidel Castro does not have to slow down in school zones.

Rule of Law is one of the key principles upon which our Constitutional Republic is founded. In the United States any legislation passed by our elected officials applies to the law makers as well as the unelected citizenry. In the United States, no one, not even Steven Seagal is above the law.

This brings us to the curious case of Wesley Snipes and the Right Honorable Congressman Charlie Rangel. Actor Wesley Snipes was was convicted in an Ocala, Florida court for failure to file tax returns from 1999 through 2001. Each of the misdemeanor counts carried a maximum one-year prison term. Last week Mr. Snipes reported to a federal prison to serve a three year sentence.

Meanwhile Congressman Rangel was found guilty by House investigators of having not paid taxes for several years on property that he owns in the Dominican Republic, for filing misleading financial statements, and for improperly seeking money from corporate interests for a college center bearing his name, and setting up a campaign office in a subsidized, New York apartment designated for residential use. As punishment Mr. Rangel received a lecture from Speaker Nancy Pelosi last week. The very next day the Congressman was back at work doing the peoples’ business.

There is little doubt that Charlie Rangel would be in jail right now if he were not a member of the House of Representatives. It is a good bet that Wesley Snipes would be free right now if he had been a member of Congress instead of an action hero. So far it appears that that the Rule of Law, the principle whereby society is governed according to widely known and accepted rules followed by all, the governed as well as those governing, does not apply to Wesley Snipes and Charley Rangel.

President Obama’s Excellent Decision Not to Raise Taxes

2010-12-07T21:12:00.001-05:00

President Obama has wisely decided not to raise taxes on Americans regardless of income level. This is a good policy decision especially in a recession. For this wise decision he deserves much praise. Way to go Mr. President!

Of course we are wondering why Mr. Obama changed his mind on this important issue. Perhaps he has been listening to small business owners and their employees who stand to lose big time if taxes go up. Maybe Mr. Obama has been rereading Karl Marx who said a progressive income tax is a prerequisite for communism and has realized that Karl’s socialist ideology is not so great. Perhaps Mr. Obama listened to the voters who overwhelmingly voted against the massive tax, borrow and spend policies he has advanced in his first two years in office. Who knows why he did it but thank goodness that he did. Class warfare is no way to advance a free society.

This is the first in what we hope will be a series of rational economic decisions by our president. We hope that a massive reduction in spending and wealth redistribution, dismantling of nanny state entitlements, and a repeal of ObamaCare will soon follow. Time will tell but on this day, hats off to President Obama for making the wise decision not to raise taxes on any American. Way to go Mr. President!

Why Keynesians are Wrong

2010-12-04T23:19:00.000-05:00

Here's a new video explaining why Keynesians are wrong. It shows that consumer spending is a consequence of growth, not a cause of growth. Looking at the difference between gross domestic product and gross domestic income, the 5-minute mini-documentary exposes the flaw inherent in Keynesian stimulus schemes.

Also, the Chairmen of President Obama's Fiscal Commission have put together a report that purports to be a serious combination of spending cuts and tax increases. Yet government spending, according to the Commission's numbers, would climb from about $3.5 trillion in 2010 to more than $5 trillion in 2020 - meaning government spending would increase about twice as fast as inflation.

The video in this blog post explains that the budget can be balanced without tax increases through spending restraint: http://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2010/10/04/heres-how-to-balance-the-budget/.

And the video in this blog post looks at the bigger issue, explaining that America's long-run fiscal problem is too much spending and that debt and deficits are merely symptoms of that underlying problem: http://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2009/12/15/the-problem-is-spending-not-deficits/

I hope you find this information useful. Please don't hestitate to contact me if you have any questions or comments. And feel free to share the videos with interested parties.

Daniel J. Mitchell, Ph.D.
Senior Fellow
The Cato Institute
1000 Mass. Ave., NW
Wash., DC 20001
(202) 842-0200
dmitchell@cato.org

www.cato.org

Our Progressive (i.e. socialist) President Obama . . .

2010-11-26T23:44:00.002-05:00

Gee whiz, the European socialistic welfare states are finding it impossible to provide everything for everybody for free. What a shock! And who would ever imagine that borrowing billions of dollars to pay for utopian, socialist promises might end in disaster?

But, oh my, isn’t that failing European welfare state model the very same model that our Progressive (i.e. socialist) President Obama, Speaker Reid, and Madam Pelosi are pursuing right here, right now in the USA? My goodness, I wonder what will happen to us if we continue to tax, borrow, spend, print fiat money, destroy the private sector, and redistribute wealth at an unsustainable and exponential rate in this European Socialist pattern? But hey, this is America, surely the outcome of OUR socialist policies will be different than the disaster now being experienced by our socialistic European friends. . . Don't ya' think?

European finance officials set the stage for an Irish aid package they hope to complete Sunday, betting that billions of Euros for the country's beleaguered banks and strained public finances will restore calm to the euro zone.

But they struggled to rise above broad fears that the debt crisis has already trampled Ireland on its way to Portugal and even Spain—the euro-zone's fourth-largest economy, representing about 10% of the currency bloc's economic activit. . . (Complete) - WSJ

------------------------------------------------------

More than 100,000 Irish citizens took to the streets of Dublin today to protest against the international bailout and four years of austerity. Despite overnight snow storms and freezing temperatures, huge crowds have gathered in O'Connell Street to demonstrate against the cuts aimed at driving down Ireland's colossal national debt. . .

Placards carried by the marchers reflect the mood of anger and humiliation at having to be bailed out by the EU and IMF. . . (complete) - by Henry McDonald, guardian.co.uk

Invasion of the (carcinogenic?) Body Scanners

2010-11-26T01:39:00.000-05:00

Never mind the puerile TSA screeners giggling at your naked body. It turns out that the things may pose serious health concerns. In a letter to John Pistole, administrator of TSA, New Jersey Congressman Rush Holt, a scientist and the Chairman of the House Select Intelligence Oversight Panel, raised the possibility that the machines might be carcinogenic.

In March, the Congressional Biomedical Caucus (of which I am a co-chair) hosted a presentation on this technology by TSA, as well as a briefing by Dr. David Brenner of Columbia University on the potential health effects of “back scatter” x-ray devices. As Dr. Brenner noted in his presentation and in subsequent media interviews, the devices currently in use and proposed for wider deployment this year currently deliver to the scalp “20 times the average dose that is typically quoted by TSA and throughout the industry.” (complete) by James Ridgeway

The Sheeple Don't Opt Out . . .

2010-11-25T01:08:00.000-05:00

The controversy over new security measures at airport checkpoints -- which some feared would boil over Wednesday, one of the year's busiest travel days -- instead didn't even reach a simmer.

Critics had declared the day before Thanksgiving "National Opt-Out Day" and urged travelers selected to undergo full body scans to refuse to subject themselves to the advanced imaging technology. - CNN (complete)

Don't Touch My Junk

2010-11-24T09:30:00.000-05:00

http://www.optoutday.com/

Ron Paul: Crotch Groped by TSA, Calls for Boycott of Airlines

2010-11-23T23:49:00.001-05:00

Appearing on the Alex Jones Show today, Texas Congressman Ron Paul expressed his outrage and disgust with the TSA and its unconstitutional naked body scanners and genital groping under the transparent pretense of protecting the American people from terrorists in distant caves. . .

He (Dr. Paul) said he believes a boycott of the airlines will be necessary if we are going to force the government to back down and stop acting like a sexual predator. “I am going to be doing everything conceivable to try to change these rules because they are not making us safer, they aren’t better for us – it’s just to enhance the power of the state.” (complete)

Quantitative Easing Explained

2010-11-22T11:25:00.001-05:00

Click here to see Quantitative Easing Explained

Debunking White House Pro-Tax Increase Propaganda

2010-11-11T21:49:00.002-05:00

The Obama Administration wants higher tax rates on investors, entrepreneurs, small business owners, and other so-called rich people next year. The White House even released a pro-tax increase video narrated by Austan Goolsbee of the Council of Economic Advisers.

But the Obama Administration's video is riddled with errors, as explained in a rebuttal video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nri1yH16168

Daniel J. Mitchell, Ph.D.

Senior Fellow

The Cato Institute

http://www.cato.org/

A Good Start!

2010-11-10T22:43:00.000-05:00

"A White House commission laid out a sweeping plan to cut the federal budget deficit by hundreds of billions a year by targeting sacrosanct areas of U.S. tax and spending policy, such as Social Security benefits, middle-class tax breaks and defense spending.

Among the controversial proposals, the plan in its current form would end or cap a wide range of breaks relied on by the middle class, including the deduction for home-mortgage interest. It would tax capital gains and dividends at the higher rates now levied on wage income. To compensate, one version of the plan would dramatically lower and simplify individual rates, to 9%, 15% and 24%.

For businesses, the plan would significantly lower the corporate tax rate—from a current top rate of 35% to as low as 26%—but also eliminate a number of deductions. It would make permanent the research and development tax credit. Overall, the plan would cut the federal deficit by $3.8 trillion by 2020." WSJ (complete)

A Post Mid-Term Election Letter to President Obama

2010-11-02T23:09:00.003-04:00

Dear Mr. Obama,

The midterm election defeat suffered tonight by the Democratic Party is a referendum on the socialist policies that you have advanced during your almost two years in office. With this landslide defeat there can be no doubt that the American People reject socialism. I therefore implore you to listen to the people and reject socialism too. I implore you to embrace the Founder’s vision of limited government, personal liberty, and economic freedom.

You might be thinking, “what’s in it for me Mr. Citizen?” Well, sir, I humbly suggest that what’s in it for you is re-election in 2012 and an even bigger place in the history books. In that spirit I offer this revolutionary re-election strategy for you.

Do everything in your power to make the Bush tax cuts permanent for everyone
Swear on your honor never to raise taxes in any form on individuals or companies
Advocate for and sign into law a very low flat tax (12% or less) on individuals and reduce the corporate tax rate to match
Swear on your honor never to allow another bailout to individuals, corporations, or states no matter what
Stop all of the “stimulus” projects and use any remaining funds to pay against the deficit
Swear on your honor never to do another Keynesian “stimulus” program ever again no matter what
Place an immediate hiring freeze on all government jobs
Return the automobile industry, the finance industry, the student loan industry, the banking industry, the insurance industry, and the health care industry to the private sector
Swear on your honor never to nationalize or take control of any private sector property or business ever again
Privatize Freddy Mac and Fannie Mae
Advocate for and sign a balanced budget bill
Advocate for and sign a repeal of the health care bill (The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, aka ObamaCare)
Advocate for and sign a repeal of the finacial "reform" act
Advocate for and sign into law a Social Security and Medicare “lock box” that makes it a crime for Congress to take money from this fund for any purpose other than paying Social Security and Medicare obligations
Privatize Social Security and Medicare as quickly as possible
Return Medicaid to the States
Eliminate all trade barriers and tariffs
Privatize the public schools
Eliminate the Department of Education and as many of the “alphabet” agencies as possible.
Allow direct letter drop competition to the post office
Eliminate the Federal Reserve
Return the currency to a commodity backed standard
Swear on your honor not to advocate for or sign any law that violates the sanctity of the bill of rights
Return all land that is owned by the Federal Government to the States
Pursue the war on Al-Qaida and its Affiliates with all means necessary but get our main army out of Iraq and Afghanistan ASAP

Thank you for listening to our referendum on your policies Mr. President and thank you for considering my revolutionary re-election strategy. This is, in my opinion, a wonderful opportunity for you to make even more (and much better) history by rejecting socialism and embracing the Founder’s vision of limited government, personal liberty, and economic freedom.

Sincerely Yours,

Mark Van Schuyver

Citizen of these United States of America

State of the Union - November 1st, 2010 . . .

2010-11-01T23:01:00.000-04:00

"The number of Americans who say things are going badly in the country, at 75 percent, is higher than it has been on the eve of any midterm election since the question was first asked in the mid-1970s, according to a new national poll . . .

The top concern remains unemployment, with 58 percent saying it's the most important economic issue facing the country today, followed by the deficit at 20 percent, and taxes and mortgages tied at 8 percent each. . . (complete)" - CNN Wire Staff

Big government kills consumer choice, then forces compliance

2010-10-28T21:53:00.000-04:00

"The hallmark of a free society is that unless specifically prohibited, one can presume to be able to do as one pleases. In free societies, citizens therefore possess discretion except as specifically proscribed by law, while government possesses discretion only where specifically empowered by law. This is why in free societies, most laws are proscriptive rather than prescriptive in nature. . .

How does a free society draw a line between activity that government should stay out of and activity over which government can legitimately intervene? Luckily, the economic theory of market failure provides guidance. . . (complete)" By David C. Rose

Obamacare's Unkeepable Promises

2010-10-28T13:07:00.001-04:00

"We are witnessing the unmistakable collapse of an American presidency. While this may not yet be irreversible, it certainly was predictable and preventable. Chief among its causes has been the unbridled hubris that prompted this president to force Obamacare, the government takeover of the finest health care system in the world, against the clear will of 'we the people' while turning his back on the free-market principles that once made us the most prosperous nation on earth. (complete)" - By Dr. Milton R. Wolf

Employers Bracing for Higher Tax Withholding

2010-10-27T23:21:00.000-04:00

"Employers in the U.S. are starting to warn their workers to prepare for slimmer paychecks if Congress fails to vote on an extension of Bush-era tax cuts. . . tax rates will revert to higher levels dating from June 2001.

For a married couple with an income of $80,000, that would drain an extra $221.48 in withholding from a semi-monthly paycheck, according to calculations by the Tax Institute at H&R Block. Married individuals earning $240,000 a year would lose an additional $557.78 to withholding in a single semi-monthly paycheck. The Tax Institute at H&R Block calculated federal tax rates for single-income earners and married taxpayers without children. . .

If Congress fails to act, income tax rates will revert to higher levels dating from June 2001. . .

Allowing the tax cuts to expire, even temporarily, would deal a blow to disposable income and could curtail the consumer spending that accounts for about 70 percent of the economy, said Alec Phillips, a Washington-based economist. . . (complete)" - Timothy R. Homan

The Tempting Path of Protectionism

2010-10-27T23:10:00.000-04:00

"The Obama administration is playing with fire when it tries to bully other countries like Mexico and China to satisfy protectionist interest groups in the United States. It might be worth recalling how the Tariff Act of 1930 - still the statutory basis of U.S. trade policy - increased costs for consumers and businesses, devastated trade and plunged the Western world deeper into the depression that was already under way. Focused exclusively on domestic politics, President Hoover and members of Congress triggered an international catastrophe. (complete)" - Jim Powell

The Death of Capitalism has been Greatly exaggerated

2010-10-27T15:17:00.000-04:00

"The Ford Motor Company is proving that stories about the death of capitalism have been greatly exaggerated. . . In February 2009, Ford was the only one of the Big Three American auto giants to turn down federal bailout money. At the time, we noted that this would establish an ideal test case, pitting GM and Chrysler - the wards of the state - against family-run Ford representing private enterprise. Twenty-one months later, Ford is pumping out exciting new models, matching the Japanese in quality, expanding its market, decreasing its debt and creating jobs. (complete)" - The Washington Times

Medicare Advantage Will Suffer Under Obamacare

2010-10-27T13:46:00.000-04:00

"Seniors got a raw deal in the new health care law. Rather than reform Medicare the right way, Congress pursued a path that ignores current problems in the program and creates new ones. The best way forward for seniors and all other Americans is repeal, so that Congress can get health care right. . ." (complete) - Kathryn Nix

Yet Another Round of "Stimulus" Spending!

2010-10-27T13:00:00.000-04:00

"The Federal Reserve is close to embarking on another round of monetary stimulus next week, against the backdrop of a weak economy and low inflation—and despite doubts about the wisdom and efficacy of the policy among economists and some of the Fed's own decision makers. (complete)." - Jon Hilsentrath & Jonathan Cheng

Debt Has Increased $5 Trillion Since Speaker Pelosi Vowed, ‘No New Deficit Spending’

2010-10-25T14:11:00.000-04:00

"When Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) gave her inaugural address as speaker of the House in 2007, she vowed there would be 'no new deficit spending.' Since that day, the national debt has increased by $5 trillion, according to the U.S. Treasury Department.

'After years of historic deficits, this 110th Congress will commit itself to a higher standard: Pay as you go, no new deficit spending,' Pelosi said in her speech from the speaker’s podium. 'Our new America will provide unlimited opportunity for future generations, not burden them with mountains of debt.'" - CNSNews.com (complete)

Leftists, Progressives and Socialists

2010-10-22T23:44:00.000-04:00

"One of the greatest sources of confusion and deception is the difference between leftists, progressives, socialists, communists and fascists. I thought about this as I caught a glimpse of the Oct. 2 'One Nation' march on Washington. The participants proudly marched with banners, signs and placards reading ;'Socialists,' 'Ohio U Democratic Socialists,' 'International Socialists Organization,' 'Socialist Party USA,' 'Build A Socialist Alternative' and other signs expressing support for socialism and communism. They had stands where they sold booklets under the titles of 'Marxism and the State,' 'Communist Manifesto,' 'Four Marxist Classics,' 'The Road to Socialism' and similar titles. . ." (complete) - by Walter Williams

Government Intervention in Health Care Increases Costs

2010-10-22T19:48:00.000-04:00

"The Council for Affordable Health Insurance (CAHI) released its annual report on health insurance mandates in the states. They report that mandated benefits—i.e., medical procedures that states require insurance providers to cover—across the 50 states are on the rise, jumping from 2,133 in 2009 to 2,156 in 2010. But that’s just part of the story. The report also shows that mandated benefits increase the cost of health insurance and by how much. This should come as no surprise. Requiring insurers to offer a higher value product comes at a higher expense. . ." (complete)

Government Intervention in Health Care Increases Costs The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.

Hoover, FDR and Clinton Tax Increases: A Brief Historical Lesson

2010-10-21T22:40:00.000-04:00

"The obvious reason to prevent a tax hike by extending current tax rates is that doing so will prevent further economic harm to an already flat economy. How do we know that tax increases will cause economic harm? Three examples: 1932, 1937 and 1993.

After the 1929 stock market crash, the Smoot-Hawley tariff of 1930 raised import prices and more importantly threw a bucket of cold water on global trade flows, helping send the economy into deep depression. The economy had very little chance to recover. Along with gross and ongoing monetary policy mismanagement, President Hoover raised taxes in 1932. The consequences were devastating. As Alan Reynolds points out . . . (here)" - by David Weinberger

Hoover, FDR and Clinton Tax Increases: A Brief Historical Lesson The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.

Obamacare Fails to Halt Rising Premiums

2010-10-21T22:32:00.000-04:00

"A new Hewitt Associates study shows that insurance costs will continue to rise for 2011. The study projects an 8.8 percent average premium increase for employers, compared with a 6.9 percent rate jump in 2010. Additionally, employee contributions toward health coverage are expected to soar by $2,209, or 22.5 percent. This is up 12.4 percent from 2010, when employees contributed $1,966, the study said.

'Employers can expect 2011 health care cost increases to be at their highest levels in five years,' the study said. This report and other recent health economic projections [which] have essentially obliterated the claim that health insurance costs would drop with passage of Obamacare. . ." - Kathryn Nix

Side Effects: Obamacare Fails to Halt Rising Premiums The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.

Obamacare Hurts Low-Income Workers

2010-10-21T22:22:00.001-04:00

"With a struggling economy and stagnant unemployment rate, the last thing the United States needs is any public policy that will hurt job growth. Unfortunately, Obamacare’s new federally mandated, essential benefits package will diminish new job opportunities, especially for low-income workers. . ." Kathryn Nix

Side Effects: Obamacare Hurts Low-Income Workers The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.

Obama, Tax Hikes, Foreclosures and Downward Spirals

2010-10-21T13:10:00.001-04:00

"Despite an economy that hasn’t responded to his record deficit spending – otherwise known as the 'stimulus' – Obama and his talking heads still oppose maintaining the Bush cuts. Any such opposition, however, is rooted far more in demagoguery than in economics. In truth, the coming tax hikes will hurt the economy in many ways, including exacerbating the foreclosure crisis and ensuring a bad economy for years on end." - Obama, Tax Hikes, Foreclosures and Downward Spirals

Stop the Spending Mr. President!

2010-10-20T09:29:00.000-04:00

$26.2 Trillion: Projected Federal Debt in 2020. (OMB, 7/23/10)

$13.6 Trillion: Current National Debt. (U.S. Treasury Department, Accessed 10/19/10)

$8.5 Trillion: Cumulative Deficits Caused By President Obama’s Proposed Budget, FY2011-2020. (OMB, 7/23/10)

$3.9 Trillion: Total Cost Of The Democrats’ Tax Hike To Taxpayers. (Joint Committee On Taxation, 8/6/10)

$3.0 Trillion: Amount Added To The National Debt Since Obama Took Office. (U.S. Treasury Department, Accessed 10/19/10)

$2.5 Trillion: True Cost Of ObamaCare Once Fully Implemented. (Sen. Max Baucus, Floor Remarks, 12/2/09)

$1.42 Trillion: Federal Budget Deficit For FY2009 – Highest In U.S. History. (Congressional Budget Office, 10/7/10)

$1.29 Trillion: Federal Budget Deficit For FY2010 – Second Highest In U.S. History. (Congressional Budget Office, 10/7/10)

$868.4 Billion: American Debt Held By China. (U.S. Treasury Department, Accessed 10/19/10)

$831 Billion: Net Interest Payment On Our National Debt In 2020 Due To Obama’s Budget. (OMB, 7/23/10)

$814 Billion: Price Tag Of Obama’s Failed Stimulus. (Bloomberg, 8/20/10)

$575 Billion: Amount Of Medicare Cuts In ObamaCare. (CMS Chief Actuary Richard S. Foster, Memo, 4/22/10)

$569.2 Billion: Amount Of Taxes In ObamaCare. (Letter to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, 3/18/10)

$10 Billion: The Cost Of The Teacher Union Bailout. (The Washington Post, 10/8/10)

$54 Million: Amount Of Stimulus Funds Spent On A Napa Valley Wine Train. (ABC News’ “Good Morning America,” 2/2/10)

$18 Million: Cost Of The Stimulus Website Recovery.org. (ABC News’ “The Note“ Blog, 7/8/09)

$43,000: Your Share Of The National Debt. (“The Daily History of the Debt Results,” TreasuryDirect, Accessed 10/19/10; U.S. Census Bureau, www.census.gov, Accessed 10/1910)

$1,761: Cost To American Families Per Year As A Result Of Cap And Trade. (CBS News' "Taking Liberties" Blog, 9/16/09)

$1,540: The Amount Of The Tax Hike The Average Middle Class Family Will See As A Result Of The Democrats’ Tax Hike. (Tax Foundation, 8/1/10)

Source: http://www.gop.com/index.php/briefing/comments/obama_by_the_numbers

Big Brother is Watching UK

2010-10-20T09:05:00.000-04:00

"Every email, phone call and website visit is to be recorded and stored after the Coalition Government (UK) revived controversial Big Brother snooping plans. . . .

That will allow the security and police authorities to track every phone call, email, text message and website visit made by the public. . . The information will include who is contacting whom, when and where and which websites are visited . . ." - Tom Whitehead, Telegraph.co.uk (complete story)

ObamaCare’s Unseen Costs

2010-10-16T19:42:00.000-04:00

Taxes will go up under the new health care law—and the costs will be more than you think. . . - Peter Suderman, Reason.com

The Obama, Reid, Pelosi Spending Disaster

2010-10-15T23:51:00.000-04:00

The Obama administration said Friday the federal deficit hit a near-record $1.3 trillion for the just-completed budget year.

That means the government had to borrow 37 cents out of every dollar it spent as tax revenues continued to lag while spending on food stamps and unemployment benefits went up as joblessness neared double-digit levels in a struggling economy. . . Yahoo News

The Rahn Curve and the Growth-Maximizing Level of Government

2010-10-10T21:58:00.001-04:00

In this Video Dan Mitchell, Sr. Fellow Cato Institute, explains how big government destroys value in our society and how smaller government maximizes growth and prosperity.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uj6lRFXC5rA&feature=channel

Stimulating the Dead

2010-10-07T23:34:00.001-04:00

According to the Social Security Administration’s Inspector General, $18 million dollars in “stimulus” money went to 72,000 people who are already dead. Another $4.3 million went to 17,000 or more prison inmates. These payments were part of the government's massive $787 billion dollar Keynesian “stimulus” package that President Obama signed into law in February 2009. We assume that few if any jobs were created when the dead received their “stimulus” cash. With unemployment still hovering near 10% it’s safe to say that the living remain equally un-stimulated.

The Flat Tax: How it Works and Why it is Good for America

2010-10-07T23:09:00.000-04:00

Cato Institute Sr. Fellow Dan Mitchell explains the benefits of the flat tax.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhUOpNve1bY&feature=channel

It's Simple to Balance The Budget Without Higher Taxes

2010-10-05T10:00:00.000-04:00

In this latest video from the Center for Freedom and Prosperity, Dan Mitchell takes on the establishment's claim that you can't have a balanced budget without raising taxes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xezWd7VU2Ug

Increases In U.S. Worker Productivity, More Than China’s Currency, Responsible For Loss Of U.S. Jobs

2010-10-04T15:32:00.000-04:00

Increases In U.S. Worker Productivity, More Than China’s Currency, Responsible For Loss Of U.S. Jobs

Doctor Shortage Projected to hit 63,000 in First Year of ObamaCare

2010-10-02T09:26:00.000-04:00

What will happen in 2015 when ObamaCare kicks in and the government uses tax payer money to provide 68 million or more currently uninsured people with health insurance in one fail swoop? Economics 101 tells us that demand will vastly outstrip supply and the result will be a drastic shortage of doctors resulting in diminished services for everyone. That is exactly what is predicted by the Rand Corporation, the Institute of Medicine, and The Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC).

"While previous projections showed a baseline shortage of 39,600 doctors in 2015, current estimates bring that number closer to 63,000, with a worsening of shortages through 2025," The Association of American Medical Colleges said.

"The United States already was struggling with a critical physician shortage and the problem will only be exacerbated as 32 million Americans acquire health care coverage, and an additional 36 million people enter Medicare." - AAMC

How to meet the instant demand for 63,000 physicians the nation does not have? The AAMC recommends going back to the government for more taxpayer dollars to subsidize the education of a whole lot more medical students. That plan will require huge tax increases because the projected shortage of 63,000 doctors is just for year-one of ObamaCare. Shortages in doctors will rise rapidly under ObamaCare . The AAMC says we will need at least 15% more new doctors to keep up.

ObamaCare is a utopian idea that promises everything for everyone at no cost to anyone. Economics 101 tells us that this is an impossible claim. ObamaCare will cost far more than the current system. For starters more than 20 new ObamaCare taxes are about to hit your wallet. Shortages will result and everyone’s services will be diminished in 2015 when 68 million people suddenly demand medical services for which the nation is 63,000 doctors short of being able to supply.

30,000 McDonald’s Workers May Lose Health Coverage Because of ObamaCare

2010-09-30T23:53:00.000-04:00

According to the Wall Street Journal 30,000 hourly workers at McDonald’s restaurants are among one million four hundred thousand restaurant and retail workers who are about to lose their health coverage because of ObamaCare (aka the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act) regulations.

McDonald's provides mini-med plans for workers at 10,500 U.S. locations, most of them franchised. . . . Last week, a senior McDonald's official informed the Department of Health and Human Services that the restaurant chain's insurer won't meet a 2011 (ObamaCare) requirement to spend at least 80% to 85% of its premium revenue on medical care. - WSJ

Representatives from insurance giant Aetna Inc. warn that dozens of other companies may also be forced to drop health coverage for retail workers because of ObamaCare. According to Aetna, Inc. the affected employers include, Home Depot Inc., Disney Worldwide Services, CVS Caremark Corp., Staples Inc. Blockbuster Inc., and many, many more.

Although new ObamaCare taxes and new ObamaCare regulations are starting right now, ObamaCare does not actually kick in until 2014 (time enough to repeal ObamaCare!). This means that as many as one million four hundred thousand retail and restaurant workers, including almost 30,000 from McDonalds, are potentially looking at a minimum of four years without health insurance coverage because of ObamaCare.

TANSTAAFL Mr. President

2010-09-29T23:39:00.001-04:00

Six months ago the Democratically controlled Congress passed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act known as ObamaCare. ObamaCare was supposed to magically lower costs and increase availability of health care for up to 30 million uninsured persons. But Americans know that ObamaCare is a utopian scheme and a budget buster. American taxpayers know that there ain’t no such thing as a free lunch; TANSTAAFL.

ObamaCare won’t fully kick in until 2014 but already premiums are rising. Premiums are projected to increase by as much as 9% across the nation in 2011. According to business leaders a big part of the increase is in direct response to ObamaCare. TANSTAAFL.

ObamaCare forces insurance companies to allow parents to insure children through age 26. But the department of Health and human Services estimates it will cost parents an extra $3,380 per year for one child. TANSTAAFL.

ObamaCare requires insurers to forego lifetime or annual limits on benefits. These increased benefits must be paid for. Insurance companies have no choice but to pass the additional costs on through higher premiums. TANSTAAFL.

ObamaCare forbids insurance companies from refusing coverage to children with preexisting conditions. Many of the major insurance companies have announced that they will stop selling “child only” insurance policies because compliance to the ObamaCare preexisting conditions rule is cost prohibitive. TANSTAAFL.

ObamaCare is supposed to provide coverage to 30 million uninsured persons while somehow “bending the cost curve downward.” The majority of these uninsured will simply be dumped into Medicaid. Medicaid, notorious for high cost, waste, fraud, and inefficiency, is already on the doorstep of being bankrupt. To cover this cost ObamaCare adds an array of new taxes and raids $500 billion dollars from Medicare. TANSTAAFL.

“In fact, a memo leaked from Obama's Health and Human Services Department estimated that as many as two-thirds of all businesses and 80 percent of small businesses will be forced to change their plans to comply with the government's new rules. And roughly half of seniors who now participate in Medicare Advantage will be forced out of those plans and back into traditional Medicare.” - Michael Tanner Cato Institute senior fellow. TANSTAAFL.

ObamaCare is now projected to cost a whopping $2.7 trillion dollars within its first ten years of operation. In spite of the 22 or more new taxes included in ObamaCare, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) will add more than $350 billion dollars to our nation’s deficit. TANSTAAFL.

The majority of American’s have opposed ObamaCare from the start. President Obama and the leaders of the Democratically controlled House and Senate have insisted that we the people would like ObamaCare once it was passed and we found out what was it in. But Americans know that their ain’t no such thing as a free lunch. ObamaCare is a budget busting utopian scheme. The latest Rasmussen poll reports that 61 percent of Americans want ObamaCare repealed. TANSTAAFL!!!

Read My Lips . . .

2010-09-28T22:29:00.000-04:00

In his first address to a joint session of the U.S. Congress Mr. Obama promised, “If your family earns less than $250,000 a year, you will not see your taxes increase a single dime. I repeat: not one single dime.” Has he kept his promise? In a word, NO. Having broken his word on so solemn a promise, how can he sleep at night? Here's the short list of new taxes coming your way.

More than twenty new or higher taxes are imbedded in ObamaCare. A few have already started. Many of the new Obama taxes affect persons who earn less than $250,000 per year. Most of the new taxes begin in January 2011 or later including a 10% tax for getting a tan at a tanning salon. A “Medicine Cabinet Tax,” that prohibits Americans from using pre-tax dollars from their HSA, FSA, or HRA accounts to buy non-prescription medicines. For example the new HSA withdrawal tax raises the tax on non-medical early withdrawals from HSA (Health Savings Account) from 10 to 20%.

There are dozens of new and/or increased taxes on business that will soon take affect. The medical industry is no exception. Beginning in 2011 a multi-billion dollar tax assessment will be imposed on name-brand drug manufacturers. Economists warn that this excise tax will increase the price that consumers pay for their medications.

In 2011 the IRS gains a new power from the ObamaCare law dubbed the economic substance doctrine. “The IRS is now empowered to disallow perfectly-legal tax deductions and maneuvers merely because it judges that the deduction or action lacks ‘economic substance.’” - ATR

The AMT (Alternative Minimum Tax) will affect more than 28 million families this year. This is an increase of four million families over last year. “These families will have to calculate their tax burdens twice, and pay taxes at the higher level." - ATR

Teachers and educational institutions are not exempt from Mr. Obama's TaxOnomic master plan. “The deduction for tuition and fees will not be available. Tax credits for education will be limited. Teachers will no longer be able to deduct classroom expenses. Coverdell Education Savings Accounts will be cut. Employer-provided educational assistance is curtailed. The student loan interest deduction will be disallowed for hundreds of thousands of families.” – ATR

The Democratically controlled Congress has had two years to make the Bush tax cuts permanent. They have not acted and now it appears that they will not act. When these tax cuts sunset in January the 10% bracket will rise to 15%, the 25% bracket will rise to 28%, the 28% bracket will rise to 31%, the 33% bracket will rise to 36%, and the 35% bracket will rise to 39.6%. Taxes for married couples will rise with the scheduled increase of the marriage penalty. The child tax credit will drop from $1,000 to $500 per child. The dependent care tax credit is being cut.

In January 2011 the “death tax” returns with a 55% top rate on estates over $1 million. The top bracket of the capital gains tax will go from 15% to 20 % next year. “The top dividends tax rate will rise from 15 percent this year to 39.6 percent in 2011. These rates will rise another 3.8 percent in 2013.” - ATR

The new Obama taxes that are about to hit our nation amount to the largest tax increases in the history of the United States. Many of these taxes hit the middle class (including millions of people who earn less that $250,000 per year). It’s hard to imagine how Mr. Obama can sleep at night having broken such a solemn promise to the American People. Do we trust you now Mr. Obama? in a word. NO.