labor unions

WSJ: Obama Would Europeanize America

Tickler Leave a comment

Another must read from the WSJ today…

The only organization with a worse rating than the Republican president is the Democratic Congress—14% approval, 75% disapproval. But there, too, the Democrats will gain strength. They are expected to increase their majority in the House, and current polling shows that in Senate races Democrats will increase their members from the current 51 (including two independents who caucus with the Democrats) to at least 57. They may even achieve the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster.

So where is the new Obama administration likely to take us? Seven things seem certain:

  • The U.S. military will withdraw from Iraq quickly and substantially, regardless of conditions on the ground or the obvious consequence of emboldening terrorists there and around the globe.
  • Protectionism will become our national trade policy; free trade agreements with other nations will be reduced and limited.
  • Income taxes will rise on middle- and upper-income people and businesses, and individuals will pay much higher Social Security taxes, all to carry out the new president’s goals of “spreading the wealth around.”
  • Federal government spending will substantially increase. The new Obama proposals come to more than $300 billion annually, for education, health care, energy, environmental and many other programs, in addition to whatever is needed to meet our economic challenges. Mr. Obama proposes more than a 10% annual spending growth increase, considerably higher than under the first President Bush (6.7%), Bill Clinton (3.3%) or George W. Bush (6.4%).
  • Federal regulation of the economy will expand, on everything from financial management companies to electricity generation and personal energy use.
  • The power of labor unions will substantially increase, beginning with repeal of secret ballot voting to decide on union representation.
  • Free speech will be curtailed through the reimposition of the Fairness Doctrine to limit the conservative talk radio that so irritates the liberal establishment.

These policy changes will be the beginning of the Europeanization of America. There will be many more public policy changes with similar goals—nationalized health care, Kyoto-like global-warming policies, and increased education regulation and spending.

Additional tax advantages for lower and middle income people will be enacted: a 10% mortgage tax credit that would average about $500 per household per year, a $4,000 tax credit for college tuition, a tax credit covering half of child-care expenses up to $6,000 per year, and even a $7,000 credit for purchase of a clean car.

More important, all but the clean car credit would be “refundable,” meaning people will get a check for them if they owe no taxes, which is simply a transfer of income from the government to individuals. In reality this is the beginning of a new series of entitlements for middle-class families, the longer-term effect of which will be to make those families more dependant on (and so more supportive of) larger government. The Tax Policy Center estimates that these refundable tax credits would cost the government $648 billion over 10 years.

These are Mr. Obama’s plans. Meanwhile, congressional Democrats would increase spending for their own interests and favorite programs. More important, the Congress will consider itself more important than a freshman president who has never held an executive position, so they will do what they want and he will have to go along with most of it.

READ IT HERE

Video: Escaped The Plantation, Voting McCain

Tickler Leave a comment

Perhaps the best speech given during this entire campaign cycle.

The O-Team
More genius by ZO. See more great clips here

The Poor, Unions, and Barack’s Socialism

Tickler 2 Comments

If unions existed to actually do what they claim, it wouldn’t be so bad. But the fact of the matter is that, these days, they exist simply to extort and postpone the inevitable free market.

Scary thinking about wealth redistribution and removing self-reliance from the poor to make them dependent on the government (from March ’08)…

John Mistress-and-Love-Child-As-Cancer-Treatment-Comfort Edwards: “People want to know why I continue this campaign for president, why Elizabeth and myself are so committed to this cause, to this crusade. I’ll tell you why. Because I want everybody in this country to have the same chances that I’ve had. I came from a place of having nothing, to having everything. And in today’s America, it is so hard for people to work themselves up. People no longer believe that their children are going to have a better life than they’ve had.”

Sanity break: Uh, if he “want[s] everybody in this country to have the same chances that [he’s] had.” then his subsequent comment “I came from a place of having nothing, to having everything” doesn’t make the case. Did he have systematic hand-outs, socialist healthcare, and union bargaining when he was struggling through law school? Didn’t think so. Much as I think he’s an idiot and a hillbilly, Edwards coming from nothing and being filthy rich now very likely took some doing, and I’m surprised he doesn’t value or subscribe to the path of hard work and determination in crafting a person for success. I think it would be hard not to if you truly went from nothing to everything on your own sweat and hand-built resources. It seems to me that there can be only two reasons why a nothing-to-everything would want others to get a government instituted shortcut (and handouts in the mean time, even if you never get off your tail and take the shortcut).

  1. Now that they have money, they want more power than just money can give. They want political power over people. And rounding up the poor and middle class by pandering to their fears and anxieties, even though it contradicts the politician’s own experience, is easier (over the heads of the poor they think) and more vote-lucrative  than collecting a handful of the rich. Yes, I’m saying Edwards doesn’t give a rat’s tail about the poor. He cares about money, power, tacky houses, and tail on the side, NOT the poor.
  2. Second, perhaps they actually didn’t succeed by their own sweat and effort, but were given a significant shortcut themselves in one way or another. Self-loathing is a very rampant condition among the undeservedly rich (just look at Hollywood), particularly liberal rich.

If he succeeded so much from ambulance-chasing to have a mansion where 14 families could live, I’m not sure where he gets the stones to preach to others about giving to the poor.

For the sake of a rounded argument… here are my reasons not to give shortcuts to the poor…

  1. Andrew Carnegie (read post here)
  2. I shouldn’t live on another man’s work, if I’m able to do my own. This creates self-reliance and self-respect. Give a man a fish, feed him for a day, teach a man to fish feed him for a lifetime, etc.
  3. The joke that is government bureaucracy shouldn’t be the one transacting/handling the sharing.
  4. And last, but certainly above all, is the self-respect one earns from doing it themselves. Give a child a fragile toy and it will be broken in minutes. Make the child earn the toy or help pay for it, and it will last. Simple concept, but Obama is clueless about even these basic principles.

Now the scariest, transparent, and most flatly dishonest lie I’ve heard Obama spew to date…

Barack Hussein Obama: “We are at a crossroads in this country. We are facing some challenges as great as any generation has faced. And we have some fundamental decisions to make about the kind of America that we’re going to build for, not just us, but for our children and for our grandchildren. The notion that we have no responsibilities towards each other, they call it the ownership society in Washington. But in our past there’s been another name for it, it’s been called social Darwinism; every man and woman for him or herself. And it allows us to say that, you know what, if your health care or your tuition rises faster than your wages life isn’t fair. It’s a bracing idea, it’s a tempting idea, it’s the easiest idea in the world to say that we’re all on our own. But here’s the problem, it doesn’t work. It defies our history. It ignores the fact that it has always been government research and investment that’s made advances possible in this country from the railway to the internet. It’s been the creation of a massive middle class through decent wages and benefits, and good public schools that’s allowed us to prosper. It’s been the ability of working men and women to join together in unions that’s allowed our rising tide to lift every single boat.”

You are a very scary human Obama… totally clueless and very very dangerous. We’re sorry for your messed -up childhood and your lack of any sort of identity, but trying to persuade the country toward an irresponsible end is reprehensible…

He says “It’s the easiest idea in the world to say that we’re all on our own. But here’s the problem, it doesn’t work.” Let me take that in two parts…

1. “It’s easy.” Really!? What’s easy is to rob from the upper-middle class and give to the poor and take credit for it in the form of political power. Just a little clue on the taxation in this great land for Obama’s audience who might read this pulled together by Glenn Beck’s researchers…

According to the Tax Foundation, the top 1% of wage-earners in this country pays nearly 40% of the burden (an 11% INCREASE over 1999, when WHO was President? Oh that’s right…Bill Clinton). Not fair? Well, you may be saying, ‘that’s because they have ALL the wealth!’ Wrong again. The top 1% of earners account for just 21% of the total adjusted gross income. Hmm. Come to think of it…you’re RIGHT! That really isn’t fair. They’re paying DOUBLE what they should be. By the way, the top 10% of earners pay 70% of the load. When you get all the way down to the top 50% of earners, they account for 96.4% of the entire tax burden. The next 10% pays 3.6%. And the bottom 40% of wage earners…pay NOTHING. That’s right, nothing. In fact, they pay nothing, and then often get a “refund” (handout) at years end.

2. It doesn’t work.” Regardless of what distorted ideas free-loving mommy and green-card-seeking free-education aspiring daddy instilled, it doesn’t make it true. The free market is what works. Socialism does not, and can not, without a unification of religion. Even then the people must be extraordinarily interdependent and mature. They ALL must be interdependent and mature or it doesn’t work. We’re so far from that (particularly most of the people currently on welfare) that I’d consider it impossible until the Savior returns to round up and take names. Should we try to recreate the Soviet Union in the mean time, thinking maybe it’ll work this time? Let’s not. I guess you were asleep in your Ivy League classes (or simply spoon-fed by radical liberal professors while you were there) but hand-outs create an entitlement society, not accountability. These principles are so basic I can’t seem to wrap my head around how unbelievably ignorant someone would have to be to not understand them. I feel sorry for Obama. He’s truly blind and in the wilderness. Hillary and Edwards are just political opportunists who polarize for power. They manipulate intentionally. I think Obama genuinely thinks he’s right about these things and that makes him most oblivious and dangerous, because his sincere stupidity is going to persuade some of those who don’t think for themselves.