(This is an update of a previous posting)
In the first year of this presidency, the current administration has displayed deference, almost subservience, to organized labor. Deference would not be surprising, since organized labor is the single largest contributor to the Democratic Party. Organized labor is now getting treatment which discriminates against non-union workers and those policies are now forming a disturbing trend.
First, the automobile industry bailout: Money was given to prop up General Motors and Chrysler instead of allowing the companies to reorganize under a Chapter 11 bankruptcy. In fact, the US government now owns the majority stake in the companies. In bailing out these companies, public money was taken, in the form of taxes, from auto workers in the south whose average salary is about forty three dollars an hour and given to United Auto Workers members in Michigan whose average salary is about seventy one dollars an hour. The Obama administration portrayed the action as helping the General Motors and Chrysler corporations. In fact, a chapter 11 bankruptcy would have been much more advantageous to the companies as it would have allowed renegotiation of the labor contracts and would have relieved the pressure of legacy costs to the companies. Additionally, it would not have cost tax money. The money was really a bail out of the United Auto Workers, not the companies. It hasn’t worked and the two companies have shown no signs of changing fortunes. At a recent auto show, all of the awards for vehicle of the year in all classes were swept by Ford Motor Company, the company that refused the bail out.
Second, the school voucher program in Washington, DC: The voucher program in Washington, DC cost about $7600 per student. The schools at which the voucher students attended had 90% higher scores in language skills tests and 95% higher scores in mathematics testing. The interesting paradox is that the Washington, DC public school system spends about $13,000 (almost twice as much) per student. The omnibus spending bill removed funding for the school voucher program. The Democrats, in their infinite concern for children, cancelled a program which cost taxpayers half as much and resulted in markedly better school performance. Why would they do that? The answer is easy. The teachers union has been paid off for supporting Democratic candidates in the election. The Democrats are willing to harm poor children and their families in order to pay off the union.
Third, the stimulus construction projects: The stimulus bill passed by the Democratic Congress and the Obama administration has a provision that stipulates that stimulus construction projects have to pay union wages to workers on stimulus projects. Why would that provision be in the bill? After all, it would result in less money to do projects and the ones that are completed would cost more. The reason is easy. Governments don’t build roads and bridges, private contractors do. Those contracts are awarded by bid. A non-union company can submit a lower labor cost bid than a union company. The raw materials cost will be the same. Therefore, the non-union bid will generally be lower. This provision in the bill is expressly for the benefit of union contractors to receive stimulus money contracts for infrastructure. The unions will receive money but the taxpayers will get less and more expensive infrastructure projects completed for their money.
Fourth, the “Employee Free Choice Act”: This piece of legislation is close to criminal. The rules would change and take away the right of workers to a secret union election ballot. To organize a union, all that organizers would need is 51% of employees to sign a card and the union would be installed. The cards would be public and the period of time to have them signed in unlimited. This is like the mob protection racket in Chicago in the 1930s. Union thugs intimidating workers is not progress. The intimidation may not even be the worst part of the bill. In the event of non-resolution of a union contract, after a set period of time the federal government will set wages. Hmmm… with the Democrats in power, I wonder whose side would be favored? Therefore, people who are intimidated into a union will have their wages set by the federal government. This is an economic disaster of the highest magnitude just waiting to happen. It will lead to companies closing because they are no longer profitable and revival of the union thugs who have essentially gone away (with the exception of the Service Employees International Union) due to people's reluctance to embrace unions. South Carolina just won the competition for the new Boeing 787 assembly plant largely based on Boeing not being forced to deal with labor unions.
Fifth, the health care proposal currently before Congress: More than sixty years after his death, the United States is still being hurt by Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s financial policies. When FDR froze wages as part of his recovery policy, the only way to compete with compensation packages for employees was to add benefits. This was particularly true in collective bargaining agreements. Subsequently, since they could not raise wages, labor unions developed expensive and comprehensive health care benefits for their members. The current Democratic mantra is always to pay for everything by “taxing the rich”, despite the fact that it is not fiscally possible to do that. Then again, they never let logic or facts get in the way of policy. The problem with “taxing the rich” is that a significant portion of higher income earners are actually small businesses which file tax returns as individual returns and the people with large benefit packages tend to be union members. Since the unions put the Democrats in office, they expect some pay back. It was announced yesterday that the conference bill (which in the Senate version was supposed to be financed partly by taxes on “Cadillac heath plans”) now has an exemption for organized labor. In other words, if you are not in a union, you pay higher taxes but if you are in a union, you do not. Not only is that a blatant pay off to labor unions, it is likely not to pass a constitutionality challenge. As an aside, I think the pop-up timer is out on the current health care bill. Put a fork in it, it is done.
In all five examples, it is easy to see the pay off to the various unions by the Democratic Congress and the Obama administration. It is brazen and open. It is also going to massively harm the United States economy and prevent recovery. Most people in the United States don’t regularly follow politics, but they certainly recognize dishonesty and graft when they see it. A recent poll which asked people if they desired to have their jobs converted to union jobs had only 9% say yes and a resounding 83% say no. Since union membership is at an all-time low, preferential treatment for labor unions at the expense of the majority of the population is not very smart politically, as well. This is the Democratic version of the organized crime “protection” rackets and is disgusting. The current administration’s poll numbers are tanking and the mid-term elections may become disastrous for Democrats should the course not be adjusted.
Showing posts with label Unions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Unions. Show all posts
Friday, January 15, 2010
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Liberals and Modern Education... or Lack Thereof
With education clearly on the decline in the nation’s public schools, one has to ask why it is happening. There is a movement afloat which began in the 1920s which theorized that there was too much information available to be taught and that new information was created at a rate that defied the ability to have it taught. The theory suggested that a better way to educate the young was to “teach them to think” rather than teach facts. Using that theory, mathematics, history, and science were placed on the back burner and “life skills” and “life adjustment” classes were prioritized. We have now had many years of those theories and to be honest, they suck. To paraphrase another writer, there is no use in being able to think if you have nothing to think about.
One could argue that the purveyors of those theories didn’t understand what was being taught in the first place. While it is true that most people not involved in science, engineering, finance, architecture, etc. don’t use higher mathematics on a regular basis, the theorists completely misunderstood mathematics education. While mathematics education does teach students how to manipulate and solve equations and problems, that is only one part of the class. More importantly, mathematics teaches students how to approach any problem rationally and to be careful in what assumptions you make. Problems need to be solved in a step-wise manner in which each step must be justified and not left to whim, chance, or assumption. Many times in mathematics, the real answer to a problem is not what the answer is intuitively. Additionally, when an answer is obtained using firm and true assumptions and steps based on correct technique, one can be confident that the solution is solid and reliable. This approach is valuable to almost everyone every day. Systematic problem solving is a valuable life skill and is arguably much more important than how you “feel” about the problem. As an aside, mathematics is important to the daily life of US citizens in that the current Congress certainly has demonstrated that they have no mathematics skills.
History classes tend to be criticized as rote memory of names and dates. If taught correctly, they are anything but that. The early history of the United States, for example, is a drama worthy of any novel or made for television movie. The founders of the United States were not homogenized in their views and goals. There was much consternation about splitting with Great Britain and even more dispute on the proper construction of the government once the revolution was won. The Constitution barely passed. The study of those people tells students not only who those people were but what this country was intended to become. It tells why these people were willing to die to create a way of life where individuals, not a monarch, held sway over their own lives. The founders were real people with differing thoughts and goals, not caricatures on different currency denominations. To be able to take a side in a political discussion, educated citizens should not only understand current issues but how the country got to be where it is and what it was in the past.
Science, at its core, is the search for the truth. Scientists are sometimes accused of being amoral because they do not subscribe to determined agendas. The true scientist takes the data presented and analyzes the data to determine where the real truth lies. Real science is reproducible and does not change with varying researchers. That is why true science is “open source”. Conclusions are only valid when someone else can do the same work and get the same result. When there is disagreement, it is because the data is conflicting when studied by many, not because a political or financial agenda is overshadowing the work. The ability to remain objective and unbiased is a very useful skill in everyday life and is difficult to achieve without education. If anyone watches opinion shows or reads the newspaper, they will realize objectivity is a resource surely lacking.
Political leaders who have nefarious objectives have always sought to “dumb down” the population because it is much easier to mislead and take advantage of an ignorant mob than an educated population. Educated populations ask tough questions and demand accountability from the leaders. In a representative form of government, the government functions best and is predicated on having an educated people. The founders realized that.
The conservative political philosophy encourages individual decision making and liberty. The liberal political philosophy encourages elite groups of leaders to make decisions for the population in their best interest. The assumption is denigrating in that the people are presumed to be unable to decide issues for themselves. It is therefore in the interest of liberals to have the population less informed and less educated and, conversely, in the interest of conservatives to have the population better educated so better individual decisions will be made. It is easier to guide the population to the liberal elites' interests if they are less informed and more dependent. The teachers unions are decidedly liberal, as evidenced by their devout support of liberal politicians. Perhaps that explains why the teachers unions oppose educational programs like the voucher program in Washington, DC which clearly produced better student results at half the taxpayer cost. Teachers colleges educate future teachers on the liberal 1920s theories of education and reinforce the “life skills” agenda. The old saying is “When you find yourself in a hole, you should stop digging”. The current educational philosophy in the United States public schools has consistently shown itself to be a failure. Why not go back to what worked and teach people how to think while they actually learn some factual information? Consider it a bonus.
One could argue that the purveyors of those theories didn’t understand what was being taught in the first place. While it is true that most people not involved in science, engineering, finance, architecture, etc. don’t use higher mathematics on a regular basis, the theorists completely misunderstood mathematics education. While mathematics education does teach students how to manipulate and solve equations and problems, that is only one part of the class. More importantly, mathematics teaches students how to approach any problem rationally and to be careful in what assumptions you make. Problems need to be solved in a step-wise manner in which each step must be justified and not left to whim, chance, or assumption. Many times in mathematics, the real answer to a problem is not what the answer is intuitively. Additionally, when an answer is obtained using firm and true assumptions and steps based on correct technique, one can be confident that the solution is solid and reliable. This approach is valuable to almost everyone every day. Systematic problem solving is a valuable life skill and is arguably much more important than how you “feel” about the problem. As an aside, mathematics is important to the daily life of US citizens in that the current Congress certainly has demonstrated that they have no mathematics skills.
History classes tend to be criticized as rote memory of names and dates. If taught correctly, they are anything but that. The early history of the United States, for example, is a drama worthy of any novel or made for television movie. The founders of the United States were not homogenized in their views and goals. There was much consternation about splitting with Great Britain and even more dispute on the proper construction of the government once the revolution was won. The Constitution barely passed. The study of those people tells students not only who those people were but what this country was intended to become. It tells why these people were willing to die to create a way of life where individuals, not a monarch, held sway over their own lives. The founders were real people with differing thoughts and goals, not caricatures on different currency denominations. To be able to take a side in a political discussion, educated citizens should not only understand current issues but how the country got to be where it is and what it was in the past.
Science, at its core, is the search for the truth. Scientists are sometimes accused of being amoral because they do not subscribe to determined agendas. The true scientist takes the data presented and analyzes the data to determine where the real truth lies. Real science is reproducible and does not change with varying researchers. That is why true science is “open source”. Conclusions are only valid when someone else can do the same work and get the same result. When there is disagreement, it is because the data is conflicting when studied by many, not because a political or financial agenda is overshadowing the work. The ability to remain objective and unbiased is a very useful skill in everyday life and is difficult to achieve without education. If anyone watches opinion shows or reads the newspaper, they will realize objectivity is a resource surely lacking.
Political leaders who have nefarious objectives have always sought to “dumb down” the population because it is much easier to mislead and take advantage of an ignorant mob than an educated population. Educated populations ask tough questions and demand accountability from the leaders. In a representative form of government, the government functions best and is predicated on having an educated people. The founders realized that.
The conservative political philosophy encourages individual decision making and liberty. The liberal political philosophy encourages elite groups of leaders to make decisions for the population in their best interest. The assumption is denigrating in that the people are presumed to be unable to decide issues for themselves. It is therefore in the interest of liberals to have the population less informed and less educated and, conversely, in the interest of conservatives to have the population better educated so better individual decisions will be made. It is easier to guide the population to the liberal elites' interests if they are less informed and more dependent. The teachers unions are decidedly liberal, as evidenced by their devout support of liberal politicians. Perhaps that explains why the teachers unions oppose educational programs like the voucher program in Washington, DC which clearly produced better student results at half the taxpayer cost. Teachers colleges educate future teachers on the liberal 1920s theories of education and reinforce the “life skills” agenda. The old saying is “When you find yourself in a hole, you should stop digging”. The current educational philosophy in the United States public schools has consistently shown itself to be a failure. Why not go back to what worked and teach people how to think while they actually learn some factual information? Consider it a bonus.
Monday, March 16, 2009
The Unions Get Paid Off by the Democrats
There is a disturbing trend in the actions of the Obama administration when it comes to how they spend the money. There are at least four different examples which will highlight the trend.
First, the automobile industry bailout: Money was given to General Motors and Chrysler instead of allowing the companies to reorganize under a Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Therefore, public money was taken from auto workers in the south whose average salary is about forty three dollars an hour and given to United Auto Workers members in Michigan whose average salary is about seventy one dollars an hour. The Obama administration portrayed the action as helping the General Motors and Chrysler corporations. In fact, a chapter 11 bankruptcy would have been much more advantageous as it would have allowed renegotiation of the labor contracts and would have relieved the pressure of legacy costs to the companies. The money was really a bail out of the United Auto Workers, not the companies. It hasn’t worked and the two companies have shown no signs of changing fortunes.
Second, the school voucher program in Washington, DC: The voucher program in Washington, DC cost about $7600 per student. The schools at which the voucher students attended had 90% higher scores in language tests and 95% higher scores in mathematics testing. The interesting paradox is that the Washington, DC public school system spends about $13,000 per student. The omnibus spending bill removed funding for the school voucher program. The Democrats, in their infinite concern for children, cancelled a program which cost taxpayers half as much and resulted in markedly better school performance. Why would they do that? The answer is easy. The teachers union has been paid off for supporting Democratic candidates in the election. The Democrats are willing to screw over poor children and their families in order to pay off the union.
Third, the stimulus construction projects: The stimulus bill passed by the Democratic Congress and the Obama administration has a provision that stipulates that stimulus construction projects have to pay union wages to workers on stimulus projects. Why would that provision be in the bill? After all, it would result in less money to do projects and the ones that are completed would cost more. The reason is easy. Governments don’t build roads and bridges, private contractors do. Those contracts are awarded by bid. A non-union company can submit a lower labor cost bid than a union company. The raw materials cost will be the same. Therefore, the non-union bid will generally be lower. This provision in the bill is expressly for the benefit of union contractors to receive stimulus money contracts for infrastructure. The unions will receive money but the taxpayers will get less infrastructure projects completed for their money.
Fourth, the “Employee Free Choice Act”: This piece of legislation is close to criminal. The rules would change and take away the right of workers to a secret union election ballot. To organize a union, all that organizers would need is 51% of employees to sign a card and the union would be installed. The cards would be public and the period of time to have them signed in unlimited. This is like the mob in Chicago in the 1930s. Union thugs intimidating workers is not progress. The intimidation may not even be the worst part of the bill. In the event of non-resolution of a union contract, after a set period of time the federal government will set wages. Hmmm… with the Democrats in power, I wonder whose side would be favored? Therefore, people who are intimidated into a union will have their wages set by the federal government. This is an economic disaster of the highest magnitude just waiting to happen. It will lead to companies closing because they are no longer profitable and revival of the union thugs who have essentially gone away due to people's reluctance to embrace unions.
In all four examples, it is easy to see the pay off to the various unions by the Democratic Congress and the Obama administration. It is brazen and open. It is also going to massively harm the United States economy and prevent recovery. A recent poll which asked people if they desired to have their jobs converted to union jobs had only 9% say yes and a resounding 83% say no. This is the Democratic version of the organized crime “protection” rackets and is disgusting.
First, the automobile industry bailout: Money was given to General Motors and Chrysler instead of allowing the companies to reorganize under a Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Therefore, public money was taken from auto workers in the south whose average salary is about forty three dollars an hour and given to United Auto Workers members in Michigan whose average salary is about seventy one dollars an hour. The Obama administration portrayed the action as helping the General Motors and Chrysler corporations. In fact, a chapter 11 bankruptcy would have been much more advantageous as it would have allowed renegotiation of the labor contracts and would have relieved the pressure of legacy costs to the companies. The money was really a bail out of the United Auto Workers, not the companies. It hasn’t worked and the two companies have shown no signs of changing fortunes.
Second, the school voucher program in Washington, DC: The voucher program in Washington, DC cost about $7600 per student. The schools at which the voucher students attended had 90% higher scores in language tests and 95% higher scores in mathematics testing. The interesting paradox is that the Washington, DC public school system spends about $13,000 per student. The omnibus spending bill removed funding for the school voucher program. The Democrats, in their infinite concern for children, cancelled a program which cost taxpayers half as much and resulted in markedly better school performance. Why would they do that? The answer is easy. The teachers union has been paid off for supporting Democratic candidates in the election. The Democrats are willing to screw over poor children and their families in order to pay off the union.
Third, the stimulus construction projects: The stimulus bill passed by the Democratic Congress and the Obama administration has a provision that stipulates that stimulus construction projects have to pay union wages to workers on stimulus projects. Why would that provision be in the bill? After all, it would result in less money to do projects and the ones that are completed would cost more. The reason is easy. Governments don’t build roads and bridges, private contractors do. Those contracts are awarded by bid. A non-union company can submit a lower labor cost bid than a union company. The raw materials cost will be the same. Therefore, the non-union bid will generally be lower. This provision in the bill is expressly for the benefit of union contractors to receive stimulus money contracts for infrastructure. The unions will receive money but the taxpayers will get less infrastructure projects completed for their money.
Fourth, the “Employee Free Choice Act”: This piece of legislation is close to criminal. The rules would change and take away the right of workers to a secret union election ballot. To organize a union, all that organizers would need is 51% of employees to sign a card and the union would be installed. The cards would be public and the period of time to have them signed in unlimited. This is like the mob in Chicago in the 1930s. Union thugs intimidating workers is not progress. The intimidation may not even be the worst part of the bill. In the event of non-resolution of a union contract, after a set period of time the federal government will set wages. Hmmm… with the Democrats in power, I wonder whose side would be favored? Therefore, people who are intimidated into a union will have their wages set by the federal government. This is an economic disaster of the highest magnitude just waiting to happen. It will lead to companies closing because they are no longer profitable and revival of the union thugs who have essentially gone away due to people's reluctance to embrace unions.
In all four examples, it is easy to see the pay off to the various unions by the Democratic Congress and the Obama administration. It is brazen and open. It is also going to massively harm the United States economy and prevent recovery. A recent poll which asked people if they desired to have their jobs converted to union jobs had only 9% say yes and a resounding 83% say no. This is the Democratic version of the organized crime “protection” rackets and is disgusting.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
How the Economy Doesn't Work and More Fabrications
A collection of thoughts about the last couple of weeks:
The "stimulus" bill now being considered in the Senate which passed in the House is being talked about non-stop by all the talking heads on television. As it continues to languish, someone described it as a rotting corpse. The longer is is exposed to the sunshine, the more it begins to stink.
Rep. Nancy Pelosi was just on television yesterday saying that "every month that the stimulus package is not passed, 500 million Americans will lose their jobs". I find that statistic interesting in that the population of the United States is just over 300 million people. How she can say something like that with a straight face means that she must have had a stroke or slow virus brain disease. It is not possible for what she said to be true and any middle schooler could tell you that it was not possible.
Spending by the government is a revolving door and does not stimulate the economy. You take taxes in, pay them out, and take them in again. It doesn't produce anything. It is money that is just being printed by the government and being covered by borrowing from foreign countries. In order for the economy to function, private industry must generate wealth and pay taxes into the government. The workers who are employed by those private industries must earn wages and pay taxes into the government. It is private industry that generates revenue, not the government. To think that the economic crisis will be resolved by just printing more money is idiotic and not very reassuring about the competence of those advocating that course. It has never worked in the past and is silly.
Another big lie is that this current wish list of a bill is a stimulus package at all. It is a laundry list of liberal wishes. Some of the ideas may have merit but they are not stimulative to the economy. As the people have seen more and more of this bill, public opinion has turned against it and rightly so. Fred Smith, CEO of Fedex was on television the other day and pointed out that the United States Tax Code is weighted substantially toward helping financial institutions and inhibiting the manufacturing sector. The Democrats constantly rail against manufacturers relocating facilities overseas yet never admit that their own tax policies are causing the movement. The obligation of any CEO of a corporation is to make a profit for the stockholders. If that CEO can find a more favorable environment to manufacture the companies products, he has an obligation to do so. Since the United States has the highest business taxes in the world, should it surprise anyone that businesses are going elsewhere? We have seen the same phenomenon within the United States with businesses relocating from the industrial north (Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Illinois, etc.) to the Southeast where the weather is better and the local and state governments are more friendly to business and the tax structure is better for business. That very thing is what has happened to the automobile industry in Michigan where dumb business decisions and liberal policies have whacked the industry. Automobile manufacturers in South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas are doing fine.
If the Democrats wanted to stimulate the economy, they could have money in the people's pockets in two weeks: reduce payroll taxes. It would only require the stroke of a pen. There are things in the stimulus bill which cost tens of millions of dollars and produce only a dozen jobs. If you are you going to do that, just give me ten million dollars and say it is a job. I won't even tell on you. In every single instance in United States history, reducing the capital gains tax has resulted in increased revenue for the government. Additionally, every single time capital gains taxes are raised, government revenue decreases. Can anyone see what the right thing is to do? Duh.
The Obama people say giving a rebate check to the people is stimulative. Consider this when comparing the rebate check to tax relief: Would you be more likely to make a big purchase (car, washer, refrigerator, computer, etc.) with a single rebate check, or with more money every paycheck for the forseeable future? Anyone can see that tax relief makes more sense and will be more stimulative to the economy. To say otherwise is to show your partisanship and no knowledge of the economy.
The left, in order to pay back the big labor unions for their support in the elections, is trying to pass the goofy "card check" legislation which will take the right to secret ballots away from union elections. Perhaps we can establish a KGB and a Ministry of Propaganda as well. The secret ballot vote is a fundamental right of all Americans in all elections. How anyone can claim it is progress is demeaning to anyone that can think.
If only these guys would start looking out for the people and less about their own butts.
The "stimulus" bill now being considered in the Senate which passed in the House is being talked about non-stop by all the talking heads on television. As it continues to languish, someone described it as a rotting corpse. The longer is is exposed to the sunshine, the more it begins to stink.
Rep. Nancy Pelosi was just on television yesterday saying that "every month that the stimulus package is not passed, 500 million Americans will lose their jobs". I find that statistic interesting in that the population of the United States is just over 300 million people. How she can say something like that with a straight face means that she must have had a stroke or slow virus brain disease. It is not possible for what she said to be true and any middle schooler could tell you that it was not possible.
Spending by the government is a revolving door and does not stimulate the economy. You take taxes in, pay them out, and take them in again. It doesn't produce anything. It is money that is just being printed by the government and being covered by borrowing from foreign countries. In order for the economy to function, private industry must generate wealth and pay taxes into the government. The workers who are employed by those private industries must earn wages and pay taxes into the government. It is private industry that generates revenue, not the government. To think that the economic crisis will be resolved by just printing more money is idiotic and not very reassuring about the competence of those advocating that course. It has never worked in the past and is silly.
Another big lie is that this current wish list of a bill is a stimulus package at all. It is a laundry list of liberal wishes. Some of the ideas may have merit but they are not stimulative to the economy. As the people have seen more and more of this bill, public opinion has turned against it and rightly so. Fred Smith, CEO of Fedex was on television the other day and pointed out that the United States Tax Code is weighted substantially toward helping financial institutions and inhibiting the manufacturing sector. The Democrats constantly rail against manufacturers relocating facilities overseas yet never admit that their own tax policies are causing the movement. The obligation of any CEO of a corporation is to make a profit for the stockholders. If that CEO can find a more favorable environment to manufacture the companies products, he has an obligation to do so. Since the United States has the highest business taxes in the world, should it surprise anyone that businesses are going elsewhere? We have seen the same phenomenon within the United States with businesses relocating from the industrial north (Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Illinois, etc.) to the Southeast where the weather is better and the local and state governments are more friendly to business and the tax structure is better for business. That very thing is what has happened to the automobile industry in Michigan where dumb business decisions and liberal policies have whacked the industry. Automobile manufacturers in South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas are doing fine.
If the Democrats wanted to stimulate the economy, they could have money in the people's pockets in two weeks: reduce payroll taxes. It would only require the stroke of a pen. There are things in the stimulus bill which cost tens of millions of dollars and produce only a dozen jobs. If you are you going to do that, just give me ten million dollars and say it is a job. I won't even tell on you. In every single instance in United States history, reducing the capital gains tax has resulted in increased revenue for the government. Additionally, every single time capital gains taxes are raised, government revenue decreases. Can anyone see what the right thing is to do? Duh.
The Obama people say giving a rebate check to the people is stimulative. Consider this when comparing the rebate check to tax relief: Would you be more likely to make a big purchase (car, washer, refrigerator, computer, etc.) with a single rebate check, or with more money every paycheck for the forseeable future? Anyone can see that tax relief makes more sense and will be more stimulative to the economy. To say otherwise is to show your partisanship and no knowledge of the economy.
The left, in order to pay back the big labor unions for their support in the elections, is trying to pass the goofy "card check" legislation which will take the right to secret ballots away from union elections. Perhaps we can establish a KGB and a Ministry of Propaganda as well. The secret ballot vote is a fundamental right of all Americans in all elections. How anyone can claim it is progress is demeaning to anyone that can think.
If only these guys would start looking out for the people and less about their own butts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)