47 comments posted · 80 followers · following 0

12 years ago @ Breitbart.tv - Ryan: Obama Has ‘Pat... · 0 replies · +3 points

No, not speaker. How about VP?

12 years ago @ Breitbart.tv - Ryan: Obama Has ‘Pat... · 0 replies · +1 points

Ryan didn't want to run for President. Maybe he could be persuaded to run for VP? He sure know how to stick it to Obama (truthfully).

12 years ago @ Big Government - As Candidates Discuss ... · 0 replies · +1 points

Long term, maybe. But for quite a while, we must figure out how to use the existing infrastructure. The easiest way to do that is oil. If that gets too expensive or too rare, there are other ways to make fuel similar to gasoline out of natural gas and coal (methanol) and maybe other sources (biofuels don't seem viable, but they should have the opportunity to compete with the rest without government subsidies).

By that time, nuclear technology should have progressed to where the waste and safety problems are resolved; promising research is pretty far along on these issues. Unused nuclear capacity, such as overnight, might be used to make hydrogen or other fuels for our vehicles. Or, who knows, maybe all our roadways will be electrified by then.

12 years ago @ Big Government - New World Bank Report ... · 0 replies · +1 points

Excellent article. A point not brought out here is that most government spending does nothing to increase wealth. The government spends money and the nation as a whole gets nothing for it. This is especially true for transfer payments; the recipients do OK, but no one else benefits. There are exceptions such as NEEDED infrastructure projects, but bridges to nowhere counter the good projects. Government tends to build too many bridges to nowhere.

Private spending, especially business capital investment, results in lots of wealth production. Lots of people benefit in lots of ways from the spending. Even spending on payroll benefits both the employee who gets a paycheck and the business' customers who receive the product.

Back in the '90s when we had a booming economy, people were trying to figure out how taxes were tied in to the boom. Several economists pointed out that, while taxes are important, government spending is more important. That was a time when government spending was restrained.

12 years ago @ Breitbart.tv - Obama: We Can't Go Bac... · 0 replies · +2 points

"Colorblind racism"? Do you not understand English? That is as big an oxymoron as I have ever heard.

It is clear that Obama has no idea what caused the recession, nor do you.

12 years ago @ Big Government - New California Budget ... · 0 replies · +2 points

You read my mind. And, we know the demands for bailouts are coming, don't we. It's only a matter of time.

12 years ago @ Big Government - Connecticut Education ... · 0 replies · +7 points

That would be helpful. The state could simply say that no government organization in the state could engage in collective bargaining or enter contracts with groups of people regarding compensation or working conditions.

A more important element, however, is competition and the choices it provides to parents. Monopolies cannot be successful over the long term, so competition is key. Charter schools help, but we need wider competition that includes for-profit organizations.

12 years ago @ Big Government - Friday Free-for-All: R... · 0 replies · +2 points

Do you really think anyone paid the 80% rate? There were so many loopholes that any tax guy could keep a client out of those high brackets.

12 years ago @ Big Government - Friday Free-for-All: R... · 0 replies · +2 points

Check the WSJ today. The "rich" pay a percentage of their income that is about twice the percentage paid by the middle class.

If you want investment to continue so that the middle class can get good jobs, the lower tax rates on capital gains and dividends seem like a pretty good idea. If rich people invest money, make a profit, and pay the lower capital gains or dividend tax rate, isn't the system working the way it is intended to work? Of course you probably can't see this because you probably don't like capitalism.

12 years ago @ Big Government - Friday Free-for-All: R... · 0 replies · +3 points

Yep, you nailed it. I can remember seeing him on TV not long after he became Governor and thinking WOW, this guy should be President.