Wealth Redistribution Explained – Hilarious!

April 30, 2010

Check out this hilarious video!


Arizona and Immigration?

April 30, 2010

Just look at all these sob stories.

At this rate, Democratic congress members will try to pass a law that makes it legal for illegal immigrants to live here. I don’t have a problem letting them live here – free trade is great! In fact, I want everyone to be able to come to American and work.

But we need to get rid of welfare and minimum wage first, or else the consequences will be dire:

1. Once they are legally living here, they will be eligible for wealth redistribution. This will increase the demand, without increasing the supply(since the government can only get 19.5% of GDP). Meaning we will have to mortgage more grandchildrens’ futures.

2. Minimum wage laws. The demand for minimum wage will shoot up by however many millions of them there are, without increasing the supply of such jobs. And unemployment will greatly increase, both among the capable illegal Mexicans and among our own poor people.

3. They will be able to vote. And with one party giving them wealth redistribution, amnesty, and minimum wage, who do you suppose they will vote for?

I would love to allow everyone to come to America – that is how this great nation was built! But allowing everyone to come to America to take someone else’s pie is very different from allowing everyone to come to America to bake their own pie.

Check out IMAO’s post about it.

Why Stimulus Isn’t Stimulating

January 9, 2010

“There is no stimulus. Stimulus is not possible. Government stimulus mathematically, economically, is not possible. You can’t stimulate an economy by taking 50 million out of it and then putting the 50 million back in. You can’t stimulate an economy by borrowing 50 million and then throwing it into the private sect…or, ’cause it’s all coming from the private sector.” – Rush Limbaugh

Politicians should be forced to take a ton of mathematics and economics courses.

The other problem, of course, is that anything the government does with redistributing wealth is 70% inefficient. They lose about 70% to overhead(70% has been the number as calculated by several different organizations over the last couple of decades)

So when you take 100% of 50 million from the economy, and try to put it back in, you’re only giving back 15 million. The government must realize this – they have all the numbers. Stimulus is not only not useful, it is harmful!

The trouble is that liberal politicians(including Republicans!) don’t see the economy, and the country, as an equation. If you take something from one place, it is subtraction equal to(or greater, with 70% government overhead) whatever you add back in.

Ultimately, the government can only create incentives for people to make the equation contain more goods(such as the promise to protect you from others’ stealing your goods, otherwise you have no reason to produce), and those incentives are worth the small price to pay for defense and police. But beyond that, they do more harm than good, because when they take your goods beyond a certain low tax(most everyone can feel these high taxes), you have a disincentive to work harder or produce more, thus lowering the overall amount of goods in the equation.(and creating unemployment, lately!)

Concerning our Fluffy Snow Covered Friends

November 20, 2009

…who are of course polar bears. Who else is fluffy and snow covered…? Yea, alright, but that’s just one example… OK, two examples… So… why polar bears, then?

Well, many scientists use ‘polar bears!’ as an argument for man made global warming… and why is that a bad thing?

For starters, it is an appeal to pity. An appeal to pity is not an argument in and of itself, and has no bearing on the debate at hand.

Secondly, polar bear populations are actually higher now than they were in the mid 20th century.

Thirdly, even if it were proved that polar bear populations are decreasing due to climate change, there is no way to link that argument to ‘Polar bear population decreases are mankind’s fault’, as there is no way to accurately test whether mankind can affect global temperature or not.(because there are other variables, including, but not limited to other heat sources such as the Sun and the core of the Earth)

Even if there weren’t other variables(an Earth without natural, gradual weather changes, and without rotating around the sun or containing a fluxing molten core), in order for the method of experimentation to be absolutely reliable, we would need to have a second group to compare to, a control group – an exact replica of Earth, only without mankind inhabiting it… but that’s not a very attractive idea, anyway.

The Statist’s Problem Solving Method

November 9, 2009

The statist’s line of thought is as follows:

1. Problem that needs solving, I don’t want to deal with it
2. Lets get a government solution to the problem
3. New problem comes about because of government solution, I don’t want to deal with it
4. Lets get a government solution to the problem

And that’s the cycle of government throughout history. Until, of course, people finally recognize that the government is the problem. And then there is usually bloodshed. And then some influential people take control. Luckily for us Americans, those influential people wrote the Constitution afterward. Unfortunately, not every revolution has leaders who are so wise, or so willing to give up their own power once the old government is gone.

The History of Government in 10 minutes

November 2, 2009

An extremely informative video about various types of government. It teaches you more about several types of government than you can read in several history books combined.

Hypocritical Michael Moore…

October 13, 2009

Michael Moore(who is a millionaire: http://www.mooreexposed.com/) seems to think our economic crisis is capitalism’s fault. A truly free capitalist economy is predictable, and when you don’t screw with it, bad things don’t happen. People work, they get paid, they buy stuff, they hire employees, they build stuff. Yes, occasionally one part of the economy goes down to make room for a new one.

But the massive job losses we are seeing have causes from government, not from freedom. Free people don’t have to lay off workers. Free people make more money, not less. This is a historical truth. Over and over again in the history of government, it has been free people who make the most product, not oppressed people.

Here are some examples of how our ‘saviors'(the government) are actually stifling growth:

Minimum wage. This increases the amount you have to pay your workers. Paying your workers more means fewer workers. Loss of jobs. Thank you, DNC…

Housing bubble. Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were BOTH founded by the government, however often you try to pin the blame on the private economy. They are called GSEs, AKA “Government Sponsored Enterprise”. And guess what? Now General Motors is a ‘GSE’, too! Makes you feel better knowing that, right?

Automobile market crash. Funny thing about this, is that Honda is doing just fine. They opened a new plant last fall, here in America.
Why is that? Because they don’t have to pay American taxes! They are based in Japan.

Gas is so expensive, right? At least that is the free economy’s fault! Well, guess who isn’t allowed to drill for oil? That’s right, Americans. Do you know what the American government taxes oil companies for?

Massive taxes. They’ve never helped growth, and yet this administration sure does enjoy raising them.

Minimum Wage and Unemployment

August 31, 2009

Stossel reports on the economics of the federal minimum wage.

Cash for Convicts?

August 27, 2009

You heard it. Your hard earned tax dollars are even being spent on convicts. Second source.

Stimulus Analogy

August 25, 2009

“Stimulus is like trying to raise the level of water in a pool by taking water from the deep end and pouring it into the shallow end.”

Read Stossel’s article titled “The Hangover”, refering to the auto industry market plummet that will follow the cash for clunkers program.