Archive for the ‘Core principles’ Category

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.

Advertisements

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.

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.

Health Care and Competition

August 25, 2009

John Stossel writes about competition and health care.

Cato Institute Commentary on Obama’s Regulations

July 3, 2009

President Obama thinks the solution to every problem is more government… but that theory breaks down against a problem caused by government regulations.

Check out Cato Institute’s commentary on our financial problems.

How Actual Free Market Capitalism Would Save Healthcare

June 17, 2009

Healthcare has saved so many lives, it is about time that something saved it.(and as the past has proven, it isn’t the government that can do the saving!)

John Stossel writes about it.

America Becoming Unsafe for the Successful?

June 14, 2009

“Be careful how you make those statements, gentlemen.” President Obama warned CEOs of financial institutions. “The public isn’t buying that. My administration is the only thing standing between you and the pitchforks.”

And it’s true, too. Employees who were supposed to receive bonuses at AIG have received many vulgar death threats, some even hiring guards to protect their homes.

What inspires this kind of fear? A mob. What inspires a mob? It takes charisma. It takes a repeated message, that someone greedy or successful is responsible for everyone else’s problems… Let’s look back in history.

“Yet formerly Germany, without blinking an eyelid, for whole decades admitted these Jews by the hundred thousand. But now… when the nation is no longer willing to be sucked dry by these parasites, on every side one hears nothing but laments.” – Adolf Hitler, in his speech on September 12th, 1938

And now look into the present.

“This is a corporation that finds itself in financial distress due to recklessness and greed. Under these circumstances, it’s hard to understand how derivative traders at AIG warranted any bonuses, much less $165 million in extra pay. I mean, how do they justify this outrage to the taxpayers who are keeping the company afloat?(…)excuse me, I’m choked up with anger here(…)” – Barack Obama, in his speech on March 16, 2009

The speeches share a common tone – anger at a particularly upper class or rich group of people. Class warfare. According to Obama and his liberal allies, the wealthy are the cause of our problems. The wealthy are taking care of themselves. The wealthy are ‘sucking us dry’ and giving themselves ‘$165 million in extra pay’.

And Barney Frank says that the AIG bonuses were “rewarding failure”. Isn’t it ironic that he would say something like that? After spending nearly 2 trillion in bailouts for companies that were failing, he is upset about 280 million in bonuses spent on employees that were part of a failing company. Didn’t he know that employees in a failing company would get money when congress bailed out AIG with taxpayer dollars? Didn’t he know that the bailout would ‘reward incompetence’? Perhaps he forgot that momentarily when he was signing the 700 billion TARP into law…

That means that Mr. Frank and his liberal allies have spent 2,000,000,000,000 on buying up failures, and he’s upset that AIG spent 280,000,000 of that on failures. If you do the division, that means he outspent AIG by 7142:1 in taxpayer dollars. He and his liberal allies spent seven thousand times as much on failures! How very intriguing that he would be angry about rewarding incompetence. Perhaps we should lower his salary, as he is obviously ‘incompetent’ when it comes to basic arithmetic.

Vote Democrat and you can help cap the successful people’s salaries who ‘must have cheated to get there'(or had signed contracts including bonuses from over a year ago with AIG…), vote Hitler and you can eliminate their lives and liberty altogether. We are on a slippery slope to class warfare, and the pitchforks are already being sharpened. The trouble is, once the wealthy are out of the way, who is there to stop the government from bearing down on the middle and lower classes? Is shared misery in a socialist system what Americans really want? Do we really want to end up like India?

The difference between us and India is that we were founded on protection of God-given rights such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for all. It doesn’t guarentee us happiness – how can that be possible in such an evil world? But when the government honors those basic rights, it protects our lives and liberty – allowing us to pursue our gifts and desires without excessive taxation or any redistribution of our long work hours.

But today in this country, the mob rule government redistributes the long hours of workaholic CEOs and careful planning to other people. It steals 39 percent of the most wealthiest peoples’ lives to give to the poorest peoples’ lives(Robin Hood style, minus the stealing from wealthy officials). And since the government has been waging a war on poverty for nearly 80 years, people don’t feel the responsibility to help eachother. Did you know that 70% of your money that goes to welfare is lost in government overhead, paperwork, and government employee salary? But yet Americans no longer feel responsibility to help other people by donating to private charities that only lose 5% in overhead. “It’s not my problem” syndrome is becoming more and more common among Americans(especially liberals!)

Let me leave you with a few suggestions: Don’t be jealous. Vote for basic protections for everyone, whether they are successful or not, and vote against government officials who redistribute your wealth to either failing corporations or to massively wasteful welfare programs. Give to charity! Love your neighbor. And most of all, don’t rely on the government to solve your problems.

Leave Us Alone Already!

May 23, 2009

You know, I don’t understand why the government can’t just leave people alone… Yes, obviously you have to have law enforcement… but look at all this excess stuff. Does any of it solve the problem it sets out to solve? No. (education, welfare, FDA, AMA…) They should stop stealing people’s money, and let the consumers hold education, food, and medicine responsible for pricing themselves! Prices would drop without excessive regulation!

Did you know that the way the regulations are, only 40 in 10,000 drugs gets through? That drives prices up for healthcare a great deal, and it doesn’t even stop all the bad drugs! Private institutions and watchdog groups do a much better job.(like eBay’s rating system, i.e)

I don’t think I have to tell you how much of a mess public education is.

70% of government charity is lost in overhead, whereas in private charity where the citizens keep the institution accountable only lose 5% in overhead. Ronald Reagan illustrated it quite nicely in his 1964 speech when he pointed out that “if we divided the 45 billion dollars up equally(…)we’d be able to give each family 4,600 dollars a year.(…)Direct aid to the poor, however, is only running only about 600 dollars per family. It would seem that someplace there must be some overhead.”

Some quick mathematics shows that if 10% of someone’s income would go to government charity, if we abolished welfare and allowed people to choose for themselves, to get the same amount we’d only need 3.15% of that person’s income in private charity to have the same effect on poverty. And honestly, I don’t think Obama really cares about poverty more than he cares about votes. He already has much of America’s poor enthralled with him emotionally. However, they don’t realize what he really wants to do. When he reduces charitable deductions, you can tell what he really wants: Money and power.

Finally, can you imagine if everyone had food insurance, and food assistance programs from the government or employers autmoatically? You’d just buy everything you felt like buying, without looking at the price! And the people at the front desk would sell it to you, too, smiling merrily even though they don’t know the price either. You swipe the card, and off you go. What would happen to food prices? They would skyrocket! Insurance premiums would continue to climb to meet the expenses. Who would be gettting rich off of it? Yes, that’s right, the government that taxes the food and the businesses that sell the food. Ever wonder why surgeons and doctors make so much more money than the average income?

If we want to reduce the price of medicine, and increase the quality, public healthcare is not the way to go! We must eliminate government regulation, intervention and taxes on healthcare. Encourage private competition to drive prices down and quality up. Look at the other things that the government controls the service of, and ask yourself: Do I really want the government to have that much of direct control on my health?