Why Redistribution Didn’t Work
When Barack Obama ran for president in 2008, one of his major stated purposes was to help the poor and the middle class. He was more aggressive in his advocacy for class warfare than any presidential candidate we had heard in the past 50 years.
Now a lot of what Obama said doesn’t appear to have been very sincere. He talked a lot about being bipartisan but he hasn’t been bipartisan. You can argue that he took Republican ideas and put them in Obamacare but if so there weren’t enough Republican ideas or he might have gotten a Republican vote or two.
But on the subject of redistribution, I think Obama was sincere. It fits his larger left wing agenda. What he wanted to do was to take from the rich and give to the poor.
To accomplish this end, President Obama (and a Democrat Congress) raises the taxes on the wealthy and on corporations. He surely thought he had accomplished his goal.
Yet here we are, six years later, and the statistics are amazing. For those people in the top quintile, earnings are greater than ever. They are doing great. Meanwhile, for the median household in America, earnings have fallen by 8%. Six years of redistribution and all you have for it is less. The average earnings of the poor and middle class have fallen while the rich got richer. How did this happen?
The first thing you have to know is that left wing policies almost invariably get hit by unexpected consequences. You think you are ending a war by withdrawing troops and the next thing you know there is more warfare than ever. That is what happened with redistribution.
Democrats never seem to learn about taxes. They think that if you tax something more you will invariably get more revenue. Over and over and over, the lesson isn’t learned. Higher rates don’t necessarily mean higher revenue.
Our founders knew better. They had a name for two different kinds of tariffs, which is a tax on imports. The REVENUE tariff had lower rates. The PROTECTIVE tariff had higher rates. The purpose of the revenue tariff was to bring money into the government’s treasury. The purpose of the protective tariff, the one with the higher rates, was to deter imports of particular items and thereby “protect” certain industries. But the higher rate tariff brought in less revenue because it discouraged behavior that brought in revenue. Raise the tax high enough on investment and you discourage investment. Raise the tax on income and people will find ways to get compensated other than by income.
Just because you raise the tax rates doesn’t mean that people will pay the higher taxes. Neither wealthy individuals nor corporations simply stand still and take it on the chin financially. Nothing is more fungible than money and what they do is they transfer it. Why invest in America when the tax rate is prohibitive when you can invest in Ireland where the tax rate is great? So they do. And as a consequence, the money isn’t invested in the United States.
But investment is essential for the creation of new jobs. The U.S. needs to be creating 300,000 new jobs every month to get ahead. Somewhere around 250,000 and we are treading water. At around 200,000 per month, we are losing ground. When the number of jobs being created gets too low, the laws of supply and demand kick in and people find that they are willing to work for less just to get (or keep) a job and pay the bills. And suddenly, earnings for median income families have fallen.
Of course, that wasn’t the only thing to hurt earnings. In 2008, we were right at the door of a complete bank meltdown. Over a trillion dollars was invested into the banks to keep them solvent.
The cause of this meltdown was well known and in fact had been predicted. As far back as 2004, a senator from New Hampshire named John Sununu Jr. was warning that our government policies were encouraging banks to make high risk loans. He cautioned that if we didn’t reverse this policy, a market correction was inevitable and the housing bubble would burst.
Sununu proposed legislation to fix this situation. It was sponsored by a number of Republican senators and was backed by George Bush. But it was aggressively condemned by several Democrats as one more example of Republicans hating the idea of poor people owning homes. Between the criticism of Republican nastiness and the fact that a filibuster couldn’t be beaten the Republicans backed off.
Of course, those Democrats didn’t step forward and say “we were wrong” when it all hit the fan. Liberalism means never having to say you’re sorry.
Read the rest HERE.
Behind the 332 pages is the proposal by President Barack Obama to treat the internet like a utility, which would unconstitutionally seize federal power to regulate the Internet like a public utility
FCC: You Won’t Know What’s In Net Neutrality Until We Force It Upon You
The power grab is on, and the Obama Executive Branch will keep it all under wraps until it is too late for you to protest against it. Such has been the tendency of the Obama White House for six years, but now the brazen tyranny is being pranced in front of us as if the hard left minions of President Obama are daring us to make a peep about it.
Republican FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai has revealed in various media interviews that the regulations against Americans through Net Neutrality are provided in a 332 page internet regulation proposal that he has been disallowed to make available to the public. Pai says the provisions in the regulations being proposed are a “monumental shift toward government control of how the internet works.” According to Pai, the proposed regulations “micromanages virtually every aspect of how the internet operates (through the internet conduct rule), it opens the door in billions of dollars of new taxes (through fees based on the reclassification of the internet as a utility) on broadband that consumers are going to have to pay, it will lead to slower broadband speeds, it opens the door to trial lawyers filing class actions across the country, litigation isn’t usually the best way to ensure innovation, and there are a whole host of harms that are going to happen.”
Tom Wheeler, the Democrat that is the FCC chairman, has not only refused to allow the public to see the 332 pages of proposed regulations, but has now even refused to testify before Congress, claiming the secrecy is necessary because “the future of the Internet is at stake.” The refusal to go before the House Oversight Committee on Wednesday comes on the eve of the FCC’s vote on new Internet regulations pertaining to net neutrality that are planned on Thursday.
The lack of transparency exists for simply one reason: because Wheeler, and the minions of the Obama Executive Branch, know that the provisions are unconstitutional, that they are acting in defiance to a court decision, and that the voting public and Republican members of Congress would disapprove of the tyrannical attack against online free speech. Wheeler, with his refusal to reveal the regulatory control contained in the 332 pages of regulations, is essentially telling us the same thing Nancy Pelosi said about the Affordable Care Act. “We’ll have to become subject to the new regulations to find out what’s in them.”
More to read HERE.
An American Renaissance
The Obama years will be forever known as the Dark Ages of US history, a time of political, cultural and economic deterioration. We have yet to see if they will lead to the fall of the American republic.
In the Obama years, the lie became not only a campaign strategy or a means to enact damaging policies, but an institution of government; the Presidency itself, a lie of monstrous proportions guarded by the complicit and the willingly ignorant.
In the Obama years, the Congress finally clearly demonstrated that although we have elections, there is no longer a government representing its citizens, but an entity serving itself, operating outside of Constitutional constraints and unaccountable to the American people for the benefit of the few at the expense of the many.
In the Obama years, disseminating either disinformation or no information, a devoted media helped create the intellectual darkness and vacant servitude required to carry out the strategy of their leftist Messiah; a country without any sense of its own history and traditions, where the low-information voter would slouch towards Obama’s imaginary utopia through a combination of governmental coercion and the hedonist nihilism of a painless, amusement-sodden, and stress-free America managed by a nanny-state.
In the Obama years, we see the resurrection of the economic feudalism of the Dark Ages, a system dominated by wealthy special interests that inhibit the upward mobility of the poor and the middle class.
In the Obama years, like during the Dark Ages, we witness the rise of Islamic hegemony and violence, the infiltration of the US government by the Muslim Brotherhood and the promotion of Sharia law in our schools and judicial system.
Renaissance literally means rebirth, a celebration of the human spirit and mankind’s potential for growth; a return to the ideals upon which the United States was founded, that is, a Constitution based on the Judeo-Christian values of Western civilization. Concomitantly, we should remember the sacrifices endured by our forebearers and reaffirm our commitment to preserve our way life as Joseph Story wrote in his 1833 Commentaries on the Constitution:
“Let the American youth never forget, that they possess a noble inheritance, bought by the toils, and sufferings, and blood of their ancestors; and capacity, if wisely improved, and faithfully guarded, of transmitting to their latest posterity all the substantial blessings of life, the peaceful enjoyment of liberty, property, religion, and independence.”
The framework of an American Renaissance is a restoration of the Constitution, in particular, 10th Amendment, which states:
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
More to read HERE.
So do check out the banners and links to your right.