Anyone who has never made a mistake has never tried anything new.
Albert Einstein
Pro-Liberty Thought of the Day
Chart of the Day
 |
| Courtesy of Lost Horizon |
The structure designed with these principles at its heart worked magnificently for the 150 years or so that it remained widely understood. The federal government remained small and relatively harmless, operating almost entirely on modest revenue from import tariffs. American prosperity soared. In fact, the American economy grew at an average annual rate of 5% from the 1860s to the 1920s with full employment, a constantly- and dramatically-rising average standard of living, and virtually no inflation.Everytime I hear a "progressive" extol the virtues of the welfare state and various Big Nanny or employee milestones "won" by unions and their "progressive"/populist allies, how the world is unthinkable without a vast government superstructure introduced in the FDR era, I have to remind people brainwashed by years of revisionist history under "progressive"-dominated academia that rapid economic growth and a rising of the standard of living did not require an overbuilt, resource-consuming, rule-making dysfunctional central government. Innovative employee policies were made by companies seeking to attract and retain productive labor, which is intrinsic to the vastly unappreciated free market system.
My Greatest Hits: April 2014
Daddies and Daughters
Facebook Corner
(IPI). What's Wrong With Illinois?
Ultimately, you have to blame Illinois voters and the people they elected, particularly the last several years the "progressive" Democrat politicians who've been in control. They have let pensions go into crisis territory, the state's debt is among the lowest rated in the nation, Chicago murder statistics and poor education performance--and despite all that, maybe up to a half of Illinois voters or even more will not vote for real, responsible change. I mean, over 5 years since Bush left office, they are still trying to blame him for the decades-old repeated failure of "progressive" policies...
(IPI). Many Illinois families are all too familiar with the many broken promises of #ObamaCare.
The president repeatedly promised that the average American family would save $2,500 per year. Not only did the president and administration later backtrack on that promise, but many families actually also face increased health insurance premiums, deductibles and out-of-pocket expenses. Unfortunately, this could just be the beginning.
Illinois has seen 17-18% increases in health insurance premiums for individual and small-group market policy renewals this year. These health insurance increases are coming on the heels of 9-14% increases last year.
Of course the IPI doesn't have a solution, except for people to just die.
Can IPI's "progressives" do any better than plagiarize the lines of "Husband of the Year" Alan Grayson? The best solution to healthcare to restore a free market and stop failed, budget-busting interventionist policy which has exacerbated sector inflation.
(Cato Institute). "We can make the federal tax system much simpler, more efficient, and respectful of limited government. After a century, it’s time to scrap the income tax and replace it with a consumption-based flat tax."
If we had no taxes the Government would essentially shut down. Now that seems good on paper but one must remember the vast amount of people who today work for the Government. The unemployment rate would be ungodly high. The Safety net would be gone and millions would go without. The massive lack of income would lead to a collapse of the economy and businesses would begin to fail and they would have no bailout to protect them. This would lead to more unemployment and even less monetary mobility to support the business economy. It would be a downward death spiral.
We need to first replace the tax system to attempt to fix the many issues with it. Then we can talk about reducing the tax amount and size of Government. But that aspect needs to be done in a controlled fashion over a period of time. The bottom line is we are just in too deep at this point to be able to just convert back to a 1913 ideal.
"Progressive" trolls like to see their economically illiterate thoughts in print. The government contributes ZERO to the economy. It PLUNDERS from the private sector; it knows NOTHING about the real economy because it has a monopoly on force and doesn't know how to compete or allocate scarce resources. Those resources don't go away because you abandon morally hazardous social or inefficient economic policy. Because "progressive" taxes artificially raise project costs and thus contract viable investment alternatives, a tax system (especially a consumption tax) which does not punish savings and investment should promote investment and related job growth.
The troll reminds me of the fear-mongerers following the end of last century's two world wars where the federal expenditures fell very rapidly: how would our economy weather thousands of war veterans joining the private-sector labor force? The fact of the matter is the US economy grew to the largest in the world without a social welfare net, without compulsory unions, without activist monetary policy. Before government started intervening, there were charities and fraternal societies, doctors gave those on limited income discounted fees, etc. Look, we are on an unsustainable path; either we take a radical step forward on our own terms, or the Government Bubble popping will force them on us and will be far more painful.
(Reason). John Stossel: Time and again, environmentalists oppose things most likely to make the world cleaner and safer, and instead persuade politicians to spend billions of dollars on symbolism like "renewable" energy.
Wow, the trolls launching ad hominem attacks on Stossel attacking his credentials, etc, are pathetic. Stossel is a reporter, not a scientist, but what he is reporting here is well-documented.
But to make a related point (I'm sure Reason has or will post something soon), A. Barton Hinkle today posted about some of the latest economically illiterate environmental policies. Even Saint Al Gore has publicly questioned the wisdom of public policy promoting ethanol. Yet, as much as "progressives" bitch about corporate welfare, here we have a textbook case of crony Big Green capitalism, enthusiastically signed into law by Gov. McAuliffe (D-VA) (remember the GreenTech scandal?).
(troll stomping time)
That is why our air is solid poison, yet the free market heaven of China is lear as a mountain breeze. Moronic
You're right in the sense that anyone who thinks China is a "free market" is moronic . What about this Communist country's policies excite you the most: the one-child rule, the country's "investments" in Green Energy, its ubiquitous 5-year economic plans?
Another uneducated look at a subject that is beyond the comprehension of the author. Seems to be a pattern here on Reason...No, it was a bunch of whiny bitching about how doing things properly for the environment is inconvenient to selfish f***stains who think their personal liberties and personal desires are somehow more important than the environment we live in.
"Progressive" trolls find it impossible to debate without engaging in uncivil behavior. You sort of miss the big issue: in a true pro-liberty state, if I'm managing a tract of water, say, for stocking fish, I'm vested to maintaining the water's purity from pollution. Instead of the idiotic stick approach, you need to think in terms of incentives. If everybody owns something, effectively no one owns it. We all have a vested interest in sufficient breathable air; when I was on the UTEP faculty, one of my colleagues with breathing issues generally stayed inside during the winter because poor Mexicans on the other side of the river would burn tires for heating and the wind would blow the smoke onto campus. Do you think that we are not concerned about noxious clouds trespassing across property lines?
Political Cartoon
 |
| Courtesy of Henry Payne and Townhall |
Musical Interlude: My iPod Shuffle Series
The Hollies, "Stop in the Name of Love". As much as I love Diana Ross and the Supremes, this version of the song is definitive. It may have just barely cracked Top 30--but the arrangement and vocals are freaking awesome.
