Wednesday, January 26, 2011

Fwd: SOU

From: larry.r.trout

'So tonight, I am proposing that starting this year, we freeze annual domestic spending for the next five years. This would reduce the deficit by more than $400 billion over the next decade, and will bring discretionary spending to the lowest share of our economy since Dwight Eisenhower was president.'…This leads to the 8 cents on the dollar scenario, because domestic spending is crowded out by interest on the national debt and entitlements.


Republicans propose returning to 2008 then 2006 spending levels for a total savings of 2.5 trillion over the next 10 years.

'This means further reducing health care costs, including programs like Medicare and Medicaid, which are the single biggest contributor to our long-term deficit. Health insurance reform will slow these rising costs, which is part of why nonpartisan economists have said that repealing the health care law would add a quarter of a trillion dollars to our deficit.'not because of slowing of rising costs, but because $770 billion in tax increases over 10 years.

''Still, I'm willing to look at other ideas to bring down costs, including one that Republicans suggested last year: medical malpractice reform to rein in frivolous lawsuits.'

This should have been in Obama's original health reform proposal, and may have been the best way to reduce rising medical costs.

'And let's make sure what we're cutting is really excess weight. Cutting the deficit by gutting our investments in innovation and education is like lightening an overloaded airplane by removing its engine. It may feel like you're flying high at first, but it won't take long before you'll feel the impact.'…Is he talking about what will happen if we get rid of Coal and Oil?...or attacking Insurance  and Pharmacutical companies? Or just tax policies? So many ways to understand this analogy.

Monday, January 24, 2011


'Another Triumph for the Greens

To go with toilets that don't flush and light bulbs that don't light, we now have dishwashers that don't wash. '

Saturday, January 15, 2011

A Tale of two moralities

I am impressed that he tries to acknowledge both sides, but he misrepresents the positions of both the right and the left, making both appear farther right than they really are.  Few Republicans want to abandon social programs, but they do want to prevent them from getting larger.

Likewise, the people on the left aren't just capitalists who also want public charity.  (That would be a good description of most Republicans.)  Many on the left despise capitalism and want the government to control the economy and specific industries.  The leftist policies of the current government have tried to take over healthcare, the auto industry and the financial sector.

He fails to mention Keynesian Economics, which is followed religiously by the everybody on the left and less religiously by a few on the right. This is a belief that the government should meddle in the economy by trying to boost demand during weak economic times.  The problem is that it has a bad track record and it is the perpetual excuse for increasing government spending and control.

There is an optimal level of government that prevents us from harming each other but otherwise leaves us free to conduct our own affairs.  We are way past that point.  The level of government we have now is leading us to bankruptcy.  The country is driving off of a cliff built out of debt.  The Tea party movement is not about a desire to abandon welfare, but a desire to reign in excessive spending.

Finally, everybody on the left ignores the lessons of history - how experiments in socialism have repeatedly collapsed the economies of the countries who tried them. It ignores the fact that per capita GDP is inversely proportional to tax rates worldwide and throughout history.

Consider the following thought experiment:  If you taxed a certain segment of the population at 100% of their income, how much would that segment of the population produce?  They would produce nothing at all.  As you lowered that tax rate, they would produce more, and if you kept lowering it, you would reach some level at which production is maximized.  Some have suggested that the government should find a tax
rate at which government revenue is maximized (as opposed to maximum productivity), but as tempting as this sounds, I want to remind you that it is not the role of the federal government to see how much money they can milk out of us.  This kind of thinking is counter to freedom.

Those on left want to increase taxes so that they can increase spending, but this is poison for our economy, as it runs counter to productivity and freedom

Wednesday, January 12, 2011

Fwd: fathers and red lights

From: larry.r.trout

'About 2 1/2 hours before the attack, authorities said Wednesday, an Arizona state wildlife officer stopped Loughner for running a red light but had no reason to search the vehicle and allowed the young man to leave with a warning.'

'In the hours before Jared Lee Loughner allegedly tried to assassinate Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) and killed six others, his father chased him into the desert as he carried a mysterious black bag in his hand, the Associated Press reported.'

It's too bad his father did not call the police, saying he did not know what his son had or planned.

Then the red light pull-over may have had probable cause.

Even so it was a legally possesed gun and he hadn't committed a crime yet.

Geithner warns Beijing on currency policies

Sarah Palin Versus The Blood Libel

Rep. Burton: Secure Congress From Undetected Explosives

What If Jared Loughner Was Muslim?


From: larry.r.trout

'Dmitri Medvedev in an interview with Izvestia from May 6, 2010: "If we speak honestly, the regime that was built in the Soviet Union cannot be called anything other than totalitarian."'

'Georgi Dimitrov, last head of the Communist International, is quoted to the effect that as early as January 1945 Stalin declared at a reception in his dacha outside Moscow that although Russia was allied with one capitalist faction (the United States and Great Britain) against another (the Nazis), it would soon fight its present allies too. Stalin believed that as a result of a postwar capitalist economic crisis, and conflicts between the Western allies, America would be compelled to withdraw its forces from Europe, which would enable the USSR not just to dominate Eastern Europe but to extend its influence to all of Germany as well as France and Italy. But as the Russian study notes with evident disbelief and perhaps even amusement, Western politicians continued to put their trust in the peaceful intentions of  "Uncle Joe" and "simply did not want to believe in Soviet expansionism" until a more sober approach began to prevail in the West (which only happened after Churchill's "Iron Curtain" speech, which this volume reprints in full). Further stages in the unleashing of the Cold War were the Berlin Blockade provoked by Stalin, the Soviet takeover of Prague in 1948, and the rapid Sovietization of Eastern Europe.

The study further notes that Soviet military doctrine in the early 1950s was—according to Marshal Sergei Akhromeev, chief of the Soviet General Staff—based on a powerful belief that Soviet tank divisions that would occupy Western Europe as far as the Atlantic. As for the outbreak of the Korean War, the initiative came from Kim Il Sung, but Stalin gave him the green light and provided enormous quantities of military equipment and "fully consciously [
soznatelno] attempted to draw America [into] a new conflict which could eventually lead to a third world war." In brief, according to this volume, Stalin was a monster and eventually a disaster for Russia even more than for the rest of the world.'

Same as the Old Boss?

Walter Williams

Liberal Seek Ban on Metaphors In Wake of Arizona Shooting

Making the World Safe for Targets of Lunatics

The Insanity Offense: How America's Failure to Treat the Seriously Mentally Ill Endangers Its Citizens

Fwd: Russia

From: larry.r.trout

'This was decades ago, however, and in the twenty-first century it would seem that common interests should outweigh the tensions and disputes between the two countries. But the improvement in relations has been modest. Although President Obama has gone out of his way to "reset" U.S.-Russian relations and Putinism is not high on the list of threats that worry Americans, a majority of Russians, according to all public opinion polls, see the United States not just as the main culprit in the fall of the Soviet Union but as Russia's greatest enemy now and in the foreseeable future. This view is reinforced day in, day out in the Russian media—and not just by a few retired generals, neo-Stalinists, neo-Eurasians, or spokesmen of extremist fringe groups.'

Tuesday, January 11, 2011

Goldman Sachs admits it misled investors, pays $550M fine

I heard a financial talk show host on the radio say that Goldman Sachs
got off easy ... that they are laughing all the way to the bank.

Likewise, I heard a socialist claim that Obama is in bed with Goldman

Thursday, January 6, 2011

Ann Coulter

Fwd: Michael Lind

'Let's stop pretending the Constitution is sacred

Freedom rests on a culture of constitutionalism, not a particular document  '

"I, (name of Member), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."