Filed under: Capitalism, Economy, Election 2020, Free Markets, Politics, Progressivism, Taxes | Tags: Green New Deal, Medicare for All, Spending, Tax Cuts
You see it again in the current political campaign. Democrats want to buy your votes, with, say, “Medicare for All”, or “The Green New Deal.” The basic problem with this is not just that such programs would be absurdly costly. The problem is that the federal government has no money of it’s own, and can only “give” you these wonderful benefits by raising your taxes. Of course they say — not yours, just the taxes on the very wealthy, Big Business, rich people. Part of the problem is that Big Business and those who run those big businesses are those who create and fill good jobs.
Republicans want to cut taxes, not just on the rich as Democrats pretend, but on everybody, because that allows businesses to grow and expand, offer new products, and gives those who want to start businesses a little extra to do it with. And that is a very good thing. It allows people, the unemployed, to rise. The February Jobs report showed the economy’s payrolls soaring by 273,000 new jobs. And many more want to hire. Congress is talking about adding more visas for temporary workers. If the unemployed want jobs, they can probably get one. Average hourly earnings increased by 0.3%. Looks like a good climate for graduating seniors.
I think that because Democrats see themselves as morally superior, and the Republicans as lesser beings, giving stuff is seen as the way to garner votes. I think that people would rather have a good job than be given stuff, they want to provide for their families themselves, and they want to work hard and advance. And the gifts Democrats want to give people end up costing far more than was planned and everybody has to pay.
Filed under: Capitalism, Democrat Corruption, Domestic Policy, Economics, Economy, Election 2016, Environment, Free Markets, Freedom, Immigration, Law, National Security, News the Media Doesn't Want You to Hear, Politics, Progressives, Taxes | Tags: Donald J. Trump, The Rage of the Democrats, Victor Davis Hanson
This interview from the Hoover Institution was recorded on April 1, 2019. when Victor Davis Hanson’s book The Case for Trump came out. It holds up remarkably well. I’m a great admirer of Dr. Hanson. How did blue collar voters connect with a millionaire builder from Queens? Possibly because, contrary to Democrat shrieks, Donald Trump is authentic, exactly who he says he is. The people like that.
The February Jobs Report: Payrolls soared by 273,000. Might have something to do with current approval.
Maggie’s Farm blog called my attention to this post.
Matt Margolis at pjmedia points out that “We Can Thank Trump for the United States Having Such a Low Per Capita Infection Rate of Coronavirus.”
Filed under: Politics
Washington State Coronavirus report: 11 peoople have died. Of the 11, 10 deaths are associated with the Life Care Center in Kirkland. There are 58 cases of Coronavirus, 39 related to the Life Care Center. Of those 18 are residents, 6 are staff, and 10 are visitors or family.
Filed under: Bureaucracy, Politics | Tags: Elizabeth Warren, Other Female Candidates, What Qualifications?
Democrat women are getting all upset over the political demise of Elizabeth Warren, not because she is notably unqualified to be president, but because she is a woman, and thus obviously it’s a sexist thing and a woman cannot be elected as a president of the United States. There were all these other women in the campaign, and now it has dwindled down to just the two men. So the most important qualification for the presidency is assumed to be their sexual identity? Whether it is a man or a woman?
Sounds like a goodly proportion of the people don’t have a very clear understanding of just what a qualification is. How about being good looking? Having held a previous governmental position? We seem to approve of former governors as having run a state well, or not. But then Senators or Congressmen are OK. But Businessmen? Those who have run large corporations? Democrats are quite sure President Trump is unqualified because he was just a businessman, but he was also a TV star, and we hear every day the thoughts of TV and movie stars, not because of their ideas, but because their names are known, and they are click-bait. Democrats were furious because they didn’t get to see Trump’s tax returns, not so much to find out how much he made (they know it was a lot, because he’s rich) but to find out where he cheated on his tax returns. Elizabeth Warren was a law professor, a job she supposedly got by claiming Native American identity. But that did turn out to be a lie. So big lies are O.K.? My problem with Elizabeth Warren was that she had no understanding of basic economics, (and lies). Tulsi Gabbard was still in, so they changed the rules.
But does Trump have any understanding of basic economics? Ran a successful business. Surrounded himself with good financial people. Brags too much, but getting the economic growth he has is certainly worth bragging about. Certainly the Democrats are not going to brag about Black employment success. Socialist ideas had some interest, but a lot of opposition. Being a former Vice President indicates that they have at least been around and participated. Among the long list of candidates the Democrats started with, there were a remarkable number who really didn’t have much of any qualifications at all.
My point is that we really don’t have any clear idea about what the qualifications for high political office either are or should be. Some of us have our own longstanding idea, but there doesn’t seem to be any widespread agreement. Though perhaps that’s the intrusion of the press and their opinions rather than the public’s ideas. The Constitution says they have to be 35 years old, and a citizen for 14 years.
We started off with wanting George Washington because he had just won a brutal war for us and we were finally free. But they didn’t know what to call him, or whether he should have royal robes or the amenities of a British King. The “president” thing was brand new, as was the idea of being elected. Consider the old post about King George’s Coach to see what they were familiar with as the proper accoutrements of a national leader. (scroll down to the picture of the coach at the bottom) There are a lot of elections now, but there are still plenty of national leaders who have simply appointed themselves.
I suspect that much of the hatred for Donald Trump is centered in the preconceived notions of Democrats of what a president should be, and he doesn’t fit. (Besides being a Republican) My idea is centered in accomplishments, and Mr. Trump is doing very nicely indeed in that department.
American Elephants 