Reality: Progressive And Individualist Policies In Action
It never ceases to amaze me how progressives believe that they hold the moral high ground when it comes to compassion. If a conservative argues for a change of the status-quo about how welfare programs are run so that people are not sentenced to lives of dependency, then they are depicted as cruel and heartless. If conservatives propose to reform the failure that is the public school system in our inner cities, they are accused of hating teachers and attacking the children. If a conservative dares to mention how liberal programs have failed to help those they were intended to help, they claim that the conservatives were too miserly and not enough money was spent. Had conservatives been more compassionate and less selfish, those "well intentioned" programs would certainly have worked. Therefore, the fault is easily transferred to the reformer and not those he seek only the maintenance of failure. On and on it goes.
However, conservatives should cede to no one the moral high ground. There is nothing that conservatives want more than for every single American to have the opportunity to achieve his/her full potential in life. Very few people take joy in or are indifferent to other people's suffering. It should be no surprise to anyone, that most Americans want everybody to have the chance to live in a society where the schools we send our children to are excellent and a prosperous economy assures them a job and a career when they graduate. The difference conservatives have with progressives is that we don’t believe that it matters a hill of beans how good your intentions are. The only thing that matters is results.
Therefore, it bothers us greatly that, for the sake of partisan advantage, the Democrat party has chosen to create a vast vote buying and money generating machine that serves their own partisan interest rather than promote policies that would actually help those in need. While this is a serious charge that will offend many on the left, it is absolutely backed by the facts. This country has spent almost the entirety of the national debt to fight a war on poverty and poverty is at roughly the same levels it was when we began. Three generations have been mired in a dependency culture that fosters habits like illegitimacy and a culture of entitlement which perpetuate an endless cycle of poverty and ruined lives.
Therefore, when I see the failure of leftist policies and their impact on the lives of human beings, I conclude that only the willfully blind, the naïve and the craven would wish for the status quo to continue another day. Since I believe that most of the hierarchy of the Democrat party are neither ostriches nor innocents, I am left to conclude that as long as their vote buying-money generating racket keeps them in power, they don’t give a damn whether lives are destroyed as a consequence.
Results do matter. Leftist policies have been an abysmal failure and part of the reason is that the politicians who claim they are the most compassionate are actually the most cold blooded and power hungry. It is bad enough that the governing model of progressives have adversely impacted the lives of the poor, it is worse that it is in the process of bankrupting cities, states and soon the Federal government. That is not my opinion. It is mathematics!
2=======================================================================================================
It is time to face some unpleasant but important truths. The “blue” model of governance in which ever higher and higher taxes on the creators of wealth are needed to fund a corrupt coalition of politicians, media, public service employees , their unions and the beneficiaries of public largesse is unsustainable. As Margaret Thatcher so eloquently pointed out, the problem with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.
It would seem obvious that it would be the massive amounts of transfer payments used to buy votes that makes the “blue” governing concept unsustainable. This is true in the case of the Federal government, but it is not the case for states and localities. There, the greatest threat to solvency is the massive power of the Democrat party’s number one allies: the public employee unions:
However, conservatives should cede to no one the moral high ground. There is nothing that conservatives want more than for every single American to have the opportunity to achieve his/her full potential in life. Very few people take joy in or are indifferent to other people's suffering. It should be no surprise to anyone, that most Americans want everybody to have the chance to live in a society where the schools we send our children to are excellent and a prosperous economy assures them a job and a career when they graduate. The difference conservatives have with progressives is that we don’t believe that it matters a hill of beans how good your intentions are. The only thing that matters is results.
Therefore, it bothers us greatly that, for the sake of partisan advantage, the Democrat party has chosen to create a vast vote buying and money generating machine that serves their own partisan interest rather than promote policies that would actually help those in need. While this is a serious charge that will offend many on the left, it is absolutely backed by the facts. This country has spent almost the entirety of the national debt to fight a war on poverty and poverty is at roughly the same levels it was when we began. Three generations have been mired in a dependency culture that fosters habits like illegitimacy and a culture of entitlement which perpetuate an endless cycle of poverty and ruined lives.
Therefore, when I see the failure of leftist policies and their impact on the lives of human beings, I conclude that only the willfully blind, the naïve and the craven would wish for the status quo to continue another day. Since I believe that most of the hierarchy of the Democrat party are neither ostriches nor innocents, I am left to conclude that as long as their vote buying-money generating racket keeps them in power, they don’t give a damn whether lives are destroyed as a consequence.
Results do matter. Leftist policies have been an abysmal failure and part of the reason is that the politicians who claim they are the most compassionate are actually the most cold blooded and power hungry. It is bad enough that the governing model of progressives have adversely impacted the lives of the poor, it is worse that it is in the process of bankrupting cities, states and soon the Federal government. That is not my opinion. It is mathematics!
2=======================================================================================================
It is time to face some unpleasant but important truths. The “blue” model of governance in which ever higher and higher taxes on the creators of wealth are needed to fund a corrupt coalition of politicians, media, public service employees , their unions and the beneficiaries of public largesse is unsustainable. As Margaret Thatcher so eloquently pointed out, the problem with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.
It would seem obvious that it would be the massive amounts of transfer payments used to buy votes that makes the “blue” governing concept unsustainable. This is true in the case of the Federal government, but it is not the case for states and localities. There, the greatest threat to solvency is the massive power of the Democrat party’s number one allies: the public employee unions:
Now, I've got to hand it to them. This is one of the most ingenious forms of political corruption I have ever seen. As I discussed in F*** the Poor, Democrat politicians create a huge bureaucracy full of unionized employees to manage their vote buying welfare scam. Then they do everything in their power to prevent any change to the horrible school systems. The resultant policies fail so spectacularly that even more employees (cops, firemen, bureaucrats, prison workers, criminal justice workers) need to be hired. They then pass laws making union membership mandatory and have union dues automatically taken out of workers paychecks by the government itself. In gratitude, the unions donate a huge part of the union dues that the state has extracted back to the politicians to make sure they are reelected. In further gratitude, those politicians sit down with the union bosses and negotiate contracts filled with sweetheart benefits and lavish pensions. If anyone objects, all of the members of this cabal along with their media allies scream in unison that the complainer is against the police, the teachers and the poor and is therefore evil scum. Seriously, what kind of human being can be against taking care of our brave firefighters, our gallant police force and our dedicated teachers? Thus, all resistance to the systematic looting of the taxpayer that the Democrat/Union alliance fosters is marginalized and destroyed. It's the perfect win/win scam for everyone, right? Yeah, everyone, but the taxpayer.
It cannot be denied that Democrats and their union allies have mastered this fine art of political gamesmanship and partisan advantage. They've perfected the rhetoric that will convince the willfully blind, the naive, the craven and the bought to return them to power year after year despite the widespread failure of their policies. This is the "blue" state governing model. If you are a government employee, it's the bees knees:
It cannot be denied that Democrats and their union allies have mastered this fine art of political gamesmanship and partisan advantage. They've perfected the rhetoric that will convince the willfully blind, the naive, the craven and the bought to return them to power year after year despite the widespread failure of their policies. This is the "blue" state governing model. If you are a government employee, it's the bees knees:
To get an idea of how totally out of whack this system is, check out this chart which shows a full breakdown of the disparity between public and private sector employment:
While virtually every level of compensation is greater for the public sector worker, the one that stands out is the number for the Defined-benefit pension. As you can see, our public sector union workers receive a staggering amount of retirement loot compared to the working stiffs who pay their salaries. Worse, many of them can retire and receive these pensions when they are in their fifties (sometimes even forties!), thus costing the taxpayers more in retirement than they did on the job! What a deal, right?
3=======================================================================================================
So, how do these corrupt pols and union thugs get away with this kind of robbery of their employers the taxpayers? Well, the great thing about pensions and health care benefits that follow the employee throughout retirement is that they don't cost anything up front. Therefore, when the pols and the union boys negotiate the contract there is virtually no immediate change in the current budget. It's "free", don't you see? It is rationalized as being necessary as a bargaining chip to be "traded" in exchange for lower wages than the outrageous demands of the union bosses. By the time a state or locality actually has to start to pay the massive payouts that have been given away, the politicians have long since gone into retirement. Pretty clever, eh?
Here's how this works in Barack Obama's Illinois:
3=======================================================================================================
So, how do these corrupt pols and union thugs get away with this kind of robbery of their employers the taxpayers? Well, the great thing about pensions and health care benefits that follow the employee throughout retirement is that they don't cost anything up front. Therefore, when the pols and the union boys negotiate the contract there is virtually no immediate change in the current budget. It's "free", don't you see? It is rationalized as being necessary as a bargaining chip to be "traded" in exchange for lower wages than the outrageous demands of the union bosses. By the time a state or locality actually has to start to pay the massive payouts that have been given away, the politicians have long since gone into retirement. Pretty clever, eh?
Here's how this works in Barack Obama's Illinois:
Yep, a tiny little loophole put into the law 21 years ago by some corrupt Democrats as favors for their union buddies and the State of Illinois is out fifty six million bucks. Imagine this kind of taxpayer giveaway on a statewide employee level and you'll get an idea of why Illinois is totally broke. What Democrats and their corrupt "blue" model have done to so many cities in America, like the once formerly wealthy metropolises of Detroit and Cleveland, they are now doing to entire states.
California is another prime example of this insidious nexus between politicians and unions. Things are so bad that cities like Stockton have declared bankruptcy and the cost of pensions for retired workers is causing the state to veer into irrecoverable insolvency. As a result, necessary services and luxuries like libraries are being cut and eliminated so that illegal immigrants can continue to receive welfare and public employees can retire at fifty:
California is another prime example of this insidious nexus between politicians and unions. Things are so bad that cities like Stockton have declared bankruptcy and the cost of pensions for retired workers is causing the state to veer into irrecoverable insolvency. As a result, necessary services and luxuries like libraries are being cut and eliminated so that illegal immigrants can continue to receive welfare and public employees can retire at fifty:
We'll delve further into how totally screwed California and Illinois are later in this chapter, but the key thing is to understand the true magnitude of the corruption involved. As long as they are playing with other people's money (i.e. our money) and the bills won't come due for years, crooked politicians have every incentive to trade away the future solvency of their cities and states in order to get elected today. Once firmly entrenched in office, they can use their massive power to reward and punish their friends and enemies at will. With a compliant media always ready to attack anyone who questions their policies as being mean, evil and heartless, Democrats domination of politics in many parts of the country is total. Nowhere has this been perfected more than in Barack Obama's hometown. This kind of politics is known as the Chicago Way.
4=======================================================================================================
While this makes for a very successful political strategy and I will be the first to admit that it is ingenious in its design, this style of governing eventually has a due date. The more people whose votes you can buy with welfare entitlements added to the cost of the employees who manage them added to the cost of the police and prisons to house them when the policies utterly fail added to the cost of the sweetheart pensions of all the employees and politicians involved in this crooked enterprise eventually bankrupts whatever government that practices this fiscal witches brew. On a city level we've already seen how Stockton and Detroit have run out of money. On a state level, California and Illinois are not far behind. On a national level, we can see the beginning of the end game with the Eurpean debt crisis caused by the profligacy of Greece, Spain, Portugal and Italy. Sadly, within a few years, we in the United States will see our own day of fiscal reckoning.
Unless that is, we all start swallowing the red pill, examine the numbers and do something to end the unsustainable governing philosophy of the left:
4=======================================================================================================
While this makes for a very successful political strategy and I will be the first to admit that it is ingenious in its design, this style of governing eventually has a due date. The more people whose votes you can buy with welfare entitlements added to the cost of the employees who manage them added to the cost of the police and prisons to house them when the policies utterly fail added to the cost of the sweetheart pensions of all the employees and politicians involved in this crooked enterprise eventually bankrupts whatever government that practices this fiscal witches brew. On a city level we've already seen how Stockton and Detroit have run out of money. On a state level, California and Illinois are not far behind. On a national level, we can see the beginning of the end game with the Eurpean debt crisis caused by the profligacy of Greece, Spain, Portugal and Italy. Sadly, within a few years, we in the United States will see our own day of fiscal reckoning.
Unless that is, we all start swallowing the red pill, examine the numbers and do something to end the unsustainable governing philosophy of the left:
Don't believe me? Still stuck in the Matrix and either believe that all is still OK and we'll be able to afford all the promises that politicians have made to their citizens? Perhaps, you are one of those people that can come up with excuses and rationalizations for why "blue" policies don't work? Maybe, you are like Barack Obama and believe that there have been too many "headwinds" that couldn't be forseen. Well, that's all well and good for you. I hope you are comfortable being sucked dry within the Matrix world of unreality.
For the rest of you who might still want some factual evidence to back up my claim that conservatism works better than progressivism and that the "blue" model is inherently unsustainable let us examine how these ideologies have worked in actual practice here in the United States. Fortunately, all one really needs to do to get an idea of what the pontentials and pitfalls of each political philosophy might be is to see what happens when politicians are able to implement their ideology, given the power to govern and then forced face the voters every two or four years. This is the genius of our federal system. Each state can become a laboratory for different ways of governing and the results can be studied and analyzed for the effectiveness or failures of different governmental philosophies. Those policies can then be emulated or avoided as facts on the ground warrant.
5=======================================================================================================
First, let's take a look at the cost of state and local governments to the citizens and businesses within them. In the chart below, the more conservative the state the redder it is and the more liberal the more blue:
For the rest of you who might still want some factual evidence to back up my claim that conservatism works better than progressivism and that the "blue" model is inherently unsustainable let us examine how these ideologies have worked in actual practice here in the United States. Fortunately, all one really needs to do to get an idea of what the pontentials and pitfalls of each political philosophy might be is to see what happens when politicians are able to implement their ideology, given the power to govern and then forced face the voters every two or four years. This is the genius of our federal system. Each state can become a laboratory for different ways of governing and the results can be studied and analyzed for the effectiveness or failures of different governmental philosophies. Those policies can then be emulated or avoided as facts on the ground warrant.
5=======================================================================================================
First, let's take a look at the cost of state and local governments to the citizens and businesses within them. In the chart below, the more conservative the state the redder it is and the more liberal the more blue:
As you can see, the most expensive states to live and do business in from a tax point of view are blue states. So, which do businesses and citizens prefer to live and operate in? Do they choose high tax states with lots of services, public employee unions and large safety nets or do they prefer lower taxes, less services, fewer public employee unions and a smaller net?
Well, business definitely prefers lower tax states. They tend to invest and create wealth, jobs and tax dollars in states that don't hand their money away to buy votes and sweetheart contracts for big labor:
Well, business definitely prefers lower tax states. They tend to invest and create wealth, jobs and tax dollars in states that don't hand their money away to buy votes and sweetheart contracts for big labor:
6=======================================================================================================
What about people? Do they prefer to live in places with high taxes more services and a large safety net or do they prefer the opposite. Well, Americans are telling everybody the answer to that the old fashioned way: with their feet:
What about people? Do they prefer to live in places with high taxes more services and a large safety net or do they prefer the opposite. Well, Americans are telling everybody the answer to that the old fashioned way: with their feet:
According to the census bureau, large numbers of the American people are fleeing from high tax blue states like Illinois, California and New York and moving to lower tax states where businesses are more welcome and, thus, more jobs are available. This should come as no surprise to anyone who paid attention to what has happened to the textile industry over the past one hundred years. Once located in the Northeast in places like Massachussetts and upstate New York, increasing taxes, regulations and unions led textile manufacturers to flee to more the more hospitable business and tax climates of the Carolinas. As the world globalized, competition with cheaper imports once again forced them to relocate to even more business friendly locations in the third world. It just goes to prove the axiom that money, like water chooses the path of least resistance.
As it is with textiles, so it is with other businesses. The high tax and high regulation model of the "blue" governing model is causing businesses to flee to safer harbor. Prospective employees and job seekers naturally follow. Unfortunately, the same dynamic has been true for the United States globally over the past fifty years. As we have built up a massive "blue" state edifice with high levels of wealth redistribution and the higher taxes they bring, a huge regulatory state and private sector unions whose demands became more than the market could bear, manufacturing industries have moved offshore. Tragically, it is not as easy for displaced workers to follow the jobs to the new country as it is to relocate from state to state. This growing level of uncompetitiveness caused by the "blue" model is causing our national economy to suffer a huge drain in wealth creation. This can be seen in high levels of unemployment and the decline of growth rates and the high deficits they cause.
7=======================================================================================================
As I said, as it is internationally, so it is with states. The genius of the founders allows us to see fifty different examples of how different political philosophies work when actually implemented. In the United States there are only two states that we can really compare on an apples to apples basis: California and Texas. Both are border states with high levels of legal and illegal immigrants. Both are wealthy in natural resources and have large diverse populations. Republicans (and conservative Democrats) have ruled the roost in Texas for almost twenty years. Texas has voted Republican for President in just about every election of my lifetime. The opposite is true of California which has been run by Democrats for a generation. If your party has been in power and your philosophy has been dominant for that length of time, you own the trend. It isn't your predecessors or policies inherited that you are judged on, but a full generation's worth of evidence of how well your philosophy governs.
So how has progressivism worked out in California and conservatism in Texas? The results are very interesting and very telling:
As it is with textiles, so it is with other businesses. The high tax and high regulation model of the "blue" governing model is causing businesses to flee to safer harbor. Prospective employees and job seekers naturally follow. Unfortunately, the same dynamic has been true for the United States globally over the past fifty years. As we have built up a massive "blue" state edifice with high levels of wealth redistribution and the higher taxes they bring, a huge regulatory state and private sector unions whose demands became more than the market could bear, manufacturing industries have moved offshore. Tragically, it is not as easy for displaced workers to follow the jobs to the new country as it is to relocate from state to state. This growing level of uncompetitiveness caused by the "blue" model is causing our national economy to suffer a huge drain in wealth creation. This can be seen in high levels of unemployment and the decline of growth rates and the high deficits they cause.
7=======================================================================================================
As I said, as it is internationally, so it is with states. The genius of the founders allows us to see fifty different examples of how different political philosophies work when actually implemented. In the United States there are only two states that we can really compare on an apples to apples basis: California and Texas. Both are border states with high levels of legal and illegal immigrants. Both are wealthy in natural resources and have large diverse populations. Republicans (and conservative Democrats) have ruled the roost in Texas for almost twenty years. Texas has voted Republican for President in just about every election of my lifetime. The opposite is true of California which has been run by Democrats for a generation. If your party has been in power and your philosophy has been dominant for that length of time, you own the trend. It isn't your predecessors or policies inherited that you are judged on, but a full generation's worth of evidence of how well your philosophy governs.
So how has progressivism worked out in California and conservatism in Texas? The results are very interesting and very telling:
8=======================================================================================================
What we have is a tale of two states.
It was the best of times....
What we have is a tale of two states.
It was the best of times....
Unlike most of the rest of the country, Texas is booming. Everywhere buildings and roads are being constructed and people are moving in to fill them. The other day I saw this ad by Elizabeth Warren that is one of the shining examples of how leftists don't understand cause and effect when it comes to economics:
Here is the woman who was the first Democrat politician to make the case that if you created a small business "you didn't build that!". As Elizabeth Warren said at the time (I"ll spare you having to watch another second of her), you (business)transported your goods on roads the rest of us built. Therefore, you owe everyone else back a "hunk" (yes, she really did use that word) of your good fortune. I"ll not reiterate how absolutely economically ignorant that argument is, but if Elizabeth "Fauxcahontas" Warren understood even the slightest bit about infrastructure and how and why it gets built, she'd realize that infrastructure generally doesn't create wealth by itself, it follows wealth.
China spends huge proportions of its national income on infrastructure because they don't have any to begin with. The only reason it makes any sense for them to do it is because so much wealth has been created that it has become essential to build the infrastructure to keep it going. Without the creation of wealth, infrastructure is useless. Period.
So, why am I bringing Fauxcahontas and China into a discussion about Texas and California? Well, if you want to see massive amounts of new infrastructure being built, sparkling new airports and highways and new museums and art centers being constructed, go to Texas. Where wealth is being created, infrastructure will follow. The truth is that Liz Warren, Barack Obama and all their Democrat friends can spend all the money on new infrastructure they want in Massachusetts and as long as taxes and regulations in that state remain high, it won't improve the economy there much at all. It isn't the roads that create the wealth, it's people and their ideas that do.
9========================================================================================================
Despite a legislature that only meets for ninety days every two years and a public service workforce that is largely non-unionized, Texas is not a place where you see Granny starving in the street in the oppressive heat with her autistic grandson. It is not a place where children are ill educated, where there is mass starvation or rampant homelessness. Rather, here is a state that has zero income taxes and very low corporate and sales taxes. It is a state that is business friendly and pro-growth and is therefore doing better than just about any state in the country economically:
China spends huge proportions of its national income on infrastructure because they don't have any to begin with. The only reason it makes any sense for them to do it is because so much wealth has been created that it has become essential to build the infrastructure to keep it going. Without the creation of wealth, infrastructure is useless. Period.
So, why am I bringing Fauxcahontas and China into a discussion about Texas and California? Well, if you want to see massive amounts of new infrastructure being built, sparkling new airports and highways and new museums and art centers being constructed, go to Texas. Where wealth is being created, infrastructure will follow. The truth is that Liz Warren, Barack Obama and all their Democrat friends can spend all the money on new infrastructure they want in Massachusetts and as long as taxes and regulations in that state remain high, it won't improve the economy there much at all. It isn't the roads that create the wealth, it's people and their ideas that do.
9========================================================================================================
Despite a legislature that only meets for ninety days every two years and a public service workforce that is largely non-unionized, Texas is not a place where you see Granny starving in the street in the oppressive heat with her autistic grandson. It is not a place where children are ill educated, where there is mass starvation or rampant homelessness. Rather, here is a state that has zero income taxes and very low corporate and sales taxes. It is a state that is business friendly and pro-growth and is therefore doing better than just about any state in the country economically:
and has provided half of all the job growth in the US over the past two years:
And continues to lead the nation in job growth by a wide margin during this horrible recession:
10======================================================================================================
Low taxes are not the only ingredient in Texas' recipe for economic growth. Unlike Democrat dominated "blue" states, Texas is a place whose politicians are not beholden to trial lawyers. Instead they seek to promote growth and innovation with sensible bills like this:
Low taxes are not the only ingredient in Texas' recipe for economic growth. Unlike Democrat dominated "blue" states, Texas is a place whose politicians are not beholden to trial lawyers. Instead they seek to promote growth and innovation with sensible bills like this:
As a result of tort reform, Texas has seen a 60% increase in doctors seeking to practice in the state and, thus, will not see the sort of doctor shortages, particularly in obstetrics that you see in other parts of the country.
In Texas, you have a state whose politicians are not a fully owned subsidiary of public employee unions. The kind of fiscal sanity that this allows has enabled the government to close a six billion dollar budget gap caused by the onset of the recession without raising taxes or raiding too much their nearly three billion dollar rainy day fund. This is a state that is fiscally sound with a sustainable level of spending and an adequate level of pension funding going into the future.
In sum, Texas is a place that is growing and attracting new business and new people and new development. Even though there are plenty of the evangelical Christians that Democrats are always ranting about, you don't see a state where science has come to an end. In fact, you see just the opposite. The science and technology business in Texas is booming. Texas is a great example of what happens when the policies of Conservatives are followed for a generation. If you want to see an example of what conservatives and libertarians would like our national government to emulate, than look no farther than the state of Texas. Is it perfect? Of course, not. But, it works far better than any other alternative.
11======================================================================================================
It was the worst of times...
Now, let's take a look at the state of California where liberals have run the place for a generation and examine the results they have achieved. Here we find a state on the verge of total bankruptcy:
In Texas, you have a state whose politicians are not a fully owned subsidiary of public employee unions. The kind of fiscal sanity that this allows has enabled the government to close a six billion dollar budget gap caused by the onset of the recession without raising taxes or raiding too much their nearly three billion dollar rainy day fund. This is a state that is fiscally sound with a sustainable level of spending and an adequate level of pension funding going into the future.
In sum, Texas is a place that is growing and attracting new business and new people and new development. Even though there are plenty of the evangelical Christians that Democrats are always ranting about, you don't see a state where science has come to an end. In fact, you see just the opposite. The science and technology business in Texas is booming. Texas is a great example of what happens when the policies of Conservatives are followed for a generation. If you want to see an example of what conservatives and libertarians would like our national government to emulate, than look no farther than the state of Texas. Is it perfect? Of course, not. But, it works far better than any other alternative.
11======================================================================================================
It was the worst of times...
Now, let's take a look at the state of California where liberals have run the place for a generation and examine the results they have achieved. Here we find a state on the verge of total bankruptcy:
Yup, the "blue" model has worked so well in California that investors would rather put money in Kazakhstan. Granted things have improved in California since that article came out in 2010. What was once a $26 Billion budget deficit has been narrowed to a still astounding $16 Billion:
Things are so bad in California that not only can they not pay their bills (another way of saying they are flat broke), but they have been forced into the laughable extreme of handing out I.O.U's to their creditors. If the rest of us ran our personal budgets the way California runs theirs, our creditors would force us into bankruptcy court. Now, you'd think that the $16 Billion deficit would be bad enough, but not only have the progressives lived beyond their means in the yearly budget, they've borrowed more money than any other state in the nation: a massive $612 Billion simolians. As if they are ever going to pay that back. Anyone, like those investors who'd rather back Kazakhstan, who looks at California's financial situation would have to admit that this state is broke. Sure, they might be able to kick the can down the road for a few more years. But, both the short term and the long term outlook are frightening.
12======================================================================================================
So, how did they get this way? Well, in California that lovable cabal of polititicans and union leaders have been screwing the taxpayers for partisan and fiancial advantage for decades. As a result, the politicians have given their labor buddies insanely lavish pension guarantees in exchange to the money that keeps them perpetually in power. The costs of those deals are finally coming due and there is no way the state can pay the piper. In fact, California's pension funds so woefully underfunded that if they were private would be taken over by the feds and its managers thrown in jail.
12======================================================================================================
So, how did they get this way? Well, in California that lovable cabal of polititicans and union leaders have been screwing the taxpayers for partisan and fiancial advantage for decades. As a result, the politicians have given their labor buddies insanely lavish pension guarantees in exchange to the money that keeps them perpetually in power. The costs of those deals are finally coming due and there is no way the state can pay the piper. In fact, California's pension funds so woefully underfunded that if they were private would be taken over by the feds and its managers thrown in jail.
In California, you see unsustainable levels of state government employment that coincide with unsustainable levels of pay, pensions and benefits. In addition, California is ground zero for the vote buying welfare machine. California has 12% of the nation's population and one third of the nation's welfare recipients. To make matters worse, progressive policies and attitudes have made California a haven for illegal immigrants and the homeless. The state has the highest population of homeless and illegals in the country by far. Indeed, California is a place where those illegal aliens can not only collect welfare, but in the name of "compassion" they can spend their taxpayer financed checks in casinos and buy beer and cigarettes with them:
If that weren't enough, now illegal aliens and their children are eligible to receive taxpayer subsidized tuition assistance:
You want to hear the kicker? In a state that is deeply in the red and completely unable to pay its bills, as "good" progressives they decided to go "green". That means that though California is home to a large percentage of shale oil reserves and offshore oil reserves, the state has not issued a permit for a new well in over thirty years. Thus, despite having an abundance of natural resources, California is forced to import 63% of it's oil consumption. This "green" mentality means that California has the seventh highest electric bills in and second highest gas prices in the land. I am sure all of this "greenness" does wonders for the competitiveness of California business, eh?
13======================================================================================================
But, that is not all. Oh, goodness no! As the environmental movement's wet dream come true, California is home to the country's first carbon caps law. They are so blinded by fundamentalist green extremism that the religion of environmentalism has taken precedence over good science and good business:
13======================================================================================================
But, that is not all. Oh, goodness no! As the environmental movement's wet dream come true, California is home to the country's first carbon caps law. They are so blinded by fundamentalist green extremism that the religion of environmentalism has taken precedence over good science and good business:
It is so bad in California that, despite huge budget deficits and massive state debt, they are all in for Barack Obama's high speed rail boondoggle. Because the politicians and the labor unions can make a bundle on this deal up front, they decided to create the "train to nowhere" today, so that they can saddle California's taxpayers of the future with a huge financial albatross:
Apparently, not enough pause when compared to all that loot these politicians and their union allies think they can grab in the short term. So, to hell with the panel. To hell with the long term budget implications. There's money to plunder! In a state with a 16 billion dollar budget deficit, how insane is that?
Not as crazy as California's progressive politicians proposed solution to the budget shortfall. Sometimes you get reminded of Einstein's definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Despite having the sixth heaviest tax burden in the nation, the inmates of the asylum want to raise taxes even more:
Not as crazy as California's progressive politicians proposed solution to the budget shortfall. Sometimes you get reminded of Einstein's definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Despite having the sixth heaviest tax burden in the nation, the inmates of the asylum want to raise taxes even more:
14======================================================================================================
It seems that the progressives of California just can't accept the fact that when you raise the majority of your revenues from taxing the "rich", your fortunes are inextricably tied to theirs. When the recession occurred, the massive financial hit that this income group experienced made an immediate negative impact on state tax receipts. In addition, the more California has taxed the rich, less of them of have been willing to pay it. They often escape the state to more hospitable tax climates or the negative impact of high taxes adversely affects their ability to grow and expand. Either way, the expected revenue always fails to live up to expectations.
However, the emotional and class warfare temptation of socking it to the "rich" is just too much for the liberals of California to resist:
It seems that the progressives of California just can't accept the fact that when you raise the majority of your revenues from taxing the "rich", your fortunes are inextricably tied to theirs. When the recession occurred, the massive financial hit that this income group experienced made an immediate negative impact on state tax receipts. In addition, the more California has taxed the rich, less of them of have been willing to pay it. They often escape the state to more hospitable tax climates or the negative impact of high taxes adversely affects their ability to grow and expand. Either way, the expected revenue always fails to live up to expectations.
However, the emotional and class warfare temptation of socking it to the "rich" is just too much for the liberals of California to resist:
Sure, that's the answer! Tax Kim Kardashian! Don't deal with the debt, the interest payments of which have grown to one quarter of the budget. Don't deal with the high pay of government workers, their benefits and pensions. Don't deal with the excessive cost of the welfare state. Heck, no! Why should the Democrats disturb their gravy train, when they can tax Kimmy K and cut vital services instead? There couldn't be any downside to that could there?
As a result of letting the inmates run the asylum, California may be a paradise for people who'd rather drink beer, gamble and smoke than work, but it is a nightmare for those in the business community. Because of over-regulation, high government spending and the high taxes they cause, businesses are leaving California in droves and many more plan to in the near future:
15=====================================================================================================
Despite spending themselves into a sixteen billion dollar annual budget deficit and borrowing so much money that their bonds are junk status, California has the second highest unemployment rate (12%!) in the country and one of the lowest levels of job creation. Unlike Texas which gained 139,800 jobs since the recession began, California has lost 855,200. That's a difference of almost a million jobs!
This is the kind of economy that the progressive formula a high government spending produces. Money well spent, eh? Even with record high spending and record high budget shortfalls for years, California can't even adequately fund its prisons and now as a result, the Supreme Court has ordered them to return thirty thousand criminals back into society. Way to go! Now there's some responsible governance:
Despite spending themselves into a sixteen billion dollar annual budget deficit and borrowing so much money that their bonds are junk status, California has the second highest unemployment rate (12%!) in the country and one of the lowest levels of job creation. Unlike Texas which gained 139,800 jobs since the recession began, California has lost 855,200. That's a difference of almost a million jobs!
This is the kind of economy that the progressive formula a high government spending produces. Money well spent, eh? Even with record high spending and record high budget shortfalls for years, California can't even adequately fund its prisons and now as a result, the Supreme Court has ordered them to return thirty thousand criminals back into society. Way to go! Now there's some responsible governance:
When one compares California to Texas and examines the results of two totally different ideoligical approaches to governance, it is hard to fathom that anyone would say that the Texas model isn't far superior. I don't think anything better represents this than this story from Dan Mitchell's blog:
CALIFORNIA: The Governor of California is jogging with his dog along a nature trail. A coyote jumps out, bites the Governor and attacks his dog.
1. The Governor starts to intervene, but reflects upon the movie “Bambi” and then realizes he should stop; the coyote is only doing what is natural.
2. He calls animal control. Animal Control captures the coyote and bills the State $200 testing it for diseases and $500 for relocating it.
3. He calls a veterinarian. The vet collects the dead dog and bills the State $200 for testing it for diseases.
4. The Governor goes to hospital and spends $3,500 getting checked for diseases from the coyote and on getting his bite wound bandaged.
5. The running trail gets shut down for 6 months while Fish & Game conducts a $100,000 survey to make sure the area is free of dangerous animals.
6. The Governor spends $50,000 in state funds to implement a “coyote awareness” program for residents of the area.
7. The State Legislature spends $2 million to study how to better treat rabies and how to permanently eradicate the disease throughout the world.
8. The Governor’s security agent is fired for not stopping the attack somehow and for letting the Governor attempt to intervene.
9. Additional cost to State of California: $75,000 to hire and train a new security agent with additional special training re: the nature of coyotes.
10. PETA protests the coyote’s relocation and files suit against the State.
TEXAS: The Governor of Texas is jogging with his dog along a nature trail. A Coyote jumps out, bites the Governor’s leather boot, and attacks his dog.
1. The Governor shoots the coyote with his State-issued pistol and keeps jogging. The Governor has spent $0.50 on a .45 ACP hollow
point cartridge.
2. The buzzards eat the dead coyote.
And that, boys and girls, is why California is broke………..And, more importantly, why too much government doesn’t work.
CALIFORNIA: The Governor of California is jogging with his dog along a nature trail. A coyote jumps out, bites the Governor and attacks his dog.
1. The Governor starts to intervene, but reflects upon the movie “Bambi” and then realizes he should stop; the coyote is only doing what is natural.
2. He calls animal control. Animal Control captures the coyote and bills the State $200 testing it for diseases and $500 for relocating it.
3. He calls a veterinarian. The vet collects the dead dog and bills the State $200 for testing it for diseases.
4. The Governor goes to hospital and spends $3,500 getting checked for diseases from the coyote and on getting his bite wound bandaged.
5. The running trail gets shut down for 6 months while Fish & Game conducts a $100,000 survey to make sure the area is free of dangerous animals.
6. The Governor spends $50,000 in state funds to implement a “coyote awareness” program for residents of the area.
7. The State Legislature spends $2 million to study how to better treat rabies and how to permanently eradicate the disease throughout the world.
8. The Governor’s security agent is fired for not stopping the attack somehow and for letting the Governor attempt to intervene.
9. Additional cost to State of California: $75,000 to hire and train a new security agent with additional special training re: the nature of coyotes.
10. PETA protests the coyote’s relocation and files suit against the State.
TEXAS: The Governor of Texas is jogging with his dog along a nature trail. A Coyote jumps out, bites the Governor’s leather boot, and attacks his dog.
1. The Governor shoots the coyote with his State-issued pistol and keeps jogging. The Governor has spent $0.50 on a .45 ACP hollow
point cartridge.
2. The buzzards eat the dead coyote.
And that, boys and girls, is why California is broke………..And, more importantly, why too much government doesn’t work.
16======================================================================================================
Despite what many excuse makers among the left might tell you, California is not alone in its woes. It is not an isolated case. What you see in California and the bluest of the blue states is exactly the same problems for exactly the same reasons. They are states that have taxed and spent themselves into economic basket cases. They are all dead states walking.
Take for example, the great state of Illinois which also hasn't voted for a Republican for President in almost 25 years. This is the state where our President first learned his political chops as a community organizer and as a state Senator. What did Illinois teach him? Debt! And lots of it!
Despite what many excuse makers among the left might tell you, California is not alone in its woes. It is not an isolated case. What you see in California and the bluest of the blue states is exactly the same problems for exactly the same reasons. They are states that have taxed and spent themselves into economic basket cases. They are all dead states walking.
Take for example, the great state of Illinois which also hasn't voted for a Republican for President in almost 25 years. This is the state where our President first learned his political chops as a community organizer and as a state Senator. What did Illinois teach him? Debt! And lots of it!
And how to run massive yearly deficits:
And where Obama learned how to respond fiscally to the massive deficits big government creates. Spending cuts? Hell no! Let's just borrow most of it! We'll make the rest up by raising taxes... by 66%!!!
And here's where Obama learned how to deal with an insolvency crisis in the most underfunded public pension system in the country. Ignore the problem, kick the can down the road and leave it for someone else to fix and then rig the books so it looks like everything is hunky dory!
The underfunded pension system and the profligate way Illinois has run its finances prompted Moody's to lower Illinois credit rating to junk bond status making it the worst in the nation. None of this is surprising to anyone who understands the "blue" model of vote buying combined with the corruption machine engaged in by the politician/public worker union cabal.
17======================================================================================================
The "Chicago Way" is just a synonym for corruption, fraud and criminality writ large:
17======================================================================================================
The "Chicago Way" is just a synonym for corruption, fraud and criminality writ large:
These are just the corrupt pols who actually broke laws and were dumb enough to get caught. The real crime in Illinois, though, is to be found in the legal corruption of politician/public worker union cabal:
So how badly have the corrupt Democrats who dominate Illinois politics ruined the state fiscally ? Well, it's so bad that The Chicago Tribune felt compelled to write this editorial:
Note the huge disparity between Illinois, California and Texas. Also note that all four states that are deeply in the red are also blue states. Coincidence? Not likely.
So let's see. Little Barry learned in Illinois that it is ok to borrow lots and lots of money till your credit rating is junk in order to finance high deficits caused by Big Government spending, to ignore the insolvency of old age pensions and kick the can down the road, and never to cut spending but to raise taxes instead. Looks like Barry did well in his course in Politics 101 from the State of Illinois because he has run up the highest deficits in our history financed by massive borrowing from the Red Chinese. Yet, his proposals to avoid fiscal insolvency isn't to cut spending (that'd be un-Amercian!), but to raise taxes. Oh yeah, and lest we forget, his answer to underfunded old age pensions (Social Security) is to propose absolutely nothing and go along with the fiction that there is actually money in the trust fund. Yeah, I'd say Barry got an A+ wouldn't you?
18=====================================================================================================
Now, one would think that if you spent the kind of money and ran up the kinds of debt and deficits that the blue states do, that you'd at least have something to show for it, right? They should surely be in better shape economically than skinflint Texas where they don't "invest" in their people, right? You'd think that someone other than government bureaucrats and labor unions would benefit. You'd think that if you spent the kind of money these states are spending you'd have lots of jobs. You might think that, but you'd be wrong. The results tell a totally different story:
So let's see. Little Barry learned in Illinois that it is ok to borrow lots and lots of money till your credit rating is junk in order to finance high deficits caused by Big Government spending, to ignore the insolvency of old age pensions and kick the can down the road, and never to cut spending but to raise taxes instead. Looks like Barry did well in his course in Politics 101 from the State of Illinois because he has run up the highest deficits in our history financed by massive borrowing from the Red Chinese. Yet, his proposals to avoid fiscal insolvency isn't to cut spending (that'd be un-Amercian!), but to raise taxes. Oh yeah, and lest we forget, his answer to underfunded old age pensions (Social Security) is to propose absolutely nothing and go along with the fiction that there is actually money in the trust fund. Yeah, I'd say Barry got an A+ wouldn't you?
18=====================================================================================================
Now, one would think that if you spent the kind of money and ran up the kinds of debt and deficits that the blue states do, that you'd at least have something to show for it, right? They should surely be in better shape economically than skinflint Texas where they don't "invest" in their people, right? You'd think that someone other than government bureaucrats and labor unions would benefit. You'd think that if you spent the kind of money these states are spending you'd have lots of jobs. You might think that, but you'd be wrong. The results tell a totally different story:
Well, well, lookee here, seems that low tax Texas created the most jobs and high tax, big spending California was dead last in creating jobs over the past decade. And high tax and high spending NJ, IL, and MI? They came in 47th, 48th and 50th. Note, that the massive federal spending of the last decade has done wonders for Washington DC. They hit the charts at #7. It would seem it's been a great decade for politicians, bureaucrats, lobbyists and their fellow travelers in our nation's capital.
But that's the past, what about the future? Perhaps all that spending and "investments" in their people in the blue states will pay dividends down the road and lots of companies will want to relocate or start businesses in their states. Well, actually... no:
But that's the past, what about the future? Perhaps all that spending and "investments" in their people in the blue states will pay dividends down the road and lots of companies will want to relocate or start businesses in their states. Well, actually... no:
Well, would you look at that! Texas led the list of the best states for business for the seventh year in a row and California was dead last again. Kind of looks like a pattern emerging here. And once again, the bluest of the blue (MI, NJ, NY) are keeping California company at the bottom. And is all that spending, borrowing and taxing that they do in Illinois paying off? I guess not. Seems that they've fallen forty places in the last decade and are, in the magazines words, "in a death spiral". Aren't you so glad that Barry has brought to Washington all he learned in Illinois?
19======================================================================================================
Now creating jobs and attracting businesses isn't everything. So, let's focus on a few other areas shall we? Are the poor somehow better off in California where there is marginally less poverty but the poor have very little chance of getting off of the dole and finding work because companies are leaving in droves and the golden goose is being starved to death? Or, are they better off in Texas which has far more opportunities and far less unemployment? Are there more people hungry because of lack of food on any given day in Texas? Are California's Schools better? Are its highways? Is its racial situation? Is its fiscal situation? Is its crime rate? Is its unemployment rate? Is its rate of homelessness? The factual answer to those questions is no. Texas is better in each and every one of those areas.
In what ways, that government has any ability to control, is California or NY, or IL or MI a better place than Texas... rich,poor, middle class or otherwise? What about the christian right that Democrats are always telling voters are as scary as Dracula? Do they run Texas in a fashion that it adversely impacts its citizen's personal lives and make it unlivable in any way? Are anybody's personal liberties threatened in Texas? And what about those crazy gun nuts that live there with their guns in racks in their pickup trucks and those insane right to carry laws that those reactionary rednecks are so fond of? Don't they have more gun deaths than in places like Illinois and California that have some of the most restrictive gun control laws in the country? Uhhh.... no again:
19======================================================================================================
Now creating jobs and attracting businesses isn't everything. So, let's focus on a few other areas shall we? Are the poor somehow better off in California where there is marginally less poverty but the poor have very little chance of getting off of the dole and finding work because companies are leaving in droves and the golden goose is being starved to death? Or, are they better off in Texas which has far more opportunities and far less unemployment? Are there more people hungry because of lack of food on any given day in Texas? Are California's Schools better? Are its highways? Is its racial situation? Is its fiscal situation? Is its crime rate? Is its unemployment rate? Is its rate of homelessness? The factual answer to those questions is no. Texas is better in each and every one of those areas.
In what ways, that government has any ability to control, is California or NY, or IL or MI a better place than Texas... rich,poor, middle class or otherwise? What about the christian right that Democrats are always telling voters are as scary as Dracula? Do they run Texas in a fashion that it adversely impacts its citizen's personal lives and make it unlivable in any way? Are anybody's personal liberties threatened in Texas? And what about those crazy gun nuts that live there with their guns in racks in their pickup trucks and those insane right to carry laws that those reactionary rednecks are so fond of? Don't they have more gun deaths than in places like Illinois and California that have some of the most restrictive gun control laws in the country? Uhhh.... no again:
Well, I guess another liberal shibboleth bites the dust, huh? You are NOT more likely to get shot and killed in a place that has less restrictive gun laws. But I digress. The real question is this... How is the way Conservatives run a state to be feared and the way Liberals run a state to be embraced when all the evidence says that liberals who run states, run them into bankruptcy with very little other concrete evidence of any sort of tangible benefit from their massive spending to show for it?
20=====================================================================================================
As an individual who fled high tax New Jersey to zero income tax Florida, I am the perfect example of what happens when a state (or country for that matter) eschews pro-growth fiscal policy for profligate spending policies. There is a limit to which people and enterprises are willing to be taxed, regulated and organized before they decide to leave for greener pastures. There are only so many golden eggs a goose is willing to lay when you begin to cut off its food supply. Even in welfare-state utopias like France:
20=====================================================================================================
As an individual who fled high tax New Jersey to zero income tax Florida, I am the perfect example of what happens when a state (or country for that matter) eschews pro-growth fiscal policy for profligate spending policies. There is a limit to which people and enterprises are willing to be taxed, regulated and organized before they decide to leave for greener pastures. There are only so many golden eggs a goose is willing to lay when you begin to cut off its food supply. Even in welfare-state utopias like France:
In my personal experience, that is exactly what has happened in New Jersey during my lifetime. Having lived in NJ for most of my life, I haven't seen any improvement in the state despite a doubling (in real terms) of government spending. When I was growing up, there was no income tax in New Jersey at all. Now it has one of the highest and property taxes are through the roof. What has all that taxing and spending bought us Garden Staters? Are our streets safer, is our economy better, are our roads in better condition, are the poor any less poor? The answer is no. I would say New Jersey was a better place when I was a kid than it is today. It was better when I entered the workforce than it is today. The sad fact is that so few of the people I grew up with can afford to buy a house and pay the taxes in my home town and must leave New Jersey altogether if they want to live as well as their parents did. It's not just in New Jersey either:
People and businesses fleeing high tax states is not a new phenomenon. For the past two censuses in a row, New Jersey lost electoral votes. When I was a kid it was 17 electoral votes and now it is 14. That's a lot of people. As people and their assets flee the state, the tax base is lowered, but spending rises as the absence of all of that wealth and the votes they no longer cast makes it easier for state workers unions and the beneficiaries of government spending to positively influence elections in their favor. This is the "Curley Effect" in action. Chris Christie may have won the governorship recently by a narrow margin, but the legislature is still controlled by the Democrats. The trend of "blueness" in NJ will continue into the foreseeable future. With it will come ever escalating spending and taxation on an increasing and more powerful dependency class to be paid for by an ever decreasing tax base. It is a recipe for fiscal disaster. It is totally unsustainable as California, Illinois, the European Union and the Federal government are finding out. When Moody's and Standard and Poor's are constantly downgrading the debt of these places, that is a signal that leftist policies are failing in a major way.
Here's a question to ask yourself. As the most recent census clearly indicates, people from NJ, NY, OH, MI, CA are fleeing from those high tax union shop states to low tax right to work states in search of more opportunity and a better way of life. This has been going on steadily for at least the last quarter century. If the progressive way of governance is so good, why is all the movement away from the failed economies of "blue" states and towards greener pastures of conservative states? Hmm? Why is that? The reality is that Americans are voting with their feet to leave the unsustainable models of progressivism and migrating towards the opportunity and sustainability of common sense pro growth states like Texas.
21======================================================================================================
If you want to see a classic example of how this red state/blue state competition plays out in the future look no further than Wisconsin and Illinois. Governor Walker of Wisconsin has put his state on the path to sustainability by cutting spending and Illinois has addressed its own budget shortfalls by borrowing, budget gimmicks and raising taxes. Which model of governing do you think will have the most success? Want to put a wager on which state does better in the coming years? So far the results are pretty telling. In Illinois:
Here's a question to ask yourself. As the most recent census clearly indicates, people from NJ, NY, OH, MI, CA are fleeing from those high tax union shop states to low tax right to work states in search of more opportunity and a better way of life. This has been going on steadily for at least the last quarter century. If the progressive way of governance is so good, why is all the movement away from the failed economies of "blue" states and towards greener pastures of conservative states? Hmm? Why is that? The reality is that Americans are voting with their feet to leave the unsustainable models of progressivism and migrating towards the opportunity and sustainability of common sense pro growth states like Texas.
21======================================================================================================
If you want to see a classic example of how this red state/blue state competition plays out in the future look no further than Wisconsin and Illinois. Governor Walker of Wisconsin has put his state on the path to sustainability by cutting spending and Illinois has addressed its own budget shortfalls by borrowing, budget gimmicks and raising taxes. Which model of governing do you think will have the most success? Want to put a wager on which state does better in the coming years? So far the results are pretty telling. In Illinois:
While in Wisconsin, the budget deficit has been turned into a surplus, the number of jobs has increased and unemployment is down:
In fact, Illinois is one of the few states in the country that saw it's unemployment rate increase in 2011:
The results of the fifty state experiment in actualizing political philosophies are in. Texas is a shining example of the benefits of an individualist, low tax, pro growth philosophy. California and Illinois are the ultimate examples of the inherent flaws of progressive policy. One policy leads to economic growth and prosperity, the other leads to debt and insolvency. There is no question, that if it were up to me to choose which example to follow based solely on the data and the facts, I'd choose the Texas model. Unfortunately, our President doesn't seem to care about the facts. Obviously , he sees another reality altogether. He and the progressives he leads are still stuck in the Matrix. As a result Barack Obama has chosen to model the United States' economic policy on California and Illinois. God help us!
In the final analysis, the Founders ingenious plan to have each of our states act as laboratories of public policy shows what actually happens when one of the two dominant political philosophies in the United States are enacted in the real world of modern America. This isn't just words in a book, or thoughts in the mind. This is the practical application of policy in reality.
The lesson for today boys and girls is don't give a Democrat a cookie:
In the final analysis, the Founders ingenious plan to have each of our states act as laboratories of public policy shows what actually happens when one of the two dominant political philosophies in the United States are enacted in the real world of modern America. This isn't just words in a book, or thoughts in the mind. This is the practical application of policy in reality.
The lesson for today boys and girls is don't give a Democrat a cookie:
22======================================================================================================
Despite the spin you hear from progressives, individualism, libertarianism and conservatism don't lead to disaster and anarchy as my friend "Fred" once wrote to me:
Anyway, I'll never be a laissez-faire capitalist, even a libertarian, because I don't believe most humans are decent or empathic enough to make it
work. You wind up with feudal serfdom, Robber Barons, and a nation that looks like Pakistan… Maybe you'd rather have Somalia. Hey, they have no taxes, and no government regulations! None of those crazy, empathy-addled liberal types, neither... just roving bands of ultraconservative Muslims looking for uncovered women to stone to death. Lovely!
"Fred's" little missive is a typical example of the ridiculous way progressives like to characterize what will happen when conservatives gain power. This is the kind of straw-man argument that President Obama loves to engage in. According to those on the left, it's as if because conservatives believe in limited government it means that we believe in no government. This type of over the top insanity is typified by Nancy Pelosi saying this:
"Bless their hearts, they (Republicans) act upon their beliefs," House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said at a Democratic party campaign event in West Palm Beach on Monday. "It's an ideology -- we shouldn't have a government role. So, reduce the police, the firemen, the teachers. Reduce the role. Give tax cuts to the high end, that will stimulate the economy, everything will be good."
"And I say to them (Republicans), do you have children that breathe air? Do you have grandchildren that drink water?" Pelosi said.
"As a mom, I was vigilant about food safety, right moms? I mean, if you could depend on the government for one thing it was that you had to be able to trust the water that our kids drank and the food that they ate. But this is the E. coli club. They do not want to spend money to do that," she said.
Really, Nancy? No government role at all, huh? Really? Do you actually believe that or are you just smearing for the sake of partisan advantage. And what about the dolts in the audience (sadly like my buddy Fred) who were nodding their heads in agreement as she said it? What does that say about either their knowledge of conservatism or their intelligence? Honestly, I've lived in both California and Texas and I didn't like the water in either. But, while I didn't get E. coli in California, I didn't get it Texas either.
The real truth is that when conservative theories are applied in the real world you get a state or a country that looks more like Texas and less like California. That’s the reality of what is currently politically achievable and desirable in the United States. All of this nonsense about "no" government is nothing more than pathetic and fictitious fear mongering.
Getting back to "Fred" and his off the wall assertions about conservatives... As a libertarian oriented guy, the idea of an Islamic caliphate is an anathema to me. Giving up government control of my life in return for religious control just doesn’t cut it for me. I don’t like any control, but I do believe in the rule of law. Therefore, the anarchy of place like Somalia does not appeal to me either. Though, I’d argue that a Somalia is more likely to happen here as a result of government spending pushing us off of a fiscal cliff and throwing us into economic anarchy like the communist government did in Somalia than does the “Texas” model. Actually, Somalia is a classic example of the failures of the left. To anyone who has read about the history of how Communism worked out in Somalia, it is clear that country is a far more instructive example of what happens when lefties run things.
Somehow, I don't see a feudal state or robber baron's in Texas either. In fact, I see just the opposite. What happens in America with libertarian influenced policies is Texas. What happens with progressive policies are Illinois and California. On a national level it's the Reagan recovery or the Obama stagnation. We'll get into that one later on!
23=====================================================================================================
When confronted with the real world results of ideology in action, the typical progressive response is to change the subject or find some kind of excuse to rationalize away numbers that serve to undermine their whole way of thinking. I have found that when I try to make parallells between what is happening in Europe as a result of leftist policies and what will happen here if we follow them into welfare-statism, they immediately start talking about the "success" of Socialism in Scandinavian countries. My buddy "Fred" is no different. In response to my touting Texas as a model we should emulate, he wrote:
No thanks. I'd rather have Denmark, although I suspect that you believe Denmark is the locus of liberal evil. Really, there's a difference between Denmark and the 1930's Soviet Union.
Of course Denmark is not the USSR. I don’t think it’s the locus of liberal evil, but I also don’t think it can be a model for the USA. Or can it?
First of all, the Danes spend around 1% of its GDP on defense and have for many years. Compared to the trillions of dollars America spent on the cold war and currently spend today, that is next to nothing. The Danes were able to skate by like this because we paid for their defense and continue to do so to this day. Anything that comes to Denmark via the ocean, be it oil, food, or any trade that they do, is protected and subsidized by the US Navy and, thus, the US taxpayer. A country free from the jackboots of the USSR during the cold war? Paid for by the US taxpayer. This type of military and security freeloading has left Denmark, and the rest of Europe, with a greater amount to spend on their social welfare programs over the years and less debt over time as a result.
That said, there are other differences of greater note. Denmark has a homogenous population of people with a culture that goes back centuries and relatively little crime. We have a relatively brand new culture with a heterogeneous population that has massive racial issues and endemic dependency and high crime. To fully get an idea of the difference between the societies of Denmark and the USA, realize this: in Copenhagen, public transportation is on the honor system. That's correct, you read right. On the honor system. Each Dane is expected to pay, but there are no turnstiles and no one asks you to produce a ticket in order to get onto a street car. Try doing that in New York!
It is very interesting to note that when that nice little homogenous society began to change and one segment of the Danish population started taking advantage of their welfare state the way many in America do, they actually did the smart thing and immediately changed policy:
Despite the spin you hear from progressives, individualism, libertarianism and conservatism don't lead to disaster and anarchy as my friend "Fred" once wrote to me:
Anyway, I'll never be a laissez-faire capitalist, even a libertarian, because I don't believe most humans are decent or empathic enough to make it
work. You wind up with feudal serfdom, Robber Barons, and a nation that looks like Pakistan… Maybe you'd rather have Somalia. Hey, they have no taxes, and no government regulations! None of those crazy, empathy-addled liberal types, neither... just roving bands of ultraconservative Muslims looking for uncovered women to stone to death. Lovely!
"Fred's" little missive is a typical example of the ridiculous way progressives like to characterize what will happen when conservatives gain power. This is the kind of straw-man argument that President Obama loves to engage in. According to those on the left, it's as if because conservatives believe in limited government it means that we believe in no government. This type of over the top insanity is typified by Nancy Pelosi saying this:
"Bless their hearts, they (Republicans) act upon their beliefs," House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said at a Democratic party campaign event in West Palm Beach on Monday. "It's an ideology -- we shouldn't have a government role. So, reduce the police, the firemen, the teachers. Reduce the role. Give tax cuts to the high end, that will stimulate the economy, everything will be good."
"And I say to them (Republicans), do you have children that breathe air? Do you have grandchildren that drink water?" Pelosi said.
"As a mom, I was vigilant about food safety, right moms? I mean, if you could depend on the government for one thing it was that you had to be able to trust the water that our kids drank and the food that they ate. But this is the E. coli club. They do not want to spend money to do that," she said.
Really, Nancy? No government role at all, huh? Really? Do you actually believe that or are you just smearing for the sake of partisan advantage. And what about the dolts in the audience (sadly like my buddy Fred) who were nodding their heads in agreement as she said it? What does that say about either their knowledge of conservatism or their intelligence? Honestly, I've lived in both California and Texas and I didn't like the water in either. But, while I didn't get E. coli in California, I didn't get it Texas either.
The real truth is that when conservative theories are applied in the real world you get a state or a country that looks more like Texas and less like California. That’s the reality of what is currently politically achievable and desirable in the United States. All of this nonsense about "no" government is nothing more than pathetic and fictitious fear mongering.
Getting back to "Fred" and his off the wall assertions about conservatives... As a libertarian oriented guy, the idea of an Islamic caliphate is an anathema to me. Giving up government control of my life in return for religious control just doesn’t cut it for me. I don’t like any control, but I do believe in the rule of law. Therefore, the anarchy of place like Somalia does not appeal to me either. Though, I’d argue that a Somalia is more likely to happen here as a result of government spending pushing us off of a fiscal cliff and throwing us into economic anarchy like the communist government did in Somalia than does the “Texas” model. Actually, Somalia is a classic example of the failures of the left. To anyone who has read about the history of how Communism worked out in Somalia, it is clear that country is a far more instructive example of what happens when lefties run things.
Somehow, I don't see a feudal state or robber baron's in Texas either. In fact, I see just the opposite. What happens in America with libertarian influenced policies is Texas. What happens with progressive policies are Illinois and California. On a national level it's the Reagan recovery or the Obama stagnation. We'll get into that one later on!
23=====================================================================================================
When confronted with the real world results of ideology in action, the typical progressive response is to change the subject or find some kind of excuse to rationalize away numbers that serve to undermine their whole way of thinking. I have found that when I try to make parallells between what is happening in Europe as a result of leftist policies and what will happen here if we follow them into welfare-statism, they immediately start talking about the "success" of Socialism in Scandinavian countries. My buddy "Fred" is no different. In response to my touting Texas as a model we should emulate, he wrote:
No thanks. I'd rather have Denmark, although I suspect that you believe Denmark is the locus of liberal evil. Really, there's a difference between Denmark and the 1930's Soviet Union.
Of course Denmark is not the USSR. I don’t think it’s the locus of liberal evil, but I also don’t think it can be a model for the USA. Or can it?
First of all, the Danes spend around 1% of its GDP on defense and have for many years. Compared to the trillions of dollars America spent on the cold war and currently spend today, that is next to nothing. The Danes were able to skate by like this because we paid for their defense and continue to do so to this day. Anything that comes to Denmark via the ocean, be it oil, food, or any trade that they do, is protected and subsidized by the US Navy and, thus, the US taxpayer. A country free from the jackboots of the USSR during the cold war? Paid for by the US taxpayer. This type of military and security freeloading has left Denmark, and the rest of Europe, with a greater amount to spend on their social welfare programs over the years and less debt over time as a result.
That said, there are other differences of greater note. Denmark has a homogenous population of people with a culture that goes back centuries and relatively little crime. We have a relatively brand new culture with a heterogeneous population that has massive racial issues and endemic dependency and high crime. To fully get an idea of the difference between the societies of Denmark and the USA, realize this: in Copenhagen, public transportation is on the honor system. That's correct, you read right. On the honor system. Each Dane is expected to pay, but there are no turnstiles and no one asks you to produce a ticket in order to get onto a street car. Try doing that in New York!
It is very interesting to note that when that nice little homogenous society began to change and one segment of the Danish population started taking advantage of their welfare state the way many in America do, they actually did the smart thing and immediately changed policy:
24======================================================================================================
Denmark actually had an adult conversation, looked at the facts and made some drastic changes in direct opposition to the policies and philosophies they’d been following for years. They didn’t wait nearly fifty years like we have. Try these policies here in the USA and see the howls of protest from the Democratic Party and their dependency constituency.
Although, perhaps they still haven't gone far enough:
Denmark actually had an adult conversation, looked at the facts and made some drastic changes in direct opposition to the policies and philosophies they’d been following for years. They didn’t wait nearly fifty years like we have. Try these policies here in the USA and see the howls of protest from the Democratic Party and their dependency constituency.
Although, perhaps they still haven't gone far enough:
Also, unlike in the USA, when faced with their own financial crisis precipitated by their welfare state, they had some more adult conversations and they….
Slashed spending!
Slashed spending!
It seems that no matter where you go in the world, the left always responds to fiscal common sense by claiming they are draconian and as Boersting says above "a war declaration". Does the playbook ever change for these losers?
In the past few months, Denmark has been noticing an unpleasant influx of immigrants, crime and drugs in their country. Their reaction:
In the past few months, Denmark has been noticing an unpleasant influx of immigrants, crime and drugs in their country. Their reaction:
Close the border again! Our reaction to the same issues and concerns? Sue Arizona and make jokes about Republicans wanting a moat with alligators on the border! So, perhaps the Danes are on the right track, eh?
Now, recently Denmark was voted the “happiest place” on earth to live:
Now, recently Denmark was voted the “happiest place” on earth to live:
That may be true. But, is it a model for the US to follow? Well, the fact is that in order to have a growing economy with enough jobs available for those entering the work force to find employment, the US needs to have a growth rate of about three percent in order to gain a net increase in jobs. Given that we now have an unemployment and underemployment rate of almost 20%, even a 3% growth rate isn’t going to cut it. We need to grow at 4% plus. So, is Denmark a good model for us in this regard? If we follow their path can we solve our own jobs crisis? Sadly, Denmark’s growth historically hasn't been nearly high enough for us to consider even when our unemployment rate was at all time lows under W and Clinton:
Let's see, average growth rates of less that 2% and a historical high of a measly 3.47% . Since the onset of the Great Recession, the growth rate has been near zero. This just won’t cut it in any way in the United States. As I pointed out, to have a recovery we need to be having growth of well above 4% for many quarters. If we follow the Danish model, we'd never even come close to that. And that’s if we cut defense to the bone.
For those progressives who would like to cite their favorite country Sweden as an example to emulate, the numbers are no better:
For those progressives who would like to cite their favorite country Sweden as an example to emulate, the numbers are no better:
As you can see, Sweden is worse. If we followed the Socialist path of Denmark or Sweden, there is no question we would be on the road to a steady and slow decline. There is no road to prosperity for us these leftist utopias. It is not a path that the United States can follow if we want to pass on the American Dream to the next generation.
The other day, someone mentioned Norway to me as a model. At first glance, it looks as if they may be on to something:
The other day, someone mentioned Norway to me as a model. At first glance, it looks as if they may be on to something:
However, do you know what the source is of Norway's economic miracle? Why, it's the kind of deep sea exploitation of their oil resources that progressives loathe so much. In fact, what Norway is an example of is the positive benefits of a conservative oriented policy of drill baby drill! My how that frosts those on the left when I serve them that little dose of reality.
In the end, there is nowhere that progressives can point to as a model of their ideology in action that is in any way something we should emulate here in the United States. But, there is more to the story of Scandinavian and other social welfare states than pure numbers. As I pointed out to my buddy "Fred", the societies these models of government create do not foster innovation and invention. They contribute just about nothing to the improvement of mankind. In defense of his beloved Scandinavian examples, "Fred" wrote to me the following:
I should mention that the Swedes did produce Ingmar Bergman, Ingrid Bergman, Ann-Margret ... Oh, and the Volvo. Hmm,
maybe we shouldn't mention the Volvo. I just can't go with your all-or-nothing thinking about other nations. It doesn't mean I'm unpatriotic, rather, we need to be objective about the good stuff and the bad stuff that any country produces. 1980's American cars sucked. Was that the fault of the American character? Greedy car companies? Corrupt unions? I don't know, but they still sucked. Sucky is sucky, whoever's building it. Maybe the 1980's American cars are an example of an industry that was almost ruined by greedy self-interest, in the pursuit of profits (on the part of management) and individual salaries and benefits (on the part of the union workers)
To be fair to those Socialist Commie Bastards... the Soviets did put the first satellite and first man in space, and they gave us a good run for our
money to the Moon... not to mention building the T-34, arguably the best tank of WWII, and promoting the films of Sergei Eisenstein, no slacker... though I wouldn't want to live under their system, myself.
I'd add that the Japanese have built some pretty damn good cars since the 1970's, and even better cameras, despite a collectivist spirit that Ayn Rand would've despised. I'm not saying that these countries are better than the U.S., just that there are advantages and disadvantages to the American way of doing things. We need to learn from others when we can, instead of puffing out our chests and blindly closing our eyes to our faults. But I'm a gray, squishy moderate, so this sentiment is to be expected from me.
I responded by telling him that the Socialist model of the Danes, Swedes and the USSR foster societies that are not conducive to creating new inventions that advance the human condition. It isn't that the Japanese don’t produce good cars or that the Russians didn’t produce good tanks (although apparently the Russians still don’t make good cars: (Hilarious, eh?)
In the end, there is nowhere that progressives can point to as a model of their ideology in action that is in any way something we should emulate here in the United States. But, there is more to the story of Scandinavian and other social welfare states than pure numbers. As I pointed out to my buddy "Fred", the societies these models of government create do not foster innovation and invention. They contribute just about nothing to the improvement of mankind. In defense of his beloved Scandinavian examples, "Fred" wrote to me the following:
I should mention that the Swedes did produce Ingmar Bergman, Ingrid Bergman, Ann-Margret ... Oh, and the Volvo. Hmm,
maybe we shouldn't mention the Volvo. I just can't go with your all-or-nothing thinking about other nations. It doesn't mean I'm unpatriotic, rather, we need to be objective about the good stuff and the bad stuff that any country produces. 1980's American cars sucked. Was that the fault of the American character? Greedy car companies? Corrupt unions? I don't know, but they still sucked. Sucky is sucky, whoever's building it. Maybe the 1980's American cars are an example of an industry that was almost ruined by greedy self-interest, in the pursuit of profits (on the part of management) and individual salaries and benefits (on the part of the union workers)
To be fair to those Socialist Commie Bastards... the Soviets did put the first satellite and first man in space, and they gave us a good run for our
money to the Moon... not to mention building the T-34, arguably the best tank of WWII, and promoting the films of Sergei Eisenstein, no slacker... though I wouldn't want to live under their system, myself.
I'd add that the Japanese have built some pretty damn good cars since the 1970's, and even better cameras, despite a collectivist spirit that Ayn Rand would've despised. I'm not saying that these countries are better than the U.S., just that there are advantages and disadvantages to the American way of doing things. We need to learn from others when we can, instead of puffing out our chests and blindly closing our eyes to our faults. But I'm a gray, squishy moderate, so this sentiment is to be expected from me.
I responded by telling him that the Socialist model of the Danes, Swedes and the USSR foster societies that are not conducive to creating new inventions that advance the human condition. It isn't that the Japanese don’t produce good cars or that the Russians didn’t produce good tanks (although apparently the Russians still don’t make good cars: (Hilarious, eh?)
26===================================================================================================
The truth is that I can’t think of a single invention or product or innovation of theirs that has benefited mankind or that I or billions others use in our daily lives. From the US, I can think of electricity, the light bulb, the air conditioner, the refrigerator, the microwave oven, the automatic transmission, the assembly line, the telephone, the cell phone, the cd player, the dvd player, the television, the LCD screen, the Xerox machine, the cat scan, the MRI, Satellite communications, GPS, the very computer that I write this on and almost all the software that makes it useful, as well as medical, chemical and bioscience technologies that are the envy and savior of the world. I could go on and on. What have the contributions of the Danes been? How about Scandinavia or the rest of Europe for that matter? What did the commies ever give us that was worthwhile? What have the Japanese and Chinese invented and given to the world recently? What have any of those countries invented in the past one hundred years that you use in your daily life or that makes life more livable for the billions of people on the planet? Think about it.
As usual, Bill Whittle has this concept that I am trying to express down perfectly:
The truth is that I can’t think of a single invention or product or innovation of theirs that has benefited mankind or that I or billions others use in our daily lives. From the US, I can think of electricity, the light bulb, the air conditioner, the refrigerator, the microwave oven, the automatic transmission, the assembly line, the telephone, the cell phone, the cd player, the dvd player, the television, the LCD screen, the Xerox machine, the cat scan, the MRI, Satellite communications, GPS, the very computer that I write this on and almost all the software that makes it useful, as well as medical, chemical and bioscience technologies that are the envy and savior of the world. I could go on and on. What have the contributions of the Danes been? How about Scandinavia or the rest of Europe for that matter? What did the commies ever give us that was worthwhile? What have the Japanese and Chinese invented and given to the world recently? What have any of those countries invented in the past one hundred years that you use in your daily life or that makes life more livable for the billions of people on the planet? Think about it.
As usual, Bill Whittle has this concept that I am trying to express down perfectly:
My point is that when you create a societal climate that encourages people to feel they can think and say whatever they want, allows them to follow their dreams and rewards them handsomely with cash and other rewards, you are also promoting the cause of human civilization. That is because if there is a need that will enhance the human condition and money to be made fulfilling it, our society is the best in the world in making that a reality. That is the glory of the combination of freedom and capitalism. Therefore I don’t think there is any doubt that it would be better if the world were more like Texas than like Denmark. And it would surely be better if it were more like Texas than California or Illinois. I don't think that anyone who cares about the facts can deny that. As conservatives, we hold the moral high ground. What we believe not only works, but it advances the cause of humanity as a whole.