Posted by: Rational Voice | October 16, 2011

Wall Street and Capitalism

I’ve tried to find a way to properly explain my thoughts on how Wall Street and big corporations do not necessarily represent true capitalism and that is because of government meddling in the market.  Well, I came across something today that stated it perfectly.  Read the entire Forbes article as well as this is just a small part of it:

Wall Street seems synonymous with capitalism, but few there espouse market principles. Likewise, Big Business rarely eschews state intervention, instead playing willing harlots for Washington’s wiles. The further Leviathan reaches, the more special interests latch to its tentacles. Restricting the state is essential to curtailing corruption and ensuring earnings come honestly. Smaller government affords less power for those with clout to co-opt.

Finance remains among the most heavily regulated spheres, thus Wall Street expends exorbitant sums lobbying. According to OpenSecrets, individuals from the securities and investment community donated $15.8 million to Obama’s campaign and $9.2 million for McCain. Nonetheless, Obama’s reelection efforts paint Republicans as Wall Street’s lackeys and the state as society’s savior. This is ludicrous given how Wall Street’s lucre fortified his coffers and Wall Street alumnae fill his cabinet

This same author has another piece here.

Posted by: Rational Voice | October 10, 2011

The Pathetic 0.99%ers

A friend of mine posted this today on Facebook and I had to share it.

They say that we’re all part of the 99%…bull.  I’m sure not part of the top 1% but I’m sure as hell not with these freeloaders.  I may not be rich but I’m not going to demonize those who are and try to take everything from them.  I want to get to where they are.  I see them as being what I’d love to achieve, not an obstacle in my way. The only obstacle in my way, and in the way of these morons, is the government which fuels dependency and destroys initiative and the American ideal of self-sufficiency and reliance.

I’ve heard so many times about our generation being the “lost generation.”   I don’t look at us as lost.  In fact I see our generation as having the ability to be another great generation, one that is extraordinarily well off.  If you work hard and live within your means, you have the ability to make it big in the next few decades.  I’m investing heavily in this down market and once it finally recovers I’m going to have a firm base on which to build my future.  I will eventually have more money than I ever dreamed of because I didn’t blame others for the bad times but rather because I got out and made the most of it. I don’t see this time as a time of troubles, I see it as a time that is utterly full of possibilities and potential so long as I’m willing to work hard to take advantage of it.  They aren’t and I will leave them in the dust behind me.

Posted by: Rational Voice | October 5, 2011

Reagan Would Support the Buffet Rule?

Oh this pisses me off.  Way to pick and choose your facts.

Taxes were actually lower because the top marginal rate under Reagan eventually got down to 28%.  True, he did increase some taxes but those were in order to get lower rates elsewhere.  And while Reagan may have said that, it wasn’t anything like this guy makes it out to be. Rather, Reagan wanted to cut the loopholes to make the system simpler and more efficient, a system that would bring in more revenue and broaden the overall tax base while allowing each person to pay lower rates.  He didn’t want to do it to make sure the rich “pay their fair share.”  He realized that by allowing people to keep their own money, they could invest in themselves and achieve a higher marginal benefit from it than they could ever get by giving it to the government. While it is true, he did increase payroll taxes as a start to Social Security reform.  He raised some others as a start towards deficit reduction because he was promised $3 in cuts for every $1 in increase, but the cuts never came because they never do. He learned his lesson after that and refused to support such ideas. He did increase capital gains taxes but that was so he could lower marginal income tax rates.  Reagan had his heart in the right place but the economic reality hurt his ideas here as revenue from capital gains taxes actually dropped significantly.  Overall revenue probably increased from the income tax cuts (don’t have the numbers) but just think, if one tax cut actually increased revenue, just imagine what two could have done!  Just look at what the Wall Street Journal had to say on this:

The 1986 experience was not a happy one. Tax revenues from capital gains surged before the increase took effect in 1987, as investors moved to cash in at the lower rate. Revenues then plummeted. Total realized capital gains didn’t again reach their 1985 level of $172 billion until 1996. By 1992, the federal government was barely getting more in revenue ($29 billion) at the 28% rate than it did in 1985 ($26.5 billion) at the 20% rate.

Rate reductions, as in 2003 when Republicans cut the rate to 15% from 20%, have typically had the opposite effect. Treasury receipts from capital gains climbed to an estimated $117.8 billion in 2006 from $49 billion in 2002.

Everything this guy says is absolute spin which absolutely distorts reality.  It all sounds good and that’s all he is, sound bites.  You look into it more and you realize everything is so misrepresented it borders on being nothing but lies.

Posted by: Rational Voice | October 5, 2011

“Lessons From Lemmings: The EU’s Green Power Folly”

I love the title of this article and it’s so true.  All these libtards are saying we’re falling behind the world in green energy which is probably true, but isn’t that a good thing?  How is us transitioning to a more expensive and less reliable energy source good for us, especially since those two probably will only be compounded by the fact that we’ll lose even more jobs?  If anything I’d say us “falling behind” is us staying ahead.  I say we let these idiots keep jumping off a cliff because it actually makes us more competitive in the long run.

Posted by: Rational Voice | September 14, 2011

Payroll Tax Cut

I’ve brought up the point in the past that cutting payroll taxes is not enough to spur job creation or get the economy going again.  And while I typically support anything that allows people to keep more of their money, I simply cannot support this tax cut for two reasons:

  1. It’s temporary but yet the president thinks businesses will start hiring because of it. They won’t though because businesses don’t look a few months into the future, they look years into the future. They aren’t going to hire one worker now because they’ll get a temporary tax cut. I will say this though, at least this time they are cutting the payroll tax for on the employer side as well as the employee side (each side pays a share of it…well actually in reality, the employee does in decreased wages because of the fact their employer has to pay this) because last time it was just for the employee, not the person who actual creates the jobs.
  2. While the first point is important, it is not nearly as important as this point: the payroll tax is what pays for Social Security, a program which is essentially bankrupt as it is, so how is cutting the very taxes which fund this program going to help keep it afloat? The answer is simple: it won’t. It will only speed up the ultimate demise of them. I am fine with this program ultimately dying but unfortunately it is not something we can have happen quickly.  Millions have paid into this their entire lives and do deserve to get something from it. And I’m willing to keep paying something into it even if I don’t get anything out of it just so we can kill it, but if it goes belly-up soon because we refuse to reform it, we will have a massive mess to deal with.
Overall, this whole payroll tax cut is nothing but game. It allows President Obama to say he cut taxes (a tax cut that won’t do anything, which he knows) so when the economy still doesn’t recover, he can say he compromised and tried Republican ideas and that they don’t work. Secondly, I think this will allow Democrats to, in the future, pin the blame on Republicans when Social Security finally tanks because it was their tax cuts which left it without adequate funding (never mind the fact that they, along with a number of Republicans, refuse to make changes to deal with our demographic shift). The payroll tax cut is not sound economics or policy; it is simply political posturing and nothing more.
Posted by: Rational Voice | September 14, 2011

9/11 “Day of Service”

This is something I truly don’t understand. The president calls 9/11 a “Day of Service” and I’ve seen others call it a “Day of Hope.” The president calls on people to go out and volunteer, to serve their community which is great and all, but what does that have to do with 9/11? What does working at a soup kitchen or picking up trash have to do with the terrorist attacks that killed three thousand of our fellow Americans? The same goes for this “Day of Hope” nonsense.  Hope? Hope for what? What the hell does hope have to do with 9/11? Hope it didn’t happen? That’s wishful thinking because we can’t change the past.

Liberals are trying to steal what 9/11 really is: a day of remembrance. 9/11 will always be that. It is a day to remember that our nation was attacked. It is a day to remember all those who died in the Twin Towers, the Pentagon, and in a Pennsylvania field. It is a day to remember the rescue workers who ran into those buildings in the hopes that they could save the lives of those trapped by the fires. And it is a day to remember the free men and women who decided do what free men and women do and fought back against the terrorists. We can remember the selfless service of all those who died trying to save lives that day, but that does not make that solemn day a “Day of Service.” It is “Day of Remembrance” because what we need to do that day, and each and every day, is remember what happened that day and to make sure it never happens again.

Posted by: Rational Voice | September 14, 2011

Great Quotes

Got these from a former teacher of mine.  Enjoy!

1. In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm and three or more is a congress. — John  Adams

2. If you don’t read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed. — Mark  Twain

3. Suppose you were an idiot.  And suppose you were a member of Congress. But then I repeat myself. — Mark  Twain

4. I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle. — Winston  Churchill

5. A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul. — George Bernard Shaw

6. A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man, which debt he proposes to pay off with your money. —  G. Gordon  Liddy

7. Democracy must be something more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner. — James Bovard, Civil Libertarian (1994)

8. Foreign aid might be defined as a transfer of money from poor people in rich countries to rich people in poor countries. —  Douglas Casey, Classmate of Bill Clinton at Georgetown University

9. Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys — P.J. O’Rourke, Civil Libertarian

10. Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else. — Frederic Bastiat, French economist (1801-1850)

11. Government’s view of the economy could be summed up  in a few short phrases:  If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it. — Ronald Reagan   (1986)

12. I don’t make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts. — Will  Rogers

13. If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it’s free! —  P.J.  O’Rourke

14. In general, the art of government consists of taking as much money as possible from one party of the citizens to give to the other. — Voltaire (1764)

15. Just because you do not take an interest in politics doesn’t mean politics won’t take an interest  in you! — Pericles (430  B.C.)

16. No man’s life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session. — Mark Twain   (1866)

17. Talk is cheap…except when Congress does it. – Anonymous

18. The government is like a baby’s alimentary canal, with a happy appetite at one end and no responsibility at the other. — Ronald  Reagan

19. The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings. The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing  of misery. — Winston  Churchill

20. The only difference between a tax man and a taxidermist is that the taxidermist leaves the skin.  — Mark Twain

21. The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools. — Herbert Spencer, English Philosopher (1820-1903)

22. There is no distinctly Native American criminal class…save Congress. — Mark Twain

23. What this country needs are more unemployed politicians. — Edward Langley, Artist (1928-1995)

24. A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you  have. — Thomas  Jefferson

25. We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office. — Aesop


1.  You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity, by legislating the wealth out of prosperity.

2.  What one person receives without working for…another person must work for without receiving.

3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.

4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.

5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work, because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation!

Posted by: Rational Voice | September 13, 2011

“Poverty” in America

I came across this earlier this summer but I don’t believe I ever got around to posting this. It shows how “poor” and “disadvantaged” the poor really are in the United States. It just makes me wonder that if the “poor” have all this stuff, do we really need to be subsidizing every aspect of their lives, from school to meals to unemployment to welfare? I’d say no if they somehow have enough money for many of what I’d call luxuries on this list. Hell, many of the poor have more of these things than I do and I work for a living.

Posted by: sonofliberty1787 | September 12, 2011

Rule of Three

So, today I had about three different ideas circling in my head.  None of which were individually fully formed arguments to post to a blog.  Anyway here goes my absolutely independent and unrelated ideas.

The budget. Yup have you heard anything about it since the debt ceiling debate?  You haven’t? Me or Rational Voice either.  The House passed Ryan’s bill, but the Senate has yet to move on it.  This year’s Continuing Resolution (the thing the government used since it failed to do its job last year) expires at the end of this month.  Looks like Congress is going to fail to do its job yet again and as I just established no one in the media is talking about it.  Apparently Barrack talking about creating jobs with more borrowed money is more important.  I guess a campaign speech to a joint session of Congress is more important than having Congress do its job.

This brings me to my second thought.  We now have American troops on the ground in Libya.  It may only be a few and for a short time, but we were promised this wasn’t a military operation and Congress need not worry about authorizing the actions, afterall there weren’t any ground troops involved.  I mean this isn’t a war or anything, right? Our role is narrow and limited and only involves “kinetic” action from fighters/bombers high in the sky.  Let me remind you of Obama’s words a few weeks ago:

We have not put any boots on the ground. And our allies, who historically we’ve complained aren’t willing to carry enough of the load when it comes to NATO operations, have carried a big load when it comes to these NATO operations. And, as a consequence, we’ve protected thousands of people in Libya, we have not seen a single U.S. casualty, there’s no risks of additional escalation, this operation is limited in time and in scope.

It may seem like no big deal, but when taken in conjunction with all of the administration’s other actions is just ridiculous.    

Finally, why do we have the burden of proving lower taxes creates jobs?  The Left is always making the claim that a stimulus and increasing taxes on wealthy will grow jobs, yet time and again that has failed.  In every other facet of the tax code from “poll taxes” on strip clubs, carbon fees on coal plants to “sin taxes” any time the government wants to discourage something they increase taxes.  So why does it follow that when taxes are increased in this instance it will grow jobs.  It doesn’t make sense, yet the right is always asked to defend the position that tax cuts will grow the economy, like it doesn’t make sense and is an impossible position.  I think we should reverse the paradox.  It’s the other way around.  Next time a liberal tells you to pay your fair share or tries to push more taxes on the rich ask them to briefly explain how that will possibly create wealth, make jobs and grow the economy.  I’m still waiting for a plausible explanation.  I’ll even ignore the empirical evidence if you can raise a sound logical argument.

Anyway, those are my thoughts for today. Hope you enjoy, feel free to discuss and debate.

Posted by: sonofliberty1787 | September 11, 2011

Government’s Job Function

I was driving back to work  after lunch the other day and heard a few interesting point from some Texas Representative on Rush’s show.  He was discussing Obama’s “jobs” speech.  Of course, there’s the typical arguments, like “where the crap will we get the money to pay for this!?” and “If it didn’t work last time, why would we try spending another few billion on the same failed ideas?”  But buried in all this was a simple statement and a simple truth.  The Congressman said, “government should not be a partner with companies. Private businesses do not want a partner in government, that’s what you see in a socialist state or dictatorship.  Government should be a referee.  They enforce laws, prevent monopolies and prevent contract infringement.”  There it is folks, a simple and perfect example of what government’s role ought to be in economic growth. 

The entire premise of the “jobs speech” is flawed.  Government cannot create wealth.  Sure the federal government can hire more bureaucrats, more regulators and people to dig ditches and fill them in.  None of these things will meaningfully employ people that will generate long term growth.  The permanent jobs will leech off the private sector, siphoning money and resources away from real job creators, while the temporary jobs will have limited impact.     

If instead Barry had proposed reducing the hundreds of regulations his EPA alone is pushing that would have helped.  If he had reigned in his Justice Department from raiding American guitar companies (and perhaps sent them to investigate the New Black Panthers or those responsible for Fast and Furious) maybe companines would feel safe to start hiring again. 

Government does not create jobs, both liberals and conservatives would do well to learn this fact.  Government protects society, its function is to prevent harm to citizens and ensure laws are followed.  In essence government is a ref.  I believe Rick Perry gets this to an extent, though he still tries to hold up the Texas example to prove he was “creating jobs.”  Texas is adding tons of jobs, but only because the government is passive or reactive in creating jobs.  As government shrinks and removes its poisonous tentacles from the economy growth will follow and fill the gap.  Texas has limited regulation, no state income tax and a very laizefaire attitude.  This is what’s responsible for job growth.  Rick Perry created jobs only in the sense he fostered and allowed an enviornment in which the fragile thing known as an economy could grow.  Perhaps the Teleprompter of the United States could take a second to look to Texas and learn what his soon to be Presidential opponent did to create jobs and grow the economy.  Sadly for our country I don’t think he’s likely to do that, but I guess that will help us get a Republican back in the White House, so I’ll take soliace in that.

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »


%d bloggers like this: