The only thing that keeps me from tearing my hair out because of the density of many politicians is this deforestation project going on atop my head. There hasn’t been any clear cutting yet but there are a few open areas that seem to be getting worse.
Enough about my hair. Why is it that so many politicians, especially Democrats, just don’t get it? They keep talking about not wanting to give tax cuts to the rich. Okay, should we give tax cuts to the 47 percent who pay no taxes? Pols miss the boat on many things when it comes to taxes, and the first is that the government didn’t earn the money. Taxes are what the government takes from those who do earn money. Tax cuts simply mean that the government is not taking as much money from individuals and corporations.
These politicians somehow ignore the big elephant standing in the middle of the room when they wring their hands and say they can’t afford to give a tax cut or that they just don’t know how they’ll be able to pay for a tax cut. News flash: historically, and you can look it up, tax increases almost always generate LESS revenue, not more. People with high incomes already pay more than their lion’s share of taxes, and when it becomes too burdensome they quickly tire of carrying the non-producers on their backs. Manufacturers will look at ways to cut costs, and this can result in laying off employees or cutting some of their benefits. In many cases they simply pack up and move to wherever the taxes are lower, even if it happens to be another country.
When Clinton was governor of Arkansas the legislature increased the tax on diesel fuel and calculated the additional millions they would rake into their coffers. Revenue decreased, because truckers filled up in neighboring states where taxes were cheaper. You can look it up.
Congress decided to protect the sugar industry by placing a large tariff on imported sugar. This increased sugar prices for everyone. Sugar became so expensive that some candy companies were forced out of business. You can look it up.
The steel tariff, during the Bush administration, was another fiasco. It placed a tariff on imported steel, and brought not only the steel industry, but the construction industry, to a screeching halt. This law was quickly repealed. You can look it up.
In Samoa, in 2007, the U.S. Congress, in its benevolence, decided to introduce a minimum wage there. In 2009, Chicken of the Sea, one of the largest employers, closed up shop and moved out of Samoa. Starkist laid off 800 workers. Both said the minimum wage law was the reason. And yes, you can look it up.
Another big thing they miss is when they’re going to “punish” an industry, such as big oil (that sounds better than little oil) by increasing or adding a tax to their products, such as gasoline. Silly me, but they’re punishing the consumer, not the industry. What business person in his right mind wouldn’t cover the cost of a tax increase by increasing the price of the product? This is just one more reason why tax cuts for the rich make sense. Politicians play on the sympathies of the electorate by calling these people “fat cats.”
Obama thinks that there’s a time when a company has made enough money, so it shouldn’t make any more. This applies to others, not to him. He never had a real job and now he’s a multi-millionaire. He wants to redistribute everyone else’s wealth, but not his own. There are many reasons that socialism has failed everywhere in the world. People simply don’t want to work hard for those who don’t.
If I go fishing and the government divides my catch among the spectators, it won’t be long before I stop buying bait and become a spectator. Of course, in communist countries they simply made people work and we saw how productive that was. It seems that there are some in this country who think socialism is a good idea, but these are people who never had to live through it. In addition to politicians, these are Hollywood types living in their own little fantasy world. Well, the leaders in communist countries were pretty well off at the expense of everyone else. I suppose the elites figure they’ll be at the top and everybody else can live in little concrete block cubes built by the government for its working class.
If socialism is so bad you’re probably asking yourself, “Then why does it work so well for some insects?” It’s not difficult to see that insects have a role in the world that doesn’t involve inventing things, for example. An ant simply has to find food and move dirt, making more tunnels. They don’t improve those tunnels by adding electricity and they don’t build trucks to haul their grains of sand or other things they carry.
Bees make honey and they could make a lot of money if they knew how to market it, but instead they just let people take it for free. And don’t raise your hand and tell me that bees are smart because you’ve heard of spelling bees. Yeah, I know, they make quilts, too. . .
Capitalism works because it’s a system of providing goods and services to others not at anyone’s expense, but as a result of one’s labors. When others carve out a niche in the same market all must compete to provide the best and most cost efficient products or services possible. The more government interferes by introducing regulations and taxes, the more it costs the consumer, and sometimes results in an inferior product.
Subsidies to farmers were intended to preserve the family farms, but, as is often the case when politicians come up with ideas, the unintended consequences were that farming became big business. Most small farms are ignored, with most of the subsidies going to large commercial farms with incomes of more than $200,000 and assets in excess of $2,000,000. More information on the detrimental effects of subsidies can be found at: http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2007/06/How-Farm-Subsidies-Harm-Taxpayers-Consumers-and-Farmers-Too.
Ethanol production also exacerbates the problem. Farmers who grow corn and other crops for ethanol production receive subsidies from the government, and the ethanol refiners also receive incentives. All this for a fuel that is considerably more inefficient than petroleum-based gasoline, can damage engines and other parts, and must be shipped by truck, rather than by pipeline. Those tree huggers seem to overlook the fact that it takes about 1700 gallons of water to make a gallon of ethanol. The cost of producing both crops and livestock has risen, so the consumer ends up digging deep to pay for ethanol and food. What a system!
My biggest concern, however, is when is the American voting public going to realize that they have to stop voting for the village idiots? I know that we can’t always pick perfect candidates to run against them, but really, Pelosi, Reid, and Obama? Give me, and the country, a break!