► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Archive for the ‘Regulation’ Category

Not Afraid Of The Lax Rules Involved With Federal Agencies? Get A Load Of This.

by Flyovercountry ( 116 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Democratic Party, DHS, Economy, Progressives, Regulation at June 23rd, 2014 - 7:00 am

I’ve written about this before, the evils perpetrated upon our constitutional republic by establishing federal agencies as a substitute for the framework of governance originally established by our founding national law. Federal agencies have effectively swept away all vestiges of the checks and balances system, and have done more to concentrate power within the federal behemoth than the election of 10 Barack Obamas consecutively could ever achieve.

Our very first federal agency was the Interstate Commerce Commission, established in February of 1887. The act granting authority to establish this agency established something called agency law. The Act itself was worded purposefully vague, and granted the agency authority to write its own rules, manage the enforcement of those rules, and depended upon the Judiciary for what little check on its power the weakest branch of our government would care to muster. The Judiciary of course elected to defer such oversight authority, deferring in almost all instances to the, “wisdom of the experts within the agencies themselves,” for such matters. With that almost exclusively followed path set forth then, continued to this day without interruption, all federal agencies effectively have the power of all three branches of our federal behemoth, concentrated within the hegemony of the current bureaucracy. What’s worse, since it is nearly impossible to fire federal workers, that bureaucracy remains in place and devoted to its own belief system, irrespective of which leadership team to manage the whole mess is actually decided upon by the American People. If for example Conservatives win national elections, the federal agencies will undoubtedly continue to run with a decidedly liberal bent, they’ll just be a little more discreet about it for 4 or 8 years.

it’s taken a while, 127 years to be more specific about it, but this very week, one of those newly formed agencies showed perfectly, why we should all be very terrified.

From the Town Hall article linked to above:

Last week the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, through the power of Dodd-Frank, passed a rule giving the agency unprecedented power to shut down businesses, no matter what the reason, at any time it wishes through a cease-and-desist order. Further, the rule puts businesses at the mercy of the CFPB and they cannot go back into operation until government approval or a court ruling is made over an issue. Subsequently because bureaucratic decisions and court rulings take a substantial amount of time to happen, businesses cannot survive during those waiting periods. Here are the details (emphasis mine):

In a notice published in today’s Federal Register, the CFPB has announced that it has adopted its interim final rule on temporary cease-and-desist orders (C&Ds) without change. The final rule takes effect on July 18, 2014.

The CFPB is authorized to issue temporary C&Ds under Section 1053(c) of Dodd-Frank. That provision authorizes a temporary C&D as an adjunct to a cease-and-desist proceeding brought under Section 1053 against a covered person or service provider. A temporary C&D is effective immediately upon service and remains in effect unless modified or terminated administratively by the CFPB or set aside on judicial review.

Reasons!? Reasons!? They don’t need no stinking reason to shut you down! This latest rule of course is being inflicted now to threaten banks who do business with gun dealers and manufacturers. So, rather than inflict gun control, which is prohibited by our Second Amendment, and further, is opposed by the vast majority of American citizens, they’ll just make certain that gun shops can not participate in the market place of capital commerce. They won’t be able to process credit card payments, deposit checks, or cash, or use checking accounts to pay their bills and such. All of course because the CCFB has granted itself this authority, and it’ll doubtless take the Judiciary a decade or so to sort it out, assuming that our weakest branch of government even cares to do so.

On Father’s day I had a conversation with a liberal. I reminded him that the entire purpose of the Second Amendment was to protect the citizens of the newly formed nation from any future government tyranny, so that the federal government would always be as afraid of its citizens as the citizens were of the government. He immediately quipped, as if I would be silly to consider that necessary today, “do you even think that’s an issue now?” When I answered you bet, he labeled me a fringe radical fanatic. (I love that softball opportunity to slap someone down by the way.) So I of course asked if his definition of a fringe radical was someone who did not wish to live under the societal rules that he agreed with and sought to inflict. That was a conversation ending question, and it felt good. This latest bit, something I wish I had in my arsenal a week ago, is that perfect example of government tyranny run completely amok.

Make no mistake about it however, this is something far bigger than the threat to use a back door method to inflict gun control. It is far bigger even than the CCFB. It is the agency system of governance itself that must be dealt with. The only President ever, who attempted to do something to reign in the out of control behemoth that our federal agencies have become, was Richard Nixon. This, as much as anything, was a reason for why he was so hated by the political left. We need the political will and fortitude not seen since Reagan to do that, and I actually have someone in mind. We’ll be discussing that on Monday. I’m going out on a limb and making an endorsement, even before anyone declares for the upcoming 2016 bloodbath.

Cross Posted from Musings of a Mad Conservative.

More on Cantor’s Loss

by coldwarrior ( 100 Comments › )
Filed under Debt, Economy, Open thread, Politics, Regulation, Republican Party, taxation, The Political Right at June 18th, 2014 - 12:00 pm

This article sums up the division in the GOP quite nicely.

Sure, I agreed with some of the things he voted for, but in the long run (as we in the dismal science love to say) he failed in the basic task that a conservative has in DC: Limit the size of Fedgov and return power to the States, return power to YOU.

The video at the end is well worth the watch as well.

 

Will Anybody Really Miss Eric Cantor?

His stunning loss was built on a terrible record of big-government conservatism at its worst.

| June 17, 2014

Will anybody really miss Eric Cantor? Probably not. Despite (or maybe because of) his position in the House Republican leadership and the historic nature of his primary loss, there was virtually nothing remarkable about him as a politician or a policymaker. The Republicans have dozens or hundreds or thousands more just like him. He’s like a Dorito corn chip in those old Jay Leno ads: They’ll make more.

Cantor exemplifies what Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) just denounced as a “Chamber of Commerce”-style GOP legislator, “the same-old, same-old,” standard-issue Republican who has brought the party to a historically low level of self-identification among voters.

Cantor was what passes for a small-government conservative. Which is to say that Cantor was in favor of shrinking the size and scope of government…except for the endless list of exceptions that allowed him to help grow federal spending by more than 50 percent in real terms, and regulatory spending by even more, during the Bush years.

You know the drill: As a “conservative,” Cantor wanted the government out of people’s lives because FREEDOM-FOUNDING FATHERS-CONSTITUTION. Yet Cantor was anti-gay marriage and anti-abortion (he even wanted to prohibit adults from transporting minors across state lines if they were getting abortions). Because the federal government really should dictate all that, right? He endorsed a constitutional amendment against flag burning because free expression doesn’t mean you can actually express what you mean. He was pro-gun or, more specifically, pro-National Rifle Association. He was pro-drug war. Nothing unique or interesting there.

He wavered ever-so-slightly on immigration reform, meaning that he believed some children of immigrants shouldn’t be punished for their parents’ transgressions (big of him, really, at least in a GOP context). But he voted to build a militarized fence along our border with Mexico, pulled a 100 percent rating from the xenophobes at the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) and he wanted English to be the official language of America (what’s Mexican for WTF?). He loved the national security state (including virtually unchecked surveillance of Americans as well as foreigners), defense spending, and wars (especially when a Republican was in the White House). He voted for No Child Left Behind, the single-biggest increase in federal control over education because education is an issue best dealt with at the local level, unless conservative Republicans run the country.

On spending and economic issues, he was atrocious and hypocritical in all the ways that a Republican can be. Of course he voted for the 2003 expansion of Medicare to include prescription drugs, even as he voted against allowing Medicare to negotiate cheaper prices for that unwarranted giveaway to the nation’s seniors. He signed off on the Bush budgets and he championed the Troubled Asset Relief Program and the illegal auto bailouts (at least as long as a Republican was president).

Like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Cantor was a spirited defender of the Export-Import Bank, an FDR-created boondoggle that guarantees loans to foreign businesses who buy American products. As the Mercatus Center’s Veronique de Rugy has shown, the Ex-Im Bank is among the purest excrescences of crony capitalism, with favored U.S. companies such as Boeing getting massive subsidies via the program. Cantor was the leader in the effort to reauthorize it two years ago and was the point man on this year’s reauthorization too. He loved the House Republican budget resolution, the so-called Path to Prosperity, which is full of accounting tricks (such as zeroing out spending on Obamacare while keeping all the program’s revenues) and would increase annual federal spending from $3.7 trillion in 2015 to $5 trillion in 2024.

If Cantor does indeed exemplify the Chamber of Commerce-style Republican that enflames the Tea Party even more than it does liberal and progressive Democrats, does the majority leader’s defeat spell doom for the GOP establishment?

I hope so, but it’s far from clear. Cantor’s district had been redrawn, and while it remained solidly red, he was unfamiliar in much of it. His internal polling was way off, so he didn’t start a counter-campaign until it was too late. For reasons that aren’t clear, he pulled 8,500 fewer total votes in this primary than he did in 2012, a drop The Washington Post notes is wider than his opponent’s 7,200-vote margin of victory.

Primary voters tend to be much more ideological and extreme than general-election voters, so they aren’t representative of larger party dynamics. Economics professor David Brat vanquished Cantor in part by touting a tough line on immigration, but it’s not clear that rank-and-file Republicans are anti-immigrant or even care much about the topic. A recent Politico poll, for instance, finds 64 percent of Republican voters in favor of comprehensive immigration reform, and the topic is way down on lists of voter concerns.

For all those reasons, I think it’s folly to talk about Cantor’s loss as meaning more than the obvious: He perfectly represented the modal Republican in that he talked about limiting government while actively growing its reach in virtually every way. That is a supremely unattractive character to be in contemporary American politics, and it helps explain why Gallup finds just 25 percent of Americans identify as Republicans (the news isn’t rosy for Democrats, either, according to Gallup: Just 31 percent of Americans identify with that centuries-old brand). Last Saturday, Rand Paul told the Texas Republican Liberty Caucus that people everywhere “say it’s time…for this libertarian moment, this liberty moment. It’s no longer something that scares people, it’s what [makes] people say, we can’t run the same-old, same-old, we’re not going to win with the same-old, same-old.” Eric Cantor was definitely the same-old, same-old. The GOP is choking on guys (yes, guys) just like him who talk about limited government and then legislate in a totally different way.

I hope that Paul is right and folks want to embrace a vision of limited government that extends to social issues and spending issues. I don’t think the rejection of Cantor by primary voters tells us much about that. But it does signal that the status quo is up for grabs and that undistinguished pols like Cantor should be shaking in their boots.

 

Nobel Laureate Gary Becker Left An Ignored Legacy Well Worth Attention

by Flyovercountry ( 88 Comments › )
Filed under Economy, Regulation at May 19th, 2014 - 2:00 pm

I’ve written many times on my blog that those societies which enact anti discrimination laws accomplish only one thing, and that is to reduce to zero, the costs associated with capricious behavior. It is one of the things which will send the political left into a tizzy, have them screaming racist from what ever roof top they can find, and more specifically, get them to spout off some of the most economically illiterate arguments concerning basic economics that I’ve ever heard. It may or may not interest everyone reading this that I did not just make that thought up from thin air. As it turns out, that very statement, and the research to prove it, won an economist named Gary Becker the Nobel Prize for Economics in 1992. That by the way was still a time when a Nobel Prize meant something more than just the prize for the person who did something noteworthy in the arena of leftist political advancement. Yes, there was more to Becker’s theory than that one statement, but that is the nub of it. He showed conclusively that fairness laws produce only the opposite result upon which they are sold to the public, that the free market price system is the greatest tool available to modern man which actually does end racial or any other type of societal discrimination. Unfortunately, the politicians who often get themselves elected by convincing Americans that they have some basic understanding of economics will more often than not simply pretend that Gary Becker never existed, and that is a real shame.

Gary Becker passed away this week, and one of his former students wrote a nice essay paying homage to his former teacher. It would be nice, if some time during our century old national discussion on race, we would actually allow for substantive debate to trump emotional demagoguery, but that’s just a pipe dream of mine. Becker’s theory you see wouldn’t allow for the professional race huxters, grievance pimps, shakedown artists, or political bosses to keep using America’s most profitable divide to stoke their own self centered agendas.

Here’s Thomas Sowell, who I believe deserves a Nobel Prize for Economics based upon his work with empirical analysis alone. He’s done more to follow up on Becker’s work than any other economist alive. In this video he discusses some of that research with William F. Buckley during an interview in 1983.

Cross Posted from Musings of a Mad Conservative.

Conservative?

by coldwarrior ( 123 Comments › )
Filed under Anarcho-Capitalism, Conservatism, Debt, Economy, government, Immigration, Libertarianism, Open thread, Politics, Regulation, Republican Party, taxation, Tea Parties, unemployment at May 16th, 2014 - 1:12 pm

Then I guess I ain’t one. No mention of deregulation at the federal level. No mention of any fiscally conservative issues like, oh, I don’t know, getting the budget and spending under control to avoid the obvious wall we are going to hit in a few years. No mention of tax reform. No mention of State’s rights. No mention of personal liberty. No mention of limiting the Federal Government’s role in our lives. These should be the ‘Agenda’ for the GOP. These should be Bedrock Issues.

 

But, predictably, No…It’s Abortion, ‘the family’ (not sure why fedgov needs to be involved in that), and illegal immigration. Now, if its up to me, abortion is up to the states where they could really make some headway like is being made on the second amendment. Mexico would be read the riot act and forced to close their side of the border, we would seal our southern border and the northern border. Hiring managers and HR and CEOs would do hard time for hiring illegals. There would be a path to citizenship, but it would be hard, and there would be work permits but they would only seasonal. Easy fix. took me 5 minutes.

 

Instead the usual crowd met and they talked about family values and abortion and fags. THE ECONOMY IS WRECKED!!!  WE HAVE 25% REAL UNEMPLOYMENT!!! WE ARE GOING TO RUN OUT OF MONEY IN A FEW YEARS!!! REGULATION IS KILLING US!!! FEDGOV VIEWS THE CITIZENS AS CATTLE!!! But no, let’s beat our chests about abortion and fags.

I have begun to ask myself, why does this  GOP ‘conservative wing’ not want to focus on why America is becoming poorer and losing ground by the minute while stacking up debt by the minute that will enslave our kids and grand-kids? Do they not see or not care about the train wreck that is coming for the economy? Why does this group have a willful disregard for economics and liberty? Having Grover Norquist natter on and subscribing to the economically illiterate idea of a balanced budget amendment does not address the serious fiscal issues that we face. Not even close. If these guys were the board and GOP was a corporation, they would be fired by the shareholders for negligence.

Although many Republicans are optimistic about their chances in this year’s elections, some of Washington’s leading conservatives gathered Thursday to privately vent frustrations about what kind of party they will be left with after November.

The group, alarmed by a resurgence of the GOP establishment in recent primaries and what activists view as a softened message, drafted demands to be shared with senior lawmakers calling on the party to “recommit” to bedrock principles.

Some of those principles laid out in the new document — strict opposition to illegal immigration, same-sex marriage and abortion — represent the hot-button positions that many Republican congressional candidates are trying to avoid as the party attempts to broaden its appeal.

Several attendees said they fear that elected Republicans, even if they succeed in retaining control of the House and winning the Senate majority, would cast aside the core conservative base.

“Conservatives ought not to delude themselves that if Republicans win the Senate majority, it will somehow be a conservative majority,” said L. Brent Bozell III, president of the Media Research Center, which monitors perceived media bias. “We should have no expectation whatsoever that they will listen. That’s why we’re fighting.”

Others worry that a toned-down campaign message by the party would dim GOP turnout and undercut Republicans in competitive races.

“I’m terrified that Republicans will blow this election if they are not going to stand for something,” said Michael A. Needham, the chief executive of Heritage Action, a conservative group.

Stand for something!?! How about standing for State’s rights, personal liberty and less regulation/federal control as ‘Bedrock Issues’? Why not restrain Fedzilla and get them off of our backs as a Bedrock Issue? They can start with USDA agents with machine guns and bullet proof vests then move to the BLM and ATF and EPA. How about standing for not selling our kids and grand-kids into debt slavery as a Bedrock Issue?

Debt is slavery and regulation is the whip.

Liberty is a gift. Liberty is a real and universal family value.

Debt and Liberty weren’t on the agenda.

 

*SO, this is what drives me mad about these people who call themselves conservative* Where is the liberty? Where is the reduction of enslaving debt?   Makes me crazy…so don’t get all out of whack over this post. It is for illustration purposes only.

 

Oh well…have a great friday and weekend yinz!

29 of 30 Dow Jones companies support Clinton initiatives

by Rodan ( 67 Comments › )
Filed under Bailouts, Business, Democratic Party, Economy, Elections 2016, Fascism, Hillary Clinton, Progressives, Regulation, Tranzis at May 7th, 2014 - 8:12 am

For all the talk of Republicans being the party of big businesses facts point in the other direction. A new report out shows that 29 out of 30 Dow Jones have donated to support the Clinton Foundation.

The blue-chip political investment for big business is Clinton Inc.

Twenty-nine of the 30 Dow Jones (INDU) Industrial Average index companies have given money or in-kind support to projects branded by Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton, according to a review of Clinton Foundation and U.S. State Department reports.

The main gates to Clintonworld are the Clinton Foundation, an umbrella group overseeing the former president’s causes such as raising money to help earthquake-ravaged Haiti, and its spinoff Clinton Global Initiative, which recruits corporate sponsors for international charitable projects. Major corporations also responded to a call for cash from the State Department during Hillary Clinton’s tenure.

[....]

“It is always going to raise suspicions,” said David Almasi, the executive director for the Republican-leaning National Center for Public Policy Research who also owns shares of Boeing Co., a Dow member that has donated to the Clinton Foundation and has business interests across the globe. “It’s the appearance of impropriety that is the problem. If they are going to play like this, they are going to have to accept that we are going to be skeptical.”

Wall Street will clearly be in the Hillary camp for the 2016 elections. For the Republicans to have any shot of defeating Hillary they must attack this Corporate Socialist – Democrat Party Axis of Evil. Turning class warfare on its head, the GOP should attack this concentration of economic and political power from the Right. It is not healthy for Capitalism to have Government and Big Businesses tied at the hip. It creates an unfair advantage for well connected people at the expense of market innovation and economic freedom.

Corporate Socialism is a threat to medium and family own businesses who are not politically connected. This will lead to depressed wages and lack of job growth which leads to government dependency. Going after this anti-Capitalist cabal will pay dividends for Republicans if they choose to go that route. Such a stance is not anti-business, on the contrary it is very pro-free market.

The Administrative Assault On The Constitution: Why Electing Third Party Candidates Won’t Matter Either

by Flyovercountry ( 163 Comments › )
Filed under Economy, EPA, government, Progressives, Regulation at May 6th, 2014 - 3:09 pm

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

On February 4, 1887, President Grover Cleveland signed into law, the very first piece of legislation that created a regulatory agency. On that date in our nation’s history, the Interstate Commerce Commission was created. This event represents in many ways, the birth of the progressive assault on the U.S. Constitution. The ICC for those of you who aren’t familiar with its impact upon the daily lives of every person living within our borders, was granted the power and authority of all three branches of our federal government. Its creation represents perhaps the single most important step in destroying the checks and balances system so thoughtfully put into place by our nation’s founders. The theory was that our nation had become to large and complex to govern in the manner proscribed by the constitutional form of governance created close to 100 years prior to that date. A new system was needed where independent regulatory agencies would be able to take a more proactive role in the specific areas of their purview. These independent agencies would provide, where necessary, a more efficient address of problems needing solution than the designed gridlock built into our constitutional architecture. This belief was born out of the gridlock of the 1860′s, 70′s, and 80′s, in which the railroads were the target of a concerted effort to gin up complaint in regards to the prices charged customers who might seek passage on the short hauls. During the entire decade, endless debate was held in Congress, and shockingly, a solution could not be agreed upon. (It is worthy of note that Milton Friedman highlighted this very debate and ensuing solution as a part of his, “Free to Choose,” series, specifically, episode seven. His argument, and one that I happen to agree with, was that a solution was not necessary, since the problem was overblown, not real, and would have been better addressed by simply allowing the market place to sort itself out, as it always had previously. It should also be noted that rail travel in the United States at that time, even on the short hauls, was far cheaper than in the European nations, where government intervention was far more prevalent.)

As a direct result of the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887, the disparity of the long haul versus short haul rates was solved by raising the former to reflect the latter, rather than the other way around. It took about a decade for the consumer advocates of the day to move on to their next crusade, and left the control of the ICC completely up to the industry experts of the time, who were of course the very owners of the railroads that the Commission in question was supposed to be regulating in the first place. The ICC was used as a regulatory bludgeon to keep smaller companies from entering into the already very competitive railroad market, and when Trucks became a viable economic alternative, and quickly grew into a superior economic alternative, the trucking industry got itself added to the purview of the ICC. Today of course, as a result of this, there are trucking companies in America which make large profits without owning or operating a single truck. They simply buy and lease ICC licenses, adding a layer of cost to every item purchased by any citizen anywhere in America at any time.

Worse than that however is the fact that as is almost always the case, the specific problems sought to be solved by this particular agency were only made worse. By the time the 10th birthday candle was placed on the top of the ICC cake, the original intention was ignored and or forgotten completely, and a whole new scope of regulatory authority and control was fabricated, by the agency itself. This by the way is a real danger to anyone wishing to live free from the yoke of government tyranny. The ICC had failed completely in its original mission, as almost every agency does. That failure however was never accounted for, nor was any accounting sought. Instead, the agency simply wrote itself a new mission, which was of course completely opposite of the intended purpose. The progressive model so expertly thrust upon us, to the point where we’ve missed its implementation entirely, is that the Legislators draft a law with extremely vague language. A broad vision is laid out in terms of the area of our society that they wish to see placed under the control of said agency. The details of the new law are proscribed to be filled in later by the newly created government agency. An example of this in action is the Dodd/Frank Law that created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Congress passed a law which said, we want to regulate how our credit markets will operate, so that the credit consumer would be protected against greedy money lenders looking to do harm to the little guy. It was pretty much that vague, except that a new government agency, The CPFB, would write the rules necessary to place the entire financial services sector of our economy under complete control of the newly formed regulatory authority. Here we are some 5 years later, and Richard Cordray, the former Ohio Attorney General that Ohioans got tired of after only 4 short years, has carte blanche to rewrite how an entire sector of our economy will function. Never mind fellow little people, that he has not one second’s experience in the function of our capital market place, nor will he have any bothersome oversight to interfere with him as he writes those rules, nor even what those rules will ultimately be. If you wish to purchase a house, ever, it’s up to Richard Cordray now, how or if that will happen.

The agency you see, not only comes with the power to write its own rules, but also with the power of the Executive Branch, since this is where all agencies reside, to manage how those rules are enforced. Beyond that however, in all but the most severe cases, the courts have by and large simply abdicated their own place in this process by allowing these entities to adjudicate their own disputes. For the most part, the answer of the Judicial Branch has been to allow the agencies wide leeway in terms of settling any differences that private citizens may have with the management of agency business. So much for separation of power, one of the principle tenets of our constitutional republic.

Every four years in this nation we hold national beauty pageants designed to choose the leaders of our Executive Branch. Invariably those leaders come from one of two major political parties, and any belief that this will change any time soon is simply the worst form of naive wishful idiocy. Sorry Gods of the Third Party, but that is fact, and no amount of whining combined with coercive bullying will change that. The system is rigged in favor of the two major political parties, and that state of being rigged has been codified into our national election law. If you expect the apparatchiks of the two major political parties to ever work together in order to relinquish their grip on power, I happen to own a bridge that spans from Brooklyn to Manhattan in the State of New York that I’d be willing to sell to you. Short of an Article V convention, this state of Democrats and Republican owning a choke hold on our national political scene will not go away. (Here by the way is an excellent addition to the Article V list, for those interested.)

Even if however, a Libertarian Candidate for President let’s pretend, actually manages to win an election, that President would still be stuck with managing Federal Agencies who have been previously granted the authority to act on their own behalf and govern their individual fiefdoms as they see fit. George W. Bush did succeed in some small measure to curb the activities of the federal behemoth, but mostly, all of the independent regulatory agencies operate in mostly the same fashion whether there’s an R or a D following the Chief Executive’s name. So, while I singled out George W. Bush, simply because he was the last one with an R, the same could be said for every Republican President from 1887 onward. They simply do not have the means available to get a hold of the monster created, as the laws as written have created these individual heads of the Hydra to operate outside of any possible constraint. (I am seeing yet another good argument for an Article V Convention here. I would also like to point out that one President did actually try to place legal limits upon agency authority and scope in our country, and that man was Richard Nixon. He failed spectacularly, and found himself chased from town.) The point is, that no matter what promise may or may not be made, getting hold of the monster and curbing its scope is impossible without repealing the existing law that created it, and it will take much more than electing one single Libertarian with the right rhetoric in order to see this accomplished.

We on the political right won’t get our way until we get our collective crap together and begin winning a lot of elections. Until that day, be prepared to live life in the Worker’s Paradise my friends. I’ll see you in the reeducation camps.

The previously mentioned episode of, “Free to Choose.”

Cross Posted from Musings of a Mad Conservative.

How To Refute The Economy Running On All Cylinders Meme In One Graph

by Flyovercountry ( 251 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Democratic Party, Economy, Regulation, taxation, unemployment at April 25th, 2014 - 6:00 am

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Let me begin with my penance. All hail the Gods of the Third Party. Hail to thee, hail to thee, hail to thee. Forgive me my transgression of mentioning elections and wining them without touting you as the sole way forward for humanity’s best hope. Now that this is out of the way, on with the reason for the post.

It’s the start of another midterm campaign season, and the stupidity from the left is already in full bloom. It’s bloomed early this year, and the leftist arguments concerning economics are no exception to that. “Barack Obama brought us back from the brink of collapse.” “it would have been worse had McCain or Romney won.” “the economy is just starting to recover and is running on all cylinders,” will be heralded from the roof tops and accepted by a compliant and completely incurious media. Those statements and more are just a taste of what we’re about to hear as we crawl our way towards that first Tuesday in November, that next opportunity to mitigate the damage done by two Barack Obama terms in the Oval Office.

I realize that many in our nation, especially those who claim that America was perched on the brink of the proverbial abyss in January of 2009, will not remember the middle to late 1970′s, most specifically the state of our economy during those halcyon days. Jimmy Carter had managed to disprove the theory that a correlation betwixt unemployment and Inflation existed. Inflation was so high that banks were beginning to flat out refuse to loan even a single thin dime, unless the borrower agreed to an interest rate that made loan sharks scratch their heads and cry WTF. Gas lines were miles long, and rationing had begun. During the winter months, the nightly news dutifully reported how many days of coal for heating were left in stockpiles, and took the extra step of comparing that estimation with the number of days left in the winter season. Those are just some of the reasons why you hear a derisive laughter when stating that the George W. Bush economy was the worst since WWII.

When Ronald Reagan took over from Jimmy Carter in ’81, things were actually worse economically compared to when Obama took over from George W. Bush in ’08.
Consider these three important comparisons of economic indicators, then and now:

- Unemployment was at 10.8% versus 7.7%
- Inflation (Consumer Price Index) was at 13.5% versus 2.7%
- Interest rates (prime rate) was at 21.5% versus 3.25%

Obama v Reagan Net Jobs

What the above graph shows is the net new jobs created in proportion to the population growth. During the upcoming election cycle, be prepared for the baloney. They’ll bandy about some highly suspect and nebulous figure for how many jobs, Barack Obama, created. It’ll be in the millions, and we’re supposed to be amazed by it’s size, never actually comparing it to the size of our population, the size of our population’s growth, let alone how many of those jobs were additions to the tax paying public’s burden for all of this, or how many jobs were lost or disappeared during the same time frame.

I have said this many times before, but it bears saying again. We, meaning those of us who believe in small government limited in scope and authority by the consent of those governed, in free market economic principles, in the rule of law as codified in our Constitution’s original intent, must get our collective crap together and begin winning elections. Our problems run much deeper than Barack Obama or any of his small band of incompetent minions. Our collective pain has been achieved politically, and politically is the only way we will be able to remedy that pain.

You’ve probably all seen this before. I first saw this quote in March of 2009, but that does not change the fact that it is spot on, eloquent, and quite possibly the best description of the state of America today.

cid:732EA4AE-8A41-4215-ADFF-E99CADC77A91

Cross Posted from Musings of a Mad Conservative.

Things Are Looking Up For The Right!

by Flyovercountry ( 134 Comments › )
Filed under Conservatism, Economy, Libertarianism, Regulation, Republican Party, Tea Parties, The Political Right, Uncategorized, unemployment at February 27th, 2014 - 1:00 pm

Political Cartoons by Eric Allie

I believe some perspective might be in order, so that the significance of this next item may be fully appreciated in its broader context. Harry Reid it seems went to his fellow minions in the Senate, and as their minion leader, found that little more than half of his sub minion drones were on board with the latest bit of class warfare du jour.

I am referencing of course the proposed federal minimum wage hike to $10.10 per hour, euphemistically referred to as, “giving America a raise.” For purposes of perspective, let’s discuss what these little bits of class warfare truly are, and especially the minimum wage hike. They are the go to plays within the Democrat play book that are pulled out whenever electoral trouble is spotted on the horizon. The minimum wage hike is the Democrat equivalent to the Steelers running their bubble screen each and every time they face a second and long and are down by a touchdown or more. They are the equivalent of Peyton Manning coming to the line of scrimmage and declaring authoritatively, “Comanche,” every single time his offense faces a third and long. The minimum wage hike is the go to play, and before now, it has worked every single time, (in terms of electoral politics anyhow. Economically, it has always resulted in disaster.)

From the Hotair article linked to above:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on Tuesday delayed action on legislation raising the minimum wage, the centerpiece of the Democrats’ 2014 agenda.

The Nevada Democrat made the surprising move amid escalating Democratic resistance in the wake of a Congressional Budget Office report released last week estimating that hiking the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour could cost the equivalent of 500,000 jobs by late 2016.

Reid has not yet unified his caucus on the issue, which is a constant in the Democrats’ election-year playbook. Of the 55 senators who caucus with the Democrats, only 32 have signed on as official co-sponsors of Sen. Tom Harkin’s (D-Iowa) bill.
Let’s get this straight. This is Obama’s highest domestic agenda priority item, and the chamber which his party controls can barely get half of their caucus to sign onto it? That’s some genius work at the White House. Who’s their legislative liaison these days?

The issue, of course, is that the CBO actually scored the proposal before Reid could advance the bill. Their estimate of 500,000 jobs lost in just two years would be a boat anchor on any legislation, but especially in an economy where workforce participation looks like this:

The Democrats who still have jobs in Washington, and are not tenured enough in their careers as professional wielders of power are worried. They have internal polls, and those internal polls are telling them to forget about 2016, but worry instead about 2014. They can read the tea leaves and those tea leaves are telling them that America is not in a mood to elect Democrats to the office of county dog catcher. This is the reason why we are seeing a huge increase in the retirements from the demographic of Democrat Congressional Leaders. These fine folks are not interested in being in Congress and not being afforded the opportunity to wield power to the degree that they feel entitled.

What we’ve just witnessed, to continue the pro football analogy, is the first snap from scrimmage during a playoff game sailing over the head of the quarterback, while the whole stadium anticipated and feared the bubble screen. The Democrats tried to label Obamacare bi-partisan, and that will never work. Then they tried to laud it as a giant success, that won’t work either. Next they tried the whole populist play book, and received a bizarrely luke warm reception from a nation fatigued with previous consequences from earlier forays into populism. After that, the calls to fix rather than scrap Obamacare were sounded to various focus groups. The response of course was this:

“You can’t fix this car Spicoli!”

The tried and true minimum wage hike was supposed to be their go to play. The good news is that as of now, they can’t even sell it to their own. Demonizing political opponents is all they have left now. Expect to see that soon. It may work, and it may not, but one thing is clear, reports of the death of the GOP may have been premature, once again.

Cross Posted from Musings of a Mad Conservative.

Obama to delay employer mandate for small businesses

by Rodan ( 4 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Cult of Obama, Democratic Party, Economy, Health Care, Regulation, Special Report at February 10th, 2014 - 4:43 pm

Regardless of how one feels about the Immigration issue, John Boehner was right. Obama can’t be trusted and implements laws as he sees fit. Knowing that Obamacare is an albatross around the Democrats, Obama has now delayed the employer mandate for small businesses.

The federal government Monday announced yet another delay in Obamacare’s rules. It will now exempt companies employing between 50 and 100 full-time workers from complying with the mandate to offer employees affordable health insurance by another year, until 2016.

Companies that have 100 or more full-time workers, defined as employees who work more than 30 hours per week, will have to begin complying with the mandate to offer such coverage in 2015 or face financial penalties of up to $3,000 per worker.

Officials Monday said that the delay in the Obamacare mandate will affect 50 percent of the businesses that were supposed to be complying by 2015. Those officials could not answer how many workers would be affected by the delay.

You best bet, Obama will delay the employer mandate for medium and big businesses before the Midterms.

Get Konnected With The Kronies OOT

by Macker ( 78 Comments › )
Filed under Bailouts, Humor, OOT, Regulation, taxation, Unions at January 24th, 2014 - 11:00 pm

Heads They Win, Tails You Lose….

Yes, there really IS a website for these “action figures” and here it is! According to the site, it purports to offer these characters for sale…but not yet…all those regulatory and confiscatory statutes, policy mandates, and political paybacks have to be met first!
While everyone’s waiting for that, let’s go right into The Overnight Open Thread!