Sunday, March 26, 2017

The Law of Diminishing Returns


It seems that one of the great passions of the liberal Democrats is the idea that raising taxes on the rich will somehow even the “economic playing field”. One big problem, it hasn't worked in the past and will not work in the future.

There comes a point when if you “punish” someone for being successful by overtaxing and/or over regulating them to raise government revenue in order to fund social programs and “pet” projects, the opposite effect occurs in most all instances. In Economics 101, that is called the “Law of Diminishing Returns” (in taxation, the point where increasing the tax rates, over and above what is fair, do not produce the desired revenue, but it actually generates less revenue than expected). Let's look at history. Starting in the 1920's, when Pres. Calvin Coolidge lowered the tax rates, to when JFK, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush also lowered the tax rates, we have seen a subsequent boom in positive economic activity, contrary with what the naysayers (Socialists and Democrats) were predicting.

It might seem strange and incongruous that when tax rates are raised over a certain point, that the revenue that comes into the government coffers was less than what was expected, but when the rates were reduced to a “fair” amount, revenue soared. It was the the tax cuts proposed and enacted under Ronald Reagan that produced low inflation, low unemployment and the greatest economic boom in U.S. history, which continued on for the next 20 years. When Reagan came into office in 1980, federal receipts were approximately $600 billion. In 1989, which was Reagan's last full budget, government receipts had shot up to $909 billion. But even with those increased government revenues, we still ran the government at a deficit. The main reason for that anomaly was entirely the product of Congressional “pork barrel” spending. They, the Congress, spent more money than the government took in in revenue, mainly for social programs that did not work.

It has been downhill ever since, especially since Pres. Obama, took office, as we now have over $20 trillion in national debt and it's still rising at an alarming rate. It is expected to reach $25 trillion in just a few short years. This could possibly result in what might be called a “government bankruptcy” (ala Greece and some other European economy's) unless we change course. That's what Trump promised us in the last campaign.

The Democrats continue to float the idea that it is “unfair” for someone in our society to amass wealth while others wallow in poverty. The Marxist/Socialist tenet of “share the wealth” by taking from the rich (a/k/a the successful) and giving to the poor has “honorable intentions”, but in practicality, the unintended consequences have proved disastrous in practice. Pres. Johnson's signature legislation called the “War on Poverty”, is a good example of failure of government involvement in helping the less fortunate. Just the opposite has occurred as the poverty rate hasn't really improved in the over 52 years and more than $8 trillion spent on the poverty initiatives that were put into effect as a result of those programs. The most financially secure countries in the world are countries that are mostly free enterprise capitalistic countries, not Marxist/Socialist countries, who try to institute a “share the wealth” philosophy. In the words of one of our founders, Benjamin Franklin who said: “When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will be the end of the republic”. Let's hope that doesn't happen to our country.

So, the point of this editorial is that once you can reach the “point of diminishing returns”, it is downhill from there and the unintended consequences of these policies take over to make matters worse, not better.

The policies promoted by Pres. Obama and his Administration have not worked, even though he and and the Democrats told us that “everything is beautiful” economically. So now, President Donald Trump, has undertaken a reversal of those policies by proposing the lowering of taxes for both individuals and corporations and by reducing the regulations that have hampered economic growth for far too long. Too much government involvement has a tendency to stifle achievement as the incentives to succeed are diminished and many people will rebel, it is human nature. So, we must turn back many of those anti-growth policies that have reached the “point of diminishing returns”, and bring back the American spirit of innovation and incentives to succeed as the greatest nation in the world. That's why Trump's slogan of “Make America Great Again” resonated with the voting public in winning the presidency.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann













Bookmark and Share

Thursday, March 23, 2017

MORT’s meanderings


                Get it in writing.
I want to see this new Administration issue an official ruling to the effect that all pronouncements at official functions be delivered in the English language, only.  This includes the opening and closing prayers by members of the clergy and the entirety of the text by all other speakers.  
There is no place in public discourse for words in any other language.  
It is my strongly held opinion that every citizen of this nation be fluent in our one language (English); loyal to our one flag, the Stars and Stripes and sworn to acceptance of the entirety of the tenets of The Constitution of the United States of America, our sacred guiding document, with no exceptions or reservations whatsoever. If individuals, including all legal citizens, are not willing to commit and assimilate to this degree, they should not be permitted to enjoy any of the benefits of citizenship of this nation.
I am absolutely opposed to any so-called ‘accommodations’ that are a result of intimidation tactics by followers of Islam intent on imposing their version of the tenets of the Quran that call for violence against non-believers. No public  ceremony that is sponsored by our Government at local, State, regional or Federal level should permit any such participants.  It should be a legal requirement that organizers of all public events require a written & signed statement from every single speaker, to the effect that no part of the content of their message can be interpreted as, in opposition to any part of the original intent of the authors of The Constitution. Otherwise, what is the purpose of citizenship in the United States?  
        If we are not totally committed patriots then, what are we?

                                                                             MORT KUFF   © 1-22-2017

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, March 19, 2017

What is a “Snowflake”?


A new word has joined the lexicon of the English language, the word is “snowflake”. Here's the definition of the word:

“An overly sensitive person incapable of dealing with any opinion that differs from his/her own”. These people can often be seen congregating mainly on college campuses.

Look what is happening on many college campuses around the country today. Schools have set up “safe spaces”, where students can be free of any opinions that might make them upset - no adverse opinions that might upset someone will be tolerated in those “safe spaces”. In addition, some schools have also banned certain words (speech codes) like the term “freshman” which in normal parlance means a student's first year in high school or college, as being sexist, and therefore, unacceptable by “wussified” professors and administrators trying to appeal to the far-left fringe, which generally run most colleges and universities.

Another fallout from this bogus sensitivity of others hearing or spouting differing opinions, is the rise of organizing efforts, some of which are sponsored by outside agitating groups, some of which are financed by George Soros, to prevent, shout down, or harass speakers that have different points of view, mainly conservative speakers like Condolezza Rice, writer and pundit Ann Coulter, social scientist Dr. Charles Murray, columnist Ben Shapiro, author David Horowitz and a host of other learned speakers from the “right” point of view (i.e. Republicans, conservatives or libertarians). In some cases, riots and desecration of property has occurred, on and off campus, with little consequences meted out to the students and agitators causing the damage or mayhem. It is a well-known fact, that most all schools of higher learning are staffed with leftist professors and administrators, who tout the liberal progressive line, and who institute restrictive rules and regulations controlling the actions of students on and off the campus. Free speech, which the liberals and progressives champion as part of their makeup, is generally limited on campus if anyone tries to digress from the “party line”, which is liberal progressive orthodoxy.

The term “snowflake” is a natural progression of the hideous term “political correctness”, which has had an adverse effect upon our language and culture for many years. Many “unelected” busybodies (mostly from the left side of the political spectrum) have determined what is permissible to be said or done under penalty of public ostracism and scorn by these members of the so-called “P.C. Police”. You name it, our lives are being disrupted by others telling us what is permissible in the general interchange between people as to what we can say or do.

Just recently, Dr. Ben Carson, President Trump's H.U.D. Secretary, was accused of making a “racist” statement by inferring that the slaves that were brought here against their will, hundreds of years ago, were in a way, immigrants to our country. A totally benign statement that was twisted and spun to infer that he made a racist remark by equating slavery with immigration. The fact that Dr. Carson was a black person meant nothing to these “race hustlers”, he is a conservative Republican and a member of Trump's cabinet, therefore, he must be condemned and pilloried. Little mention was made that our first black President Barack Obama, had made over 10 similar references, over the years, equating slavery and immigration, by using the same analogy as Dr. Carson. No condemnation from the left about Obama's remarks, most likely because he was a liberal Democrat, and in their eyes, he was the right kind of black person, not a black Republican and Trump supporter, like Dr. Carson.

Wake up America, our traditions, culture, and morals are under attack, we must not sit idly by and accept this “wussification” of America without some form of a counter attack. Our present president, Donald Trump seems to be leading the charge against this insidious manipulation of our lives by the left. We should back him completely in his quest to neutralize the “snowflakes” and the P.C. Police.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann









A tribute to Snowflakes everywhere!

Friends in Safe Spaces. Chad Prather and Steve Mudflap McGrew aka Larry the Liberal

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, March 16, 2017

Rioters a/k/a Protesters are Emotionally Primitive


We are experiencing dire consequences from all sides of the spectrum because, many on the Washington scene are fearful the game is over and their cushy jobs are in peril of going down with the draining of the swamp.

It isn't mere speculation that the hold overs from the last administration may be behind the intelligence leaks and the chaotic events designed to upset President Trump's agenda for making America great again, as evidenced by the hateful rhetoric expressed from these people.

The Democratic party no longer exists as it was before the Obama era, because it has compromised traditional values, and the people, not living in heavily populated coastal urban areas have spoken.
They didn't vote for Donald Trump for his personality or oratory, but for action he promised, that has already been displayed in such a short time.

The people are also fed up with the anarchists, Bolsheviks and other organizations claiming their rioting is legal protest. They draw in the unsuspecting, uninformed naïve, who are emotionally primitive in their attempt to express themselves without violence, and are limited in their vocabulary by confining themselves to using a barrage of "F" bombs to state their opposition to traditions.
The Trumpians mean to change the climate and clean the attitude of the Washington elitists.

Conservative column from George Giftos





Bookmark and Share

Sunday, March 12, 2017

What is Fake News?


My definition of “fake news” is a person or organization that is attempting to purvey or present a story to the public that's made up or grossly embellished in order to promote some agenda or to be against some person with whom they dislike or abhor. You could say that both political parties have been guilty of doing that, but it seems that the liberals (a/k/a Democrats and Progressives) have taken it to a whole new level, especially since Donald Trump became a candidate and eventually the President of the United States.

It is normal for the news media or political opponents (in some cases they are one in the same) to “spin” information to further their views. That might be looked upon as “white lies”, but when stories are made up of “whole cloth” to be used as a negative weapon against someone or something you don't support or agree with, that is a “whopper” of a lie, and can be considered “fake news”.

President Trump, who is probably considered to be one of the most unorthodox politicians in modern history, has been the victim of this phenomenon, of the presentation of made up stories and outright fabrications by his opponents in the media and by the Democrats. Trump being Trump, doesn't take those “bogus” stories lying down, he fights right back and goes after those who he feels are trying to undermine him and his presidency. Some made up stories to make my point are: that he removed a bust of Martin Luther King from the Oval Office (not true), that the 1st lady Melania Trump was an escort, a prostitute when she first came to the United States (not true), that his White House staff is in disarray according to “unnamed” sources in the White House (not true) etc., etc.

The news media is overwhelmingly liberal and it's sympathies generally are “in the pocket” of the Democrats. Therefore, the stories they speak on or write about are generally unfavorable to the Republicans, and especially unfavorable to President Trump.

Now don't get me wrong, the president, Donald Trump, is not always accurate in some of his utterances he makes, but they are generally exaggerations and/or bravado, not meaningful or earth shattering untruths. But, the news media and the Democrats jump on those utterances and generally make “mountains out of molehills”, as the old saying goes, accusing him of gross misconduct, and of all things, “impeachable offenses”.

All during his campaign and during the initial phases of his presidency, President Trump has used the term “fake news” to label some of the stories promulgated by the news media, especially CNN, MSNBC, the N.Y. Times, and Wash. Post etc. These news organizations take exception when Pres. Trump labels them purveyors of “fake news”, but the public seems to agree with Pres. Trump that many of the stories that are put out for publication are made up, with no reliable sourcing, and meant to make Pres. Trump and his administration look bad and to undermine his presidency. That tactic seems to have backfired on the media, and the public is very disenchanted by the low ratings they give to the news media.

We do have “freedom of speech” in our country, but we also have a set of morals (which seem to be under fierce attack lately) and a Constitution which has been given to us by our forefathers. Honesty and integrity are two principles that should be followed by all who disseminate the news (the 4th Estate), and it should be fair and balanced in reporting of that news. Opinions should be reserved for the editorial page and not in the actual news stories, and made up stories (fake news) should be scrapped altogether, otherwise our whole system, our democratic republic, will be compromised and made a farce. President Trump says he will fight against “fake news” with all his might, and from his past record of achieving success, he might just succeed in reducing its incidence or he might even be able to get rid of it altogether.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share