 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
 |
|||||||||
|
www.freedomandprosperity.org |
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
 |
|||||||||
|
The views expressed by Andrew Quinlan and Dan Mitchell on this weblog are solely their own and are not necessarily those of their employers, The Center for Freedom and Prosperity Foundation and The Cato Institute, respectively. |
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
The Market Center Blog |
||||||||||||
|
Observations and insights on the global fight |
||||||||||||
|
CF&P's Market Center Blog Archives |
||||||||||||
|
Monday, November 30, 2009 ~ 4:22 p.m, Dan Mitchell Wrote: ...newly disclosed private exchanges among climate scientists at Britain's Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia reveal an intellectual circle that appears to feel very much under attack, and
eager to punish its enemies. In one e-mail, the center's director, Phil Jones, writes Pennsylvania State University's Michael E. Mann and questions whether the work of academics that question the link between
human activities and global warming deserve to make it into the prestigious IPCC report, which represents the global consensus view on climate science. "I can't see either of these papers being in the next
IPCC report," Jones writes. "Kevin and I will keep them out somehow -- even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!" In another, Jones and Mann discuss how they can pressure an
academic journal not to accept the work of climate skeptics with whom they disagree. "Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in,
this journal," Mann writes. "I will be emailing the journal to tell them I'm having nothing more to do with it until they rid themselves of this troublesome editor," Jones replies. ...Christopher
Horner, a senior fellow at the libertarian Competitive Enterprise Institute who has questioned whether climate change is human-caused, blogged that the e-mails have "the makings of a very big" scandal.
"Imagine this sort of news coming in the field of AIDS research," he added. Monday, November 30, 2009 ~ 2:05 p.m, Dan Mitchell Wrote: Any tax imposed on financial transactions would have to take effect internationally to keep Wall Street jobs and related business from moving
overseas, U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi said on Thursday. "It would have to be an international rule, not just a U.S. rule,"
Pelosi said at a news conference. "We couldn't do it alone, we'd have to do it as an international initiative." Several House Democrats have proposed a
Wall Street tax to pay for job-creating legislation they plan to pass in December. The tax, which could raise $150 billion per year, would tap into
widespread public outrage at Wall Street in the wake of the financial crisis. ...The No. 4 Democrat in the House, Representative John Larson, said his
proposal to impose a 0.25 percent tax on over-the-counter derivatives transactions would apply internationally. "Part of our proposal would
include that it would be international," Larson told Reuters after meeting with other lawmakers about the jobs package. Democratic Representative
Peter DeFazio said his separate proposal, which would tax a wider array of trading activity, would cover all U.S. corporations and individuals no
matter where their trades took place. ...Britain urged other governments earlier this month to consider a bank tax as a way to fund future bailouts,
and France and Germany have also called for a bank tax. The International Monetary Fund is studying the idea. Sunday, November 29, 2009 ~ 3:16 p.m, Dan Mitchell Wrote: Saturday, November 28, 2009 ~ 5:55 p.m, Dan Mitchell Wrote:
Friday, November 27, 2009 ~ 6:57 p.m, Dan Mitchell Wrote: The results of a new survey suggest that one-fifth of UK-based entrepreneurs earning more than GBP150,000 are planning to flee Britain in
search of countries with more favorable tax rates. The poll of more than 300 entrepreneurs by business advisors Tenon also found that many more
may follow in an attempt to escape the 50% rate of income tax, due to be introduced from next April on annual incomes above GBP150,000, with
nearly half of the respondents (48%) still deciding what action to take. ...Tenon points out that in the last month, high profile names such as the
actor Sir Michael Caine and the artist Tracey Emin have threatened to change their tax residency to countries with more favorable tax rates. Popular locations for redomiciling include Monte Carlo, Guernsey,
Liechtenstein, and the Cayman Islands. Andy Raynor, Chief Executive of Tenon Group, noted that entrepreneurs are showing their disapproval of the tax measures by "letting their feet do the talking."
The Mayor of London, meanwhile, is much less restrained regarding the foolishness of Gordon Brown's class-warfare policy. Here's what he has to say in the Daily Telegraph: Not everyone can be relied upon to mourn the departure of Tracey Emin and her duvet. ...Some readers may feel that the country can rub along
without her. ...And then there may be people who don't give a monkey's that Michael Caine is thinking of vamoosing, or that we are about to lose Eddie
Jordan, the former Formula One chief, or the milk tycoon Lord Haskins. Some of you may not care a tinker's cuss if the former bookshop king Tim
Waterstone deserts these shores, and as for the impending absence of Hugh Osmond, an entrepreneur who has had a role in everything from pizza to
insurance, you may feel that we just have to dry our eyes and get a grip on our feelings. ...the 50p tax rate that is beginning to drive these people away
is a disaster for this country, and it is a double disaster that no one seems willing to talk about it. When Margaret Thatcher's government cut the top
rate of tax to 40 per cent in 1988, she was completing a series of reforms – beginning with the removal of exchange controls and followed by the Big
Bang – that helped to establish London as the greatest financial centre on earth. Britain had been transformed from a sclerotic militant-ridden
basket-case to a dynamic enterprise economy, and the capital became a global talent magnet. ...So it is utterly tragic, at the end of the first decade
of this century, that we are back in the hands of a government whose mindset seems frozen in the wastes of the 1970s. If Gordon Brown remains
in power – and perhaps even if he does not – Britain's top rate of tax will soar far above that of our most important global competitors. ...even on the
Government's figures it is only due to raise £2.5 billion of the £700 billion required – and those estimates may be wildly optimistic. This tax is
predicted to drive away at least 25,000 people; it may simply encourage more avoidance; it may actually cost money, not bring it in. After all, when
Mrs Thatcher cut the top rate in 1988, the Treasury saw yields go up. People stopped avoiding taxation; people thought it worth their while to get up at
5am and work that extra bit harder – and the share paid by higher-rate taxpayers actually increased as a result of the tax cut. What Gordon Brown wants to do is therefore economically illiterate. Last but not least, here's the Center for Freedom and Prosperity's video, which explains why punitive soak-the-rich tax increases are fundamentally misguided.
Thursday, November 26, 2009 ~ 7:21 p.m, Dan Mitchell Wrote: But I'm not a PC kind of guy, so I hope everyone enjoys their turkey and is thankful for the things that matter (as one of my softball buddies said, he is thankful for cloture, the 2nd Amendment, and Heidi Klum). Thursday, November 26, 2009 ~ 6:23 p.m, Dan Mitchell Wrote: As you finalize your Thanksgiving plans, be sure to reserve a seat at your table for an extra guest: Uncle Sam. Have you ever asked yourself how
much of the cost of your Thanksgiving feast is owed to the fact that the government takes a big bite at it in hidden taxes? The Americans for Tax Reform Foundation and the Center for Fiscal Accountability have
calculated just how big that government "tax bite" for Thanksgiving is, and it clocks in at a whopping 40.91 percent. ...And that is only if your family
does not have to drive or fly to get to the Thanksgiving party, or stay at a hotel for the duration of the festivities, as domestic airfare, gasoline, and
hotel stays have their own "tax bites" which are even higher than the bite the government takes out of your Thanksgiving meal, and which we calculated last year. Wednesday, November 25, 2009 ~ 10:47 a.m, Dan Mitchell Wrote: Effects of climate change have driven women in communities in coastal areas in poor countries like the Philippines to risk dangerous jobs, and sometimes even into the flesh trade. Suneeta Mukherjee, country
representative of the United Nations Food Population Fund (UNFPA), said women in the Philippines are the most vulnerable to the effects of climate
change in the country. "Climate change could reduce income from farming and fishing possibly driving some women into sex work and thereby increase
HIV infection," Mukherjee said during the Wednesday launch of the UNFPA annual State of World Population Report in Pasay City. Tuesday, November 24, 2009 ~ 8:34 p.m, Dan Mitchell Wrote: In pursuit of an Eagle Scout badge, Kevin Anderson, 17, has toiled for more than 200 hours hours over several weeks to clear a walking path in an east
Allentown park. Little did the do-gooder know that his altruistic act would put him in the cross hairs of the city's largest municipal union. Nick Balzano,
president of the local Service Employees International Union, told Allentown City Council Tuesday that the union is considering filing a grievance against the city for allowing Anderson to clear a 1,000-foot
walking and biking path at Kimmets Lock Park. "We'll be looking into the Cub Scout or Boy Scout who did the trails," Balzano told the council.
Balzano said Saturday he isn't targeting Boy Scouts. But given the city's decision in July to lay off 39 SEIU members, Balzano said "there's to be no
volunteers." No one except union members may pick up a hoe or shovel, plant a flower or clear a walking path. Monday, November 23, 2009 ~ 2:11 p.m, Dan Mitchell Wrote: Here is the Center's three-part video series on Keynesianism, Stimulus, and Economic Growth
Sunday, November 22, 2009 ~ 10:22 p.m, Dan Mitchell Wrote: A former soldier who handed a discarded shotgun in to police faces at least five years imprisonment for "doing his duty". Paul Clarke, 27, was found
guilty of possessing a firearm at Guildford Crown Court on Tuesday – after finding the gun and handing it personally to police officers on March 20 this
year. The jury took 20 minutes to make its conviction, and Mr Clarke now faces a minimum of five year's imprisonment for handing in the weapon. In
a statement read out in court, Mr Clarke said: "I didn't think for one moment I would be arrested. ...The court heard how Mr Clarke was on the
balcony of his home in Nailsworth Crescent, Merstham, when he spotted a black bin liner at the bottom of his garden. In his statement, he said: "I took
it indoors and inside found a shorn-off shotgun and two cartridges. "I didn't know what to do, so the next morning I rang the Chief Superintendent,
Adrian Harper, and asked if I could pop in and see him. "At the police station, I took the gun out of the bag and placed it on the table so it was
pointing towards the wall." Mr Clarke was then arrested immediately for possession of a firearm at Reigate police station, and taken to the cells.
...Prosecuting, Brian Stalk, explained to the jury that possession of a firearm was a "strict liability" charge – therefore Mr Clarke's allegedly honest
intent was irrelevant. Just by having the gun in his possession he was guilty of the charge, and has no defence in law against it, he added. ...Judge
Christopher Critchlow said: "This is an unusual case, but in law there is no dispute that Mr Clarke has no defence to this charge. "The intention of anybody possessing a firearm is irrelevant." Saturday, November 21, 2009 ~ 1:32 p.m, Dan Mitchell Wrote: To paraphrase Clinton Treasury Secretary Lloyd Bentsen, George Bush is no Ronald Reagan. ...on Bush's watch, and with his signature, the burden of
federal spending rose to 20.3 percent of GDP in 2006, up from just 18.5 percent when he took office. During the Clinton years, by contrast, federal
spending fell as a share of GDP, from 21.4 percent in 1993 to 18.5 percent in 2001. ...even when defense spending is excluded, Clinton reduced the
burden of government, while Bush has expanded it. ...According to the Congressional Budget Office, entitlement spending has increased from 10.9
percent of GDP when Bush took office to 11.9 percent of GDP in 2006. During the Clinton years, spending on so-called mandatory programs fell from 11.2 percent of GDP to 10.9 percent of GDP. The domestic
discretionary spending numbers tell a similar story: During the Clinton years, these programs dropped from 3.4 percent of GDP to 3.2 percent.
Since Bush took office, they have risen to 3.5 percent. ...Take trade, for example. At best, Bush has a mixed record. The Central American Free
Trade Agreement is a step in the right direction, but his steel tariffs and agricultural subsidies are examples of anti-trade initiatives. Clinton policy
was unambiguously pro-trade, however, largely because of the approval and implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade that also launched the World
Trade Organization. Clinton gets a better grade on regulatory policy, as well. Bush signed into law the prohibitively expensive Sarbanes-Oxley law,
as well as a market-distorting energy bill. The Clinton years, by contrast, saw the burden of regulation reduced on numerous sectors of the economy,
including agriculture, financial services and telecommunications. Clinton also beats Bush on federalism. He signed a welfare reform legislation that
ended an entitlement program and reduced the central government's power and authority. On education, Bush went the other direction. His No Child
Left Behind Act increased federal control over an area that properly belongs under the purview of state and local governments. Friday, November 20, 2009 ~ 7:32 p.m, Dan Mitchell Wrote: Health and safety inspectors are to be given unprecedented access to family homes to ensure that parents are protecting their children from household
accidents. New guidance drawn up at the request of the Department of Health urges councils and other public sector bodies to "collect data" on properties where children are thought to be at "greatest risk of
unintentional injury". ...The draft guidance by a committee at the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice) has been criticised as
intrusive and further evidence of the "creeping nanny state". ...Nice also recommends the creation of a new government database to allow GPs, midwives and other officials who visit homes to log health and safety
concerns they spot. ...Matthew Elliott, of the TaxPayers' Alliance, said: "It is a huge intervention into family life which will be counter-productive.
"Good parents will feel the intrusion of the state in their homes and bad parents will now have someone else to blame if they don't bring up their children in a sensible, safe environment." Thursday, November 19, 2009 ~ 12:43 p.m, Dan Mitchell Wrote: Appearing refreshed and energized before a friendly crowd of about 1,000, the 63-year-old said he was retired, not tired. He covered a broad array of
subjects in his remarks. But Bush kept to his promise from earlier this year not to comment on specific policies or decisions of his successor, something
his former vice president, Dick Cheney, has not felt obliged to do. Oh, and he's writing a book too. Who isn't these days? In fact, Bush did not mention
Barack Obama's name, nor the Democrat's policy moves into the banking, financial, automobile, healthcare and insurance industries. But some might
interpret an oblique warning when Bush said: "The role of government is not to create wealth but to create the conditions that allow entrepreneurs
and innovators to thrive. As the world recovers, we will face a temptation to replace the risk-and-reward model of the private sector with the blunt
instruments of government spending and control. History shows that the greater threat to prosperity is not too little government involvement, but too much." Thursday, November 19, 2009 ~ 11:32 a.m, Dan Mitchell Wrote: The Federal Reserve is still going through its "lessons-learned" exercise from the recent financial crisis, but there's one lesson it clearly has not yet
absorbed -- the one about ignoring and enabling credit bubbles. That's the only conclusion that can be drawn from the Fed's decision last week to not
only keep its benchmark interest rates at zero but also let everyone know that it intends to leave them there for a good long time. ...Not surprisingly,
all of this sparked a week-long party in financial markets that had already experienced powerful rallies over the past six months. Even with Thursday's
modest pullback on Wall Street, U.S. stocks are up 60 percent since March, and share prices in emerging markets have nearly doubled. Commodity
prices are soaring once again, led by gold, which is now selling for more than $1,100 an ounce, and crude oil, which is up a whopping 126 percent
since February. A rally in the junk-bond and third-world debt markets has driven interest rates back to where they were before the crisis. In urban
China, India and Brazil, property prices have doubled in the past year. "The markets are on a sugar high," Mohamed El-Erian, chief executive of Pimco,
the giant money manager, told Newsweek's Rana Foroohar last week. Judging from how sharply and quickly these prices have risen, it's a pretty
good guess that most of the buying has not been done by long-term investors who are suddenly upbeat about the prospects of global economic growth.
The better bet is all this is the handiwork of short-term speculation by banks, hedge funds, private-equity funds and other financial center
wise-guys moving as a herd, financing their purchases directly or indirectly with some of that yummy zero-percent money provided courtesy of the Fed.
...There's no way to know how long all this can continue before one of these bubbles finally bursts, the dollar spikes upward and investors all rush to
unwind their trades at the same time. But it is a good guess that it will last as long as the Fed and other central banks indicate there is no end in sight
for the current cheap-money regime. The longer they wait, the bigger the bubbles, and the bigger the mess to clean up. All of which is why the recent
statements by policymakers were so disappointing -- and so dangerous. Wednesday, November 18, 2009 ~ 1:55 p.m, Dan Mitchell Wrote:
Wednesday, November 18, 2009 ~ 12:23 p.m, Dan Mitchell Wrote: Lord Smith of Finsbury believes that implementing individual carbon allowances for every person will be the most effective way of meeting the
targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions. It would involve people being issued with a unique number which they would hand over when purchasing
products that contribute to their carbon footprint, such as fuel, airline tickets and electricity. Like with a bank account, a statement would be sent
out each month to help people keep track of what they are using. ...Lord Smith will call for the scheme to be part of a "Green New Deal" to be
introduced within 20 years when he addresses the agency's annual conference on Monday. ...Ruth Lea, an economist from Arbuthnot Banking
Group, told the Daily Mail: "This is all about control of the individual and you begin to wonder whether this is what the green agenda has always been
about. It's Orwellian. This will be an enormous tax on business." Tuesday, November 17, 2009 ~ 8:23 p.m, Dan Mitchell Wrote: In the department of bad ideas that won't go away, Exhibit A is a global tax on financial transactions. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown mooted the
tax last weekend before the G-20 finance ministers in St. Andrews, Scotland, where he was promptly rebuffed by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.
...it's easy to see why high-tax countries such as France and Germany relish the idea. Tax competition is a bête noire for the Western European countries
whose governments eat up close to half of their economies. The U.K. is back in that club after the post-financial-panic recession lopped 6% off its GDP.
Scrambling for revenue—and unwilling to hamstring London markets alone—Mr. Brown is suddenly promoting global tax coordination. ...Like all
tax-harmonization schemes, the Tobin levy is designed to raise taxes above a level that is hard to sustain in a competitive world. This is why its backers
have always insisted on a global imposition of the tax. Kudos to Secretary Geithner for offering Mr. Brown a reality check. Monday, November 16, 2009 ~ 2:19 p.m., Dan Mitchell Wrote: He is clearly unhappy with the rough and tumble of democratic politics, with the daily grind of public appearances, glad-handing and schmoozing. But
these are not required in Brussels, where nobody is elected to anything and such populism as smiling at cameras and holding referendums are anathema. Brown, dark-suited and anonymous, is a natural oligarch, his
governing style attuned to the post-democratic statism of 21st-century Europe. ...If a Brown presidency were a success it would be a triumph for
Europe. It might help rescue the meretricious gravy train that is today's EU hierarchy, perhaps even setting it on a path to usefulness. If Brown failed,
nothing would be lost, since everyone knows it is not a proper job anyway. Since it was invented by the greatest boondoggle of the late 20th century,
the Lisbon treaty, it has been a title looking for a purpose – which is why Tony Blair so wants it. ...An inability to think laterally has long been the
curse of the European movement. A sign of its intellectual insecurity is that it cannot handle scepticism, treating any but the most craven sycophant as
an enemy. At the Nice summit that followed the corruption scandals of 1998-9, the EU's spin doctors declared that in future "decisions should be
taken as closely as possible to the citizen". They lied, and knew it. So did the public. Since 2005, few have dared ask Europe's citizens if they agreed with
the Lisbon constitution, and those that did received bloody noses. The reneging of Labour and the Liberal Democrats on 2005 election commitments to a referendum showed the power of Europe's oligarchs to
outflank democratic accountability. It is near impossible to ascertain what any European citizen expects or wants from what is to be an extraordinary
sovereign power placed over them. Nothing in recent constitutional history has been more cynical – or more dangerous – than the fact that referendums
voting yes to euro-integration are accepted and those that vote no are rejected. ...The tragedy of Lisbon is that it is a rotten treaty, slithering from
the disciplines needed for freer trade to the phoney utopia of a level socioeconomic playing field across the continent. This will not work. It will
propel the EU into constant friction with national parliaments, and stir public anger at being denied a vote on the new constitution. Sunday, November 15, 2009 ~ 11;40 p.m., Dan Mitchell Wrote: South Carolina is in dire need of economic growth, especially in its rural communities. This study shows how, hypothetically, school choice would
have increased the number of small businesses created by residents aged 16-25 in five counties in South Carolina. Our findings are based on the
research of Russell Sobel and Kerry King, which shows that counties that offer school choice see a significantly higher rate of self-employment among
young men and women. According to Sobel and King, voucher-based school choice can increase youth self-employment by as much as 25 percent. In this
study we found that a similar program in the counties of Clarendon, Hampton, Lee, Marlboro and Williamsburg could have created 123 small businesses and 379 additional jobs. Saturday, November 14, 2009 ~ 9:49 p.m., Dan Mitchell Wrote: Our job is to read bad legislation so you don't have to, and on that score we may demand combat pay for plowing our way through the House
health-care bill that passed on Saturday. ...House Democrats are funding their new entitlement with a 5.4% surtax on incomes above $500,000 for
individuals and above $1 million for joint filers. The surcharge is intended to snag the greatest number of taxpayers to raise some $460.5 billion, and so
the House has written it to apply to modified adjusted gross income. That means it includes both capital gains and dividends. That surtax takes effect
on January 1, 2011, or the day the Bush tax rates of 2001 and 2003 expire. Today's capital gains tax rate of 15% would bounce back to 20% because of
the Bush repeal and then to 25.4% with the surtax. That's a 69% increase, overnight. Friday, November 13, 2009 ~ 3:12 p.m., Dan Mitchell Wrote: Shouldn't an army base be the last place where a terrorist should be able to shoot at people uninterrupted for 10 minutes? After all, an army base is
filled with soldiers who carry guns, right? Unfortunately, that is not the case. Beginning in March 1993, under the Clinton administration, the army
forbids military personnel from carrying their own personal firearms and mandates that "a credible and specific threat against [Department of the
Army] personnel [exist] in that region" before military personnel "may be authorized to carry firearms for personal protection." ...The unarmed
soldiers could do little more than cower as Major Nidal Malik Hasan stood on a desk and shot down into the cubicles in which his victims were trapped.
Some behaved heroically, such as private first class Marquest Smith who repeatedly risked his life removing five soldiers and a civilian from the
carnage. But, being unarmed, these soldiers were unable to stop Hasan's attack. The wife of one of the soldiers shot at Ft. Hood understood this all
too well. Mandy Foster's husband had been shot but was fortunate enough not to be seriously injured. In an interview on CNN on Monday night, Mrs.
Foster was asked by anchor John Roberts how she felt about her husband "still scheduled for deployment in January" to Afghanistan. Ms. Foster
responded: "At least he's safe there and he can fire back, right?" -- It is hard to believe that we don't trust soldiers with guns on an army base when
we trust these very same men in Iraq and Afghanistan. ...The law-abiding, not the criminals, are the ones who obey the ban on guns. Instead of making
areas safe for victims, the bans make it safe for the criminal. Hasan not only violated the army's ban on carrying a gun, he also apparently violated the
rules that require soldiers to register privately owned guns at the post. Research shows that allowing individuals to defend themselves dramatically
reduces the rates of multiple victim public shootings. Even if attacks still occur, having civilians with permitted concealed handguns limits the
damage. A major factor in determining how many people are harmed by these killers is the amount of time that elapses between when the attack
starts and someone is able to arrive on the scene with a gun. ...All the multiple victim public shootings in the U.S. -- in which more than three
people have been killed -- have all occurred in places where concealed handguns have been banned. Thursday, November 12, 2009 ~ 7:18 p.m., Dan Mitchell Wrote: Susette Kelo's little, pink house in New London, Conn. -- like the houses of all her neighbors -- is now a pile of rubble, overgrown with weeds. But
Pfizer, the company that called for the demolition in order to build a new research and development plant, announced Monday it is packing up and
leaving town in order to cut costs after its merger with fellow drug-giant Wyeth. New London now has a wasteland where a neighborhood once
stood, and no jobs or business to show for it. It's another travesty of central planning. ...Kelo, and other residents who didn't want to move, sued to
block the condemnation. They lost, but they fought all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. There, the four liberal justices joined with moderate
Anthony Kennedy to rule in favor of the developers -- the takings were perfectly legal. ...the takings in New London begin to sound like a great
progressive victory: government, triumphing over the exploitive notion of "property rights," helps the many at the expense of a few. But, New London
was really another example of political cronyism and politicians using the might of government in order to benefit well-connected big business at the
expense of those poorer and less influential. Consider that the head of the New London Development Corporation was Claire Gaudiani, who was
married to David Burnett, the Pfizer executive who wanted "a nice place to operate." Pfizer vice president George Milne also sat on the development
corporation's board. ...Pfizer got its loot - free land, special tax breaks, and government-funded clean-up of the neighborhood (including clearing out the
unsightly neighbors) - and the area prepared for economic "rejuvenation," as Justice Stevens put it. It didn't work out that way. The Fort Trumbull
neighborhood Pfizer had bulldozed today consists only of "weeds, glass, bricks, pieces of pipe and shingle splinters," according to the Associated Press. Wednesday, November 11, 2009 ~ 11:01 p.m., Dan Mitchell Wrote: ...let's give credit to John Cassidy, part of the left-wing stable at the New Yorker, who wrote last week on its Web site that "it's important to be clear
about what the reform amounts to." Mr. Cassidy is more honest than the politicians whose dishonesty he supports. "The U.S. government is making a
costly and open-ended commitment," he writes. "Let's not pretend that it isn't a big deal, or that it will be self-financing, or that it will work out
exactly as planned. It won't. What is really unfolding, I suspect, is the scenario that many conservatives feared. The Obama Administration . . . is
creating a new entitlement program, which, once established, will be virtually impossible to rescind." Why are they doing it? Because, according
to Mr. Cassidy, ObamaCare serves the twin goals of "making the United States a more equitable country" and furthering the Democrats' "political
calculus." In other words, the purpose is to further redistribute income by putting health care further under government control, and in the process
making the middle class more dependent on government. As the party of government, Democrats will benefit over the long run. Tuesday, November 10, 2009 ~ 7:43 p.m., Dan Mitchell Wrote: Monday, November 9, 2009 ~ 11:25 p.m., Dan Mitchell Wrote:
Sunday, November 8, 2009 ~ 4:44 p.m., Dan Mitchell Wrote:
Reminds me of the old line about "Thank goodness we don't get all the government we pay for." Saturday, November 7, 2009 ~ 8:00 p.m., Dan Mitchell Wrote: Congressman Brady of Texas gets an award for the best one-liner, saying about the Pelosi plan that "If the IRS and Medicare had a baby, it would look like this."
For a closer look, click this PDF link. Friday, November 6, 2009 ~ 6:22 p.m., Dan Mitchell Wrote: Czech President Vaclav Klaus signed the European Union's Lisbon Treaty Tuesday, bringing into force the EU's plan to overhaul its institutions and
win a greater role on the world stage. Klaus was the last EU leader to ratify the treaty and his signature, coming after the top Czech court cleared the
pact, means the bloc of nearly half a billion people can pick its first-ever long-time president and a more powerful foreign representative. Thursday, November 5, 2009 ~ 2:49 p.m., Dan Mitchell Wrote: The government's latest tally of stimulus jobs counted pay increases for existing workers as jobs saved in a popular federal preschool program,
raising fresh questions about the process the Obama administration is using to tout the success of its $787 billion economic recovery plan. A review of
the latest stimulus reports - which the White House promised would undergo extensive reviews to ensure accuracy - found that more than two-thirds of
14,506 jobs credited to the recovery act by Head Start programs involved pay increases. Health and Human Services spokesman Luis Rosero defended
the practice. "If I give you a raise, it is going to save a portion of your job,'' he said. ...Most of the inflated figures were like those cited in the 935 saved
jobs reported by the Southwest Georgia Community Action in Moultrie, Ga. Director Myrtis Mulkey-Ndawula said she followed the guidelines the
Obama administration provided and multiplied her 508 employees by 1.84 - the percentage pay raise they received - and came up with 935 jobs saved.
...More than 250 other community agencies receiving stimulus cash from the HHS Administration for Children and Families similarly reported saving
jobs when using the money to give pay raises, pay for training and continuing education, extend employee work hours, or buy equipment, according to their spending reports. Wednesday, November 4, 2009 ~ 9:13 p.m., Geoffrey MacLeay Wrote: Taxes (Agency for Foreign Investments of the Republic of Macedonia ) Setting Up a Business (Agency for Foreign Investments of the Republic of Macedonia ) Tuesday, November 3, 2009 ~ 11:02 p.m., Geoffrey MacLeay Wrote: …While it is certainly true that Republican primary voters tend to be highly ideological, perhaps excessively so, it's worth recounting Crist's reasons for
backing the stimulus plan. When Marc Caputo and Steve Bousquet of the Miami Herald asked Crist about the virtues of the plan, he said, "I think it's
fantastic. Are you kidding me? We don't have to raise taxes." Moreover, Crist continued, "we might be able to cut property taxes some more. We
have more money for education, so we can increase per-student spending. We can spend more money on our roads and infrastructure. We can provide
health care for our people. I mean, it's remarkable." Indeed, something is remarkable, namely Crist's rigid adherence to an ideology more pernicious than orthodox progressivism or conservatism or nudism or
anarchoprimitivism. I'm referring, of course, to free-lunchism. One can argue about the virtues of federal borrowing to stimulate the economy.
Because state governments are obligated to balance their budgets, there is a solid case for having Washington offer a temporary countercyclical boost to
cash-strapped states. But the notion that the federal stimulus plan gives state governments carte blanche to permanently ratchet up their spending
levels while cutting taxes defies logic. Florida's Constitution requires that the state government can't use one-time funds, like windfall from
privatization or federal stimulus dollars, to pay for more than 3% of recurring expenses. Incredibly, Crist demanded that Florida use one-time
funds to pay for 12% of the state budget. When Republicans in the state legislature took the difficult step of passing a budget that included unpopular spending cuts, Crist turned around and vetoed hundreds of
millions in cuts, despite the continuing deterioration of state revenues. It could be that Crist believes that the federal government will simply pass a
stimulus plan every year, one that will grow ever larger without consequence to Florida taxpayers. This, of course, can't possibly be true. As
a result, Crist has committed Florida to a fiscal nightmare, one that will lead to draconian tax hikes and spending cuts long after he makes a break
for the U.S. Senate or finds some other comfortable sinecure thanks to the good graces of his many wealthy friends. In fairness, Crist is only the most
egregious offender. As Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels noted in The Wall Street Journal in September, the last decade has seen state government spending
increase by 6% every year. Dozens of governors of both parties have enthusiastically embraced free-lunchism, with Daniels as one of the rare
exceptions. Recognizing that Indiana was on an unsustainable path, Daniels committed the state government to making painful spending cuts, investing
in infrastructure and education, and focusing his efforts on the long-term goal of raising household incomes for Hoosiers. Florida, in contrast, has
followed a very different model: After riding an unsustainable building boom, Crist intends to back federal measures like tax credits for home
buyers and generous Federal Housing Administration underwriting to prop up still-inflated home values. This is public policy as a Ponzi scheme. And
even after free-lunchism proved a spectacular failure over the last decade, whether carried out by the Bush White House or Democrats and Republicans at the state level, Crist seems to have learned nothing. Monday, November 2, 2009 ~ 3:21 p.m., Dan Mitchell Wrote: You're a billionaire but you don't want anyone, least of all the taxman, to know. What do you do? Head for a palm-fringed island paradise or a snow-covered Alpine micro-state? Wrong. The world's most opaque
jurisdictions – the ones that will best shield you and your cash from the light – are mostly in the heart of the most sophisticated and powerful global
financial centres. London, Luxembourg and Zurich are in the top five most secretive jurisdictions, according the first comprehensive index of financial
transparency ever compiled. Yet top of the pile, beating the British Virgin Islands, Belize or Liechtenstein as the best place to hide wealth, is Delaware.
One of the smallest states in the US, it offers the best protection for anyone who does not want to disclose their identity as a beneficial owner of a
company. That is one very good reason why the East Coast state hosts 50% of the US's quoted firms and 650,000 companies – almost equivalent to one
company per Delaware resident. ...Delaware – the political power-base of the US vice-president, Joe Biden – offers high levels of banking secrecy and
does not make details of trusts, company accounts and beneficial ownership a matter of public record. Delaware also allows companies to re-domicile
within its borders with minimal disclosure, and allows the existence of privacy-enhancing "protected cell" or "segregated portfolio" companies,
among many other stratagems useful for protecting the identity of those who do business there. Sunday, November 1, 2009 ~ 8:56 p.m., Dan Mitchell Wrote: It's hard not to laugh when viewing the results of the federal first-time home-buyer tax credit. The credit, worth up to $8,000 for the purchase of a
home, has only been available since April of last year. Yet news of the latest taxpayer-funded mortgage scam has traveled fast. The Treasury's inspector
general for tax administration, J. Russell George, recently told Congress that at least 19,000 filers hadn't purchased a home when they claimed the
credit. For another 74,000 filers, claiming a total of $500 million in credits, evidence suggests that they weren't first-time buyers. Among those claiming
bogus credits, at least some of them were definitely first-timers. The credit has already been claimed by 500 people under the age of 18, including a
four-year-old. ...As a "refundable" tax credit, it guarantees the claimants will get cash back even if they paid no taxes. A lack of documentation
requirements also makes this program a slow pitch in the middle of the strike zone for scammers. The Internal Revenue Service and the Justice
Department are pursuing more than 100 criminal investigations related to the credit, and the IRS is reportedly trying to audit almost everyone who
claims it this year. Speaking of the IRS, apparently its own staff couldn't help but notice this opportunity to snag an easy $8,000. ...Mr. George said
his staff has found at least 53 cases of IRS employees filing "illegal or inappropriate" claims for the credit. "In all honesty this is an interim report.
I expect that the number would be much larger than that number," he said. The program is set to expire at the end of November, so naturally given its
record of abuse, Congress is preparing to extend it. Republican Senator Johnny Isakson of Georgia is so pleased with the results that he wants to
expand the program beyond first-time buyers and double the income limits. ...Meanwhile, the credit continues to distort the housing market and
postpone the day when home prices can find a floor that is a basis for a stable recovery. More than two years into the housing bust, trillions of
dollars in taxpayer losses or guarantees via Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and amid an ongoing plague of redefaults in federal programs to prevent
foreclosures, politicians are still trying to manipulate housing prices. And leave it to Congress to design a program that even a four-year-old can scam. Link to this Blog Entry
|
||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||
