I recently cross-posted one of my blogs here on Facebook, and inevitably the one person I knew would comment did. “M,” as I’ll call him, used the following to deride my view that taxes are a dis-incentive to work: My question is whether any proposed tax cut on businesses would constitute a large enough amount of money to permit the hiring of new workers. Surely, | Read More »
The incoming Presidential Administration and the new Congress appear set to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on new government programs, physical infrastructure and “relief” for those affected by the recent economic downturn. They plan to do this through deficit spending, requiring them to sell bonds and, perhaps eventually, raise taxes. The underlying concept is the Keyensian-based idea that if government spends enough money it | Read More »
Many counted Barack Obama’s support from the leaders of major corporations as a thread of confidence that his policies would help spur economic growth; that business leaders had confidence in Obama’s “spend for prosperity” approach. The Obama campaign officially barred corporate donors (though Federal law prohibits corporations from contributing to campaigns), but many corporate leaders donated directly and bundled contributions from others in an effort to pump millions of dollars into the Obama coffers.
Donors included individuals and bundlers from Goldman Sachs, Google, Microsoft, Citigroup, IBM and JP Morgan Chase. It seems that many at these corporations believed on election day that Obama’s policies were best for them.
Indeed, I am certain that Obama’s policies are preferable to major corporations. Let’s take a look at his policies, found on his election website, the AFL-CIO and from Factcheck.org:
Read More »Something has been bothering me for some time about the vocabulary conservatives and libertarians have been using to describe liberal economy policy. We hear it on radio from Boortz and Hannity and television from O’Reilly; we read it on blogs by Thomas Sowell and in newspaper columns by George F Will.
The term I refer to is “wealth redistribution,” called for throughout history by Marx, Lenin, Castro and Chavez. Liberals in America don’t use the term, knowing that it will bother conservatives and many moderates. Unfortunately, it is unconvincing to many, especially liberals, that such a beast as wealth distribution would be a bad thing.
After all, “wealth redistribution” is just taking money from the evil, awful “rich” and giving it to those poor, needy “less fortunate.”
Read More »
![[RS]](/t/img/logo-footer.jpg){kind=logo}