The Easiest Prediction in the World: That Liberals Will Fail

First off, a blast from the past – January 1st, 2011:

…the Californians wanted it. People get the government they deserve, and they usually get it good and hard. California is America’s Greece and when the collapse hits, hopefully a majority will wake up to the fact that liberalism is a failure.

And, now – from the New York Times:

The state budget shortfall in California has increased dramatically in the last six months, forcing state officials to assemble a series of new spending cuts that are likely to mean further reductions to schools, health care and other social programs already battered by nearly five years of budget retrenchment, state officials announced on Saturday.

Gov. Jerry Brown, disclosing the development in a video posted on YouTube, said that California’s shortfall was now projected to be $16 billion, up from $9.2 billion in January. Mr. Brown said that he would propose a revised budget on Monday to deal with it…

Given that this is the New Y0rk Times, you do have to be careful – the budget shortfall didn’t “increase dramatically”; it was built in.  When Jerry and the liberals of the California legislature passed their budget they made a whole bunch of absurd assumptions both as to revenues and expenditures…that they would be, respectively, much higher and much lower than what has actually happened.  Any real analyst would have predicted this right from the start –  or, even, just a moderately informed amateur, like me.

The key to understanding what is wrong with America is to understand three things:

1.  We spend too much money via government.

2.  Our debt is too large to be managed given our current ability to create wealth.

3.  Our ability to create wealth is hampered endlessly by the tax and regulatory system.

All three of these problems are liberal-created problems:  it is liberals who want to spend too much (yes, plenty of Republicans join in, but liberals always lead the way…as is shown by the fact that they increased federal spending by a trillion per year since Obama took office).  Because we spend too much, we end up borrowing too much – and now our debt (federal, State and local) is so large that, given our current base of wealth, it simply cannot be repaid (when you factor in the un-funded mandates).  Our only way out of this mess is to cut spending and grow wealth – but we can’t grow wealth effectively because liberals have erected a positively Byzantine tax and regulatory system which rewards failure and punishes effort and success.

Liberalism must go if America is to survive.  Remember this as we approach November.

 

 

 

55 thoughts on “The Easiest Prediction in the World: That Liberals Will Fail

  1. jesusfreakneil May 12, 2012 / 10:47 pm

    Maybe George Clooney needs to work on fund raisers in California that may take care of this huge debt. All that money raised for Obama’s re-election campaign could go to better use.

  2. GMB May 12, 2012 / 11:13 pm

    Until the 16 Amendment is repealed. Until you take away th governments ablility to spend without limit.

    Goodluck with ending liberalism becuase we are funding it.

  3. Amazona May 13, 2012 / 12:04 am

    Liberalism has never succeeded, which is why the Libs refuse to address the question when asked, these many years now.

    There is a strong historical record of the success of the US Constitutional model, for about 150 years, as it resulted in unmatched economic prosperity and personal liberty, but the Leftist model, no matter what name it is going under at the time, has always been a failure. The extent of the failure has been related to the degree to which the Leftist system has been implemented, but it has never succeeded.

    And its failures have been spectacular, including abject economic misery, making citizens captives ot their governments and not allowed to leave their countries, and even mass murder of many tens of millions.

  4. Cluster May 13, 2012 / 8:56 am

    Well it’s obvious that Jerry Brown and the liberals that run California’s government want people to starve, want dirty air, want seniors to die early, etc, etc. Those heartless bastards think only of cutting the budget so the rich can get richer. But I am sure that people like Bill Mahr, Sean Penn, Michael Moore, Norman Lear, and Tom Hanks will step up to the plate here and save their state – its just a matter of time.

    This is really a good example of how surreal this current environment of liberalism is. On the other thread, Watson is trotting out the old liberal screed of religious oppression by citing an Old Testament Passage from a few thousand years ago in an effort to either clearly demonstrate his stupidity, or in some juvenile effort to continue to bash people of Faith, all the while the policies that he so ardently support are leading people off the cliff, and it’s a very ignorant and dangerous denial of reality. Maybe if Christians were actually stoning their non virgin wives to death, Watson may have a point (instead of the one on his head), but the debt crisis is real, and most liberals including Watson are in complete denial. And they call themselves the reality based community – could there be anything more ironic?

  5. Cluster May 13, 2012 / 9:06 am

    It is truly time folks for conservatives to not only defeat the liberals, but to humiliate them, shame them, and hopefully make them bleed through the ears. It is time that they realize that their way of thinking, and their policies actually create more poverty and hurt the poor, create more misery, polarize more people, limit freedoms, and stagnate personal and economic growth. Liberals, to a person, have disturbing personal issues of feeling the need to smother people and society with their misguided benevolent mandates, and at the core of that is a true disdain for other people and an inflated sense of self. But as Amazona contends, liberals are bone deep stupid, so the possibility that they will even understand this is slim, so our only option is too humiliate them, defeat them and let them figure it out on their own. Tough love if you will.

  6. Cluster May 13, 2012 / 9:19 am

    Here’s another example of how bone deep stupid liberals are. This morning on MSNBC, Chris Hayes, who is actually Rachel Maddow in drag, is having a conversation on women, specifically single moms and their challenges in society, notably their struggles to raise the children and ability to get government help. Despite the overlooked fact that we are spending more on welfare today than ever before in our history, not once was the father mentioned. Don’t you think that the father is a rather important component to this problem? How about if we focus on finding the dead beat father and holding him to account? How about if we focus on talking about personal responsibilities, child rearing, and finding ways to keep families together? Would that be a legitimate line of conversation? Other than reserving judgement, and celebrating single parenthood at the tax payers expense.

    • Retired Spook May 13, 2012 / 9:56 am

      How about if we focus on talking about personal responsibilities, child rearing, and finding ways to keep families together?

      I recall a similar conversation here several years ago when one of our resident Libs made the comment, “well, it’s not as though children come with an instruction manual.” When I hear statements like that, I don’t know whether to laugh or cry.

    • Amazona May 13, 2012 / 12:08 pm

      BTW, cluster, kudos on your “Rachel Maddow in drag” quip—-got ’em both with that one!

      • Cluster May 13, 2012 / 1:56 pm

        Thank you Ama, I kind of liked that one myself. Happy Mother’s Day.

  7. Retired Spook May 13, 2012 / 10:03 am

    Meanwhile, on the other side of the country from California, another Democrat-run state is having problems of its own.

    CHARLOTTE, N.C. (AP) — Once a bright spot for President Barack Obama, North Carolina is now more like a political migraine less than four months before Democrats open the party’s national convention in Charlotte.

    The causes are plenty.

    Labor unions, a core Democratic constituency, are up in arms. Democratic Gov. Bev Perdue isn’t running for re-election; Democrats say she was likely to lose. The state Democratic Party is in disarray over an explosive sexual harassment scandal. Voters recently approved amending the state constitution to ban gay marriage, a position that runs counter to Obama’s. And unemployment in the state remains persistently high.

    “Nobody can sugarcoat the fact that we got problems here,” said Gary Pearce, a former Democratic consultant who was an adviser to former Democratic Gov. Jim Hunt. Pearce was referring specifically to state party woes but could have been talking about any of the troubles here for Democrats.

    And then from the “you-can’t-make-this-stuff-up” file:

    But, he added: “I think the greatest strength that the party has is President Obama. And he’s the thing that people will rally around.

    Talk about cognitive dissonance.

    • Cluster May 13, 2012 / 10:20 am

      So with all the problems NC democrats are experiencing, their answer is too rally around an empty suit, failed community organizer who has created a much larger mess at the federal level? I don’t know whether to laugh or cry.

      • Amazona May 13, 2012 / 11:23 am

        And this comes back to what I keep saying—you should understand the ideology of the party your candidate represents.

        Identity Politics is a scam, a shell game to get people to vote for a PERSON instead of for the political system that person represents. Once this is established as the norm, then the leaders can focus on promoting that person’s persona, with the result being elections based on personality and identity.

        The Dems are counting on identity factors—–his race, his personal attractiveness to some, a feeling of wanting to defend him against detractors, etc—-about Obama to pull this election out of the fire.

        Romney’s skirting the issue by trying to focus on issues and not on the person, but he needs to go deeper—-to identify the issues and then to link them, not with Obama, personally, but with the ideology of the system he represents.

        It’s not enough for him to declare that he, Mitt Romney is for Constitutional government—-he has to point out that the political model he represents is for Constitutional government. It’s not enough to say that Obama policies have failed—-he needs to point out that LIBERAL policies have failed, AGAIN, and get beyond Obama personally to the core of the matter, which is the underlying ideology of Obama.

  8. Retired Spook May 13, 2012 / 10:23 am

    Newsmax has an article this morning that dovetails with the cost and growth of government.

    3. Taxes Now Higher Than Food, Clothing, Shelter Costs

    This year Americans will pay more in total taxes than they spend for food, clothing, and shelter combined, illustrating what the Tax Foundation calls the “growing cost of government.”

    Total outlays for taxes in 2012 will be about $4.04 trillion, which is $152 billion more than Americans will spend on housing, food, and clothing.

    “Relative to the basic cost of living, taxes have increased considerably in recent decades,” the foundation states in a new report.

    In 1929, Americans paid $10.1 billion in taxes while outlays for food, clothing, and shelter totaled $41.6 billion.

    The cost of those essentials surpassed tax collections every year after that until 1981, when the $858.3 billion paid in taxes narrowly surpassed the $854.4 spent on food, clothing, and shelter.

    Seven years later, in 1988, taxes again surpassed outlays on essentials, and they remained larger than food, clothing, and shelter costs every year until 2009, when the economic slowdown reduced tax collections.

    But after a two-year gap, taxes are once again trumping spending for food, clothing, and housing.

    The Tax Foundation also points out that transfer payments — government outlays that Americans can use to purchase food, clothing, and housing, among other things — have increased considerably in recent decades.

    In 1929, transfer payments accounted for just 0.5 percent of private outlays on food, clothing, and shelter. By 1965, when Medicare began, the percentage had grown to about 11 percent. Today it is close to 35 percent.

    “Consumption data, which comes from the Bureau of Economic Analysis, includes private consumption that is paid for with government transfer payments from assistance programs such as Medicare,” Kevin Duncan of the Tax Foundation observes.

    “This leads to double counting, as the taxes that finance these programs and the increased consumption that those taxes fund are included in both tax and consumption figures, respectively.

    “Despite these limitations, the comparison of tax costs to the basic cost of living provides a useful illustration of the growing cost of government.”

    Our Lefties often comment that taxes are at historical lows, but what they forget is there are LOTS and LOTS of taxes besides income taxes. I still use landline long distance service because of an incoming 800# for my business. On my bill, which I just received yesterday, taxes and fees were 26% of the bill. Before my wife and I started buying prepaid cell phone minutes to replace our companion plan, the taxes and fees on our cell phone bill were over 30%.

    • neocon1 May 13, 2012 / 1:13 pm

      meanwhile back at the wraunch 47% of Americans pay NO federal income taxes

      OPM = Schweeeeeeat

      • Amazona May 13, 2012 / 1:22 pm

        neo, do us a favor and go a little deeper, and tell us the percentage of people who might pay income tax but who take more from the government than they pay in.

      • bozo May 14, 2012 / 2:40 am

        So, over half of the 7% in this pie chart don’t pay any federal taxes…

        Dang hippies.

      • Amazona May 14, 2012 / 3:23 am

        So this gets you all wound up, does it?

        What do the people in this alleged 7% DO? What is their contribution to the workforce?

        Oh, that’s right—-society owes them not just housing and food and tattoos and nail art and cell phones and health care and cable TV and so on, it also owes them what other people have earned, in cash.

        Got it. Thanks for playing.

      • bozo May 14, 2012 / 4:04 am

        Ammo thinks 80% of the American people are deadbeats.

        Got it. And, no, thank YOU for playing.

        BTW, hysterical Stephen Colbert-ian line there about “What do the people in this alleged 7% DO? What is their contribution to the workforce?” when they, in fact, ARE the workforce. Comedy gold!

      • tiredoflibbs May 14, 2012 / 6:17 am

        The problem, for you, creepy assclown, is that we do not live in a Democracy. We live in a Representative Republic. I would like to see the data and criteria that was used to create this pie chart.

        Another problem, for you, is that wealth is not fixed – it can be created. This goes back to the proggy belief is that wealth is fixed. For one group to grow their wealth another group has to lose it.

        You and your chart are wrought with errors – stop going to left wing sites for your info and then mindlessly regurgitate it for all to see your ignorance.

      • Cluster May 14, 2012 / 8:24 am

        Bozo,

        Here’s another little factoid for you. Under the policies that people like you champion, that group of poor people that you seem to care so much about will grow exponentially. Or wait minute, maybe that’s your goal.

      • Amazona May 14, 2012 / 9:27 am

        Oh my goodness, freakzo, your level of hilarity these days is simply astounding. What with all that chuckling, chortling, braying, and so on, it’s a wonder you manage to get any posting done.

        Lucky for you truth plays such a small and insignificant part of this posting, because that might slow you down and leave less room for the tittering and guffawing that seem to mark your existence.

        No, liar liar pants would be on fire except for the pee running down your leg from all that uncontrollable laughter. I never called anyone a deadbeat. What I did ask was what these people do, productively, to earn more than they do, and suggest that your position is that society owes them not only the things I mentioned but also other people’s cash.

        Maybe if you got actual information, instead of picking up propaganda and rolling around in glee over what some TV talking heads, knowing their audience, are feeding you for cheap laughs, you might not be so stupid. (Did he take a swipe at Bristol Palin, too? Man, that is FUNNNEEEEEEE!!! I believe people like you would call it pure comedy gold.)

        4% of the people in this country have 29% of the money? Do you really believe that?

        But let’s say you do. After all, the great intellectual and witty Saint Steven told you so, in a comedy routine. Man, that research doesn’t get much better than that!

        Then what?

        1. Why do you think this is?
        2. What do you think should be done about this?
        3. Do you think everyone ought to have the same amount of money?
        4. If so, why?
        5. Is it possible for you to try to make a point without lying?

        And when did the meme change from 1% vs 99%? So now it’s 93% vs 7% ? Or 80% vs 20% ? It just doesn’t sound so catchy, does it, and after all doesn’t the mob mentality depend on catchy slogans you can pull out of the back of your boxers at will to hurl into otherwise intelligent conversations?

      • Amazona May 14, 2012 / 9:38 am

        To show you how utterly BRILLIANT Colbert is, he claims that this mythical 20% IS the workforce. Hmmmmm. Unemployment at over 8% and even the Complicit Agenda Media are admitting that this figure has dropped to that only because so many people have quit looking for work and/or been out of work so long that they are no longer counted.

        The guesstimates for the truly unemployed is far higher than 8% and the underemployed (the PhD’s asking if you want fries with that) aren’t even included in that figure.

        But the TV clowns are entertaining the audience clowns with statements that the alleged poorest 20% of the people in the country are the ones doing all the work. And the clowns glued to their TV sets are roaring with hysterical laughter at this, and scurrying off to post this brilliant insight on the internet.

        No wonder their minders find it so easy to control them. The 21st Century version of bread and circuses makes it a snap. Attract them, like moths to flames, to a couple of propagandists who entertain them by throwing them raw meat of class warfare thinly disguised as humor, and make it sound kind of funny (till you look at what was really said, which of course the lemmings never do) and you can spread your lies into unquestioning empty heads.

        But, what the hell, it’s not as if the resident clown has ever let fact, or reason, or even simply decency, get in the way of a toxic post.

      • Amazona May 14, 2012 / 9:54 am

        In a non-collectivist society, upward mobility is enabled to a much greater degree, because the society is a meritocracy. I am sure the clown just snidely dismisses accounts of productive workers being told by their union bosses to stop working so hard, stop producing so much, because the union standard is so much lower.

        In a free market, unfettered by the restrictions of collective control, the man who produces more than his fellow workers can be compensated accordingly, and promoted based on his productivity and contribution to the company rather than on seniority or some other artificial criterion.

        There will always be a lower level of income, because there will always be a level of productivity and contribution to a company that simply does not call for higher wages. I have asked a couple of the rabid PL howlers-at-the-moon types who post here if they have gone to their bosses and suggested that the wages of the janitors be raised to whatever they make—or, to really accurately reflect what they seem to be braying about now, that their own salaries be lowered to that of the janitor’s.

        No takers.

        I have a young man, 27, doing odd jobs for me. He is going to school, working a full time job plus what hours I can give him, and paying his own way through school. He says he doesn’t deserve to make more money than he does now, because he made a series of bad decisions, and now has limited skills. So there ARE people who get it. He’s years behind the people he went to high school with, and he knows it’s because they made better decisions than he did. As he said “I can whine and feel sorry for myself and stay in an $11.00 an hour job, or I can work my ass off and try to catch up”.

        There really aren’t many people like the clown. It’s just that they stay in their little bubble where they admire the smell of each other’s farts, while the real world goes on around them.

      • Rightlane May 16, 2012 / 1:55 am

        What the chart doesn’t show is why the disparity. Bozo looks at and assumes it means the workers are getting screwed and should unite! I wonder about numerous demographics, not the least of which is age, that undoubtedly make up a sizable chunk in the 20 %. Yea, you know, old folks who have reach and past their prime income earning years and accumulated sizable retirement portfolios.
        Trust funders with the inheritances from their benefactor (think Kennedy’s Bozo and it will not bother you so much knowing the government can’t confiscate that wealth for its own purposes to “help the poor” or better yet, fund the next GSA party…) who by working earned the money producing the wealth they enjoy. How dare they feel they should be allowed to provide for their families beyond the grave?
        What about the ever-increasing interest payments to Federal debt bond holders? Is China in the 1%? No, guess not. That money left the country for good on that slow boat to China, so it doesn’t count, but it sure does make us all poorer. Surely, you understand once you’ve spent a dollar it can’t be spent again. Oh, wrong, sorry, my bad. I forgot, you supported the health care bill, so you don’t understand that. But, let me s’plain it to you Ricky. Money spent servicing this ridicules debt level is money wasted and gone forever. Working Americans will never see a dime of that money again, but they might get crappy health care, since the “you can keep your insurance if you like it” line was just another lie.
        You can’t raise taxes high enough to pay for your liberal social conscience using OPM without destroying the system that produces the wealth that pays for all these social services. Get a job, work hard, save some money and you too can be a 20%er. Self-sufficiency feels good and builds self-esteem, so pull liberal your hands out of other people’s pockets, and let people pay their own bills. They will feel better about themselves for forgoing the trip to the free clinic.

    • Mark Edward Noonan May 13, 2012 / 11:57 pm

      Spook – and that leaves out the costs which come in by what liberalism stops us from doing. Turns out, we’re sitting on at least 1.3 trillion (yes, trillion – with a “t”) barrels of recoverable oil just in one shale formation in the American west. For comparison – Saudi Arabia has a bit more than 264 billion barrels of proven reserves. Yes, folks; with a bit of work, we have enough oil not just to become oil independent, but become a net exporter of oil. We’re sitting on a thousand gold mines and the liberals won’t even let us start digging.

      This is another cost of liberalism – just imagine how many jobs directly in the oil industry would be created…and then probably double that with the follow-on jobs in manufacturing, transportation, etc necessary to support this increased oil business. All shot out a cannon because liberals don’t like oil (of course, only when we use it…when liberals use it to drive in a limo or fly a private jet, that’s ok).

      • Amazona May 14, 2012 / 2:36 am

        On a recent flight I sat next to a man returning from Williston, ND, where he had been scouting real estate for his company to build housing for the oil field workers—something my company has already looked into doing, but we are too new to be spread out that thin.

        Houses, car dealerships, grocery and drug stores, clothing stores, insurance agencies, movie theaters, restaurants, tire shops, furniture stores, appliance stores, doctors—-just look at the support infrastructure of any farming community and you will see the support industry of the oil patch.

        And by the way, these are the same types of businesses that go under, and the same types of jobs lost, when coal mines are shut down, when any industry that has sparked development then disappears. We don’t just lose the jobs in that industry.

  9. neocon1 May 14, 2012 / 10:30 am

    During the 2008 election campaign, President Obama proposed to create or expand a variety of refundable tax credits, most notably his Making Work Pay credit. Refundability was key for Obama – that’s the only way to make credits available to people who pay little or no tax. Critics decried the proposals, asking how you can cut taxes for people who pay no tax. The Tax Policy Center (TPC) estimated that, under then current law, 38 percent of all nondependent tax units would pay no income tax in 2009.

    Earlier this year, Obama signed into law the American Recovery and Reinvestment Tax Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5), which, among other things, temporarily put into place some of the refundable credits proposed during the campaign. TPC estimates that under the new law, 47 percent of tax units will owe no income tax in 2009.

    • neocon1 May 14, 2012 / 10:34 am

      “Why do 47% of Americans pay not income tax but yet?
      Most of the 47% of Americans who pay no federal income tax can afford to have things like cell phones, computers, cable television… I don’t know, luxury items? but yet that can’t contribute ANY of their income for taxes?

      *Yes I know I asked this before, no one could answer it so I’ll try
      again.*”

      Good question……..AND they can vote!!

      • neocon1 May 14, 2012 / 10:36 am

        Even that number, however, strikes us as too high. It’s not healthy for society if somewhere between a third and half of all potential tax filers don’t help share the cost of most of government, from defense to highways to national parks. Everyone above the poverty level should have at least a minimal stake in financing the nation.

        The fact that so many people have no income tax liability is a reflection of a leaky, dysfunctional tax system. The code is absurdly complex. (Some Americans have to pay hundreds of dollars to preparers just to find out that they don’t owe any taxes.) It’s riddled with loopholes and excessive social engineering. It’s undermined by spending programs that masquerade as tax credits. It even fails at its basic function of raising revenue, taking in barely $1 for every $2 the government spends.

        That’s an unsustainable gap. Virtually every budget expert agrees that closing it will require trims in popular programs, particularly the underfunded Medicare and Social Security systems. That’s a matter of math, not ideology, because that’s where the rising costs are. It will require higher taxes on middle- and upper-income people. It will require narrowing loopholes and perhaps even some sort of national sales, or value-added, tax.

        In short, it will require a shared national sacrifice. When nearly half of households don’t pay federal income taxes, it makes consensus harder to achieve by undermining the sense that we’re all in this together.

      • neocon1 May 14, 2012 / 11:03 am

        communism is an atheistic form of government and will always fail

      • Amazona May 14, 2012 / 11:40 am

        neo, I was hoping you had the figures on how many people who DO pay taxes take more from the government than they put in. I don’t have that figure handy but it skews the equation even more to the awareness of the inherent flaws in the current system.

        When you say 47% of people pay NO taxes, you overlook those who pay a small amount, but then receive large government benefits that far outweigh their contributions.

        I wonder if there is a calculation on where the break-even point is, where what one puts in is not exceeded by what one takes out.

      • neocon1 May 14, 2012 / 11:43 am

        I had it once but cant find it right now, I think it was from the Heritage foundation.

      • neocon1 May 14, 2012 / 11:45 am

        When you say 47% of people pay NO taxes, you overlook those who pay a small amount, but then receive large government benefits that far outweigh their contributions.

        I believe those are factored into the 47%

  10. tiredoflibbs May 14, 2012 / 12:26 pm

    Sweden had a choice:
    1) Implement liberal proggies favored plan – government stimulus
    2) implement conservative PERMANENT TAX CUT

    Which one do you think they chose?

    Spain, Portugal, the UK and the US went the way of large stimulus…. very little went to the economy and the result – countries saddled with large debt.

    Tax-cutting Sweden, by contrast, had the fastest growth in Europe last year, when it also celebrated the abolition of its deficit. The recovery started just in time for the 2010 Swedish election, in which the Conservatives were re-elected for the first time in history.

    Hmmm…. this rings familiar to the Red State vs Blue State article from two weeks ago. Red states were growing faster than their Blue state (love of spending) counterparts.

    http://www.spectator.co.uk/essays/7779228/swedens-secret-recipe.thtml

    Just one more example of liberal proggy ideology FAILING! But the liberal proggies will mindlessly continue to deny the obvious.

  11. Amazona May 14, 2012 / 4:26 pm

    Article from Egocentral.invisionzone.com: (emphasis mine)

    “When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic”

    Although found nowhere in the national archives or known writings of Benjamin Franklin, it is widely accepted that he once said “When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.”

    According to the most recent data from the Congressional Budget Office, the bottom 50% of all income earners pay just 3.4% of the taxes collected! Conversely, the top 20% of income earners pay a whopping 85% of the taxes collected. In other words, 80% of income earners contribute a miserable 15% of the taxes collected! When you consider that this lower income bracket is totally dominated by politicians that overwhelmingly favor wealth redistribution, Americans are now able to “vote themselves money.” One is left to wonder if we have already begun to “herald the end of the republic.”

    Let’s not forget plank number two in Karl Marx’s ten planks toward communism in his Communist Manifesto, which is “A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.”

    Years ago, I came across a great analogy to our system of taxes. The story has been printed and e-mailed many times in different formats, but the basic concept remains unchanged. Although the origins of the story are unknown, everyone agrees that the good ole federal government clearly provided the inspiration.

    Here it is:

    Every evening, the same 10 friends eat dinner together, family style, at the same restaurant. The bill for all 10 comes to $100. They always pay it the way we pay taxes:
    • The first four are poor and pay nothing.
    • The fifth pays $1.
    • The sixth pays $3.
    • The seventh, $7
    • The eighth, $12.
    • The ninth, $18.
    • The 10th, (the most well-to-do) pays $59.

    One night the restaurant owner announces that because they’re such good customers, he’s dropping their group dinner bill to $80. Let’s call that a tax cut. They want to continue paying their bill as we pay taxes. So the four poorest men still eat free. But if the other six split the $20 tax cut evenly, each would save $3.33. That means the fifth and sixth men would end up being paid to eat. The restaurant owner works out a plan: The fifth man eats free; the sixth pays $2; the seventh, $5; the eighth, $9; the ninth, $12; and the 10th guy pays $52. All six are better off than before, and the four poor guys still eat for nothing. The trouble starts when they leave the restaurant and begin to compare what they reaped from the $20 cut. “I only got a dollar of it,” says the sixth man, “but he (pointing at No. 10) got $7.” The fifth guy, who also saved a dollar by getting his meal free, agrees that it’s not fair for the richest to get seven times the savings as he. No. 7, grousing that the wealthy get all the breaks, points out that he only got two bucks. “Wait a minute,” the first four poor guys yell in unison. “We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!” The nine men jump the 10th and administer a severe beating. The next night he doesn’t come for dinner. They shrug it off and eat without him. The customary $80 bill comes. Surprise! They’re $52 short.

    Yes, those who pay the most taxes get the most back from tax reductions. But tax them too much — punish them for the wealth they may have — and they just might stop bringing their money to the table.

    I guess this is why American businesses have about $10 trillion in offshore deposits. You can’t blame them. After all, they got tired of getting beat up to forfeit their “fair share.”

    According to Alexis de Tocqueville, writer of “Democracy in America” (1853) who was astounded at how the American experiment was going due to the moral Christian fiber of the nation, “When (Americans) discover that they can vote themselves money from the public till, the experiment will be over.”

    • neocon1 May 14, 2012 / 4:54 pm

      Indianapolis NBC affiliate WTHR recently uncovered a growing segment of individuals unfairly milking the system — but it’s not oil barons, banking magnates or Wall Street wizards. It’s illegal immigrants.

      All those earning money in the United States, whether here legally or not, are required to file tax returns with the IRS. The problem stems from the fact that 2 million undocumented workers claim tax credits for children living outside our borders, primarily in Mexico.

      According to the U.S. Office of the Inspector General, this is costing American taxpayers over $4 billion per year, and although the IRS has been repeatedly informed of the problem, nothing is being done about it.

      http://www.bizpacreview.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=news.details&ArticleId=604871&returnTo=michael-dorstewitz

      • neocon1 May 14, 2012 / 5:01 pm

        Florida investigation reveals 180,000 non-citizens may be registered to vote
        Right Side News ^ | 1/14/2012 | Dan Spencer

        Florida officials have discovered that 180,000 registered voters may be non-citizens.

        A CBS4/Miami Herald analysis of information supplied by Miami-Dade shows a large number of the potential non-citizens voters cast ballots in the past — including the 2000 election, when the presidency was decided by just over 500 votes.

        According to Deputy Supervisor of Elections Christina White, there are a “lot of non-citizens on our registration rolls.”

        Florida’s Division of Elections is checking the citizenship of voters by comparing drivers license records, which show whether a licensed driver is also a U.S. citizen.

    • neocon1 May 14, 2012 / 5:14 pm

      Alexis de Tocqueville, Republic quotes:

      The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money.

      • neocon1 May 14, 2012 / 5:16 pm

        Famous Quote from Benjamin Franklin

        “When the people find they can vote themselves money,
        that will herald the end of the republic.”

      • Amazona May 14, 2012 / 9:06 pm

        neo, do you not read my posts? At 4:26, some time zone somewhere, (has anyone figured that out?) I posted both the Franklin attribution and the deToqueville quote.

        Of course, it never hurts to repeat them……

  12. Jeremiah May 15, 2012 / 2:12 am

    Liberalism will always fail, as long as the goal of liberals is to imitate Mussolini, Stalin, etc.

    It’s going to take a little bit for liberalism to die in America, because it has killed the incentive to work in this country. When the tax money runs out, that’s when things will finally come to a head.

    • neocon1 May 15, 2012 / 5:28 am

      Woo Hoo

      New Obama Book Shocker: Kennedys and Obamas at War — Caroline Considers Obama a ‘Liar’

      Despite endorsing Obama in 2008, JFK’s daughter Caroline now considers Obama a “liar,” according to a family source in Edward Klein’s new book on Obama called “The Amateur.”

      Pssssstttttttt caroline
      WE told you that he was a lying amateur 3.5 years ago. Glad you are finally catching on.

      • neocon1 May 15, 2012 / 5:59 am

        rotfl

      • tiredoflibbs May 15, 2012 / 6:19 am

        Neo, the obAMATEUR’s campaign (and his mindless drones – many can be found here) finds this video…

        …. UNFAIR!!!

  13. tiredoflibbs May 15, 2012 / 6:01 am

    Will fail?

    It HAS FAILED – just look at the obAMATEUR’s policies, Clinton’s policies BEFORE the Republican Congress changed his direction (if he wanted a second term), Carter’s policies and LBJ’s policies.

    Modern liberalism (Progressivism) has failed here and around the world.

    Talk about slow learners.

  14. Liberty At'Stake May 15, 2012 / 10:07 am

    Easiest Prediction in the World … you’ve cracked the code for my blog.

  15. Retired Spook May 15, 2012 / 10:14 am

    I’m underwhelmed by the Liberals who have weighed in (or not) on this thread to list all the successes of Liberalism over the decades.

    • Amazona May 15, 2012 / 11:30 am

      Gee, I wonder if this is in any way related to their frantic scrambling to get away from challenges to defend their chosen system by, say, offering up some examples of its success when implemented.

      Do ya think????

  16. Jim Nolan May 15, 2012 / 2:35 pm

    Speaking as a young man whose whole family has been ruined by this system, it is better to rage against the status quo when an injustice is being committed, and some organization and some understood and accepted hierarchy is needed for anything to get done about it.

    What’s a few failures along the way to social justice; it’s the intent I fight for, not the result.

    • neocon1 May 17, 2012 / 6:47 am

      What’s a few failures along the way to social justice;</I.

      leftist marxism is "social justice" ???
      I'll tell that to the 100 MILLION murdered by it and those who lived behind barbed wire, mine fields and machine guns, to keep them from FLEEING this wonderful system of "social justice" a working mans paradise….

Comments are closed.