But when liberals call it a Value-Added Tax then it's ok? Hey, a VAT is so European! How could it not be good!?
I'm willing to listen if a VAT will replace the income tax entirely - including a repeal of the 16th amendment, but not if it's lumped on top. That's not reform, it's just double taxation.
Jim DeMint is really a great American, and he's taking steps to be a great leader of the Republican party. This is from his superb op-ed in Friday's Wall Street Journal:
To win back the trust of the American people, we must be a "big tent" party. But big tents need strong poles, and the strongest pole of our party - the organizing principle and the crucial alternative to the Democrats - must be freedom. The federal government is too big, takes too much of our money, and makes too many of our decisions. If Republicans can't agree on that, elections are the least of our problems.
Freedom will mean different things to different Republicans, but it can tether a diverse coalition to inalienable principles. Republicans can welcome a vigorous debate about legalized abortion or same-sex marriage; but we should be able to agree that social policies should be set through a democratic process, not by unelected judges. Our party benefits from national-security debates; but Republicans can start from the premise that the U.S. is an exceptional nation and force for good in history. We can argue about how to rein in the federal Leviathan; but we should agree that centralized government infringes on individual liberty and that problems are best solved by the people or the government closest to them
I find it ironic that the Obama administration recently stepped up its language against the Somali pirates. This is, after all, an administration that has started a trade war with Mexico, said(at one point at least) that it wanted to revise NAFTA, and has no problems discussing tariffs and protectionist trade barriers - even sneaking them into the so-called stimulus bill. I see trade barriers and piracy as two sides of the same coin. Both impede the process of free and fair trade between willing parties through the use of force, taking their unfairly gotten gains for uncertain economic uses.
The only difference is that the pirates do their work by spitting on the rule of law. The government gets to claim it is the rule of law. And then take whatever it wants.
I was really excited about this story, though there's still a lot of entitlement mentality reflected. Out in Kauai, in Hawaii, a group of citizens rebuilt a bridge in a state park. They had been waiting around for state funds of about $4 million to rebuild, and they eventually realized that those funds might be as much as two years away.
Led by a kayaking company that realized its livelihood was at stake, a group got together and built a bridge. Didn't cost them much. And now, instead of the park being closed for another couple of years, it should open in the next few weeks.
Still, some of what was in the article reflects a bit of entitlement and government dependence.
"We can wait around for the state or federal government to make this move, or we can go out and do our part," Slack said. "Just like everyone's sitting around waiting for a stimulus check, we were waiting for this but decided we couldn't wait anymore."
"We shouldn't have to do this, but when it gets to a state level, it just gets so bureaucratic, something that took us eight days would have taken them years," said Troy Martin of Martin Steel, who donated machinery and steel for the repairs. "So we got together -- the community -- and we got it done."
CNN Headline: "Charles Manson spends most of his time alone."
What a funny coincidence. So do all his victims. Sadly, they didn't have a choice in the matter.
The AIG bonus mess exposes the serious lack of oversight and responsibility that went into creating the bailouts and the stimulus package. Chris Dodd (D-CT) now says the amendment he sponsored to the stimulus package that protects bonuses at companies receiving bailouts was forced on him by the Treasury department.
Dodd...said it was because administration officials were afraid the government would face numerous lawsuits without the new language.Now tell me, why would a Congress and administration willing to create an ex post facto tax on contracted bonuses that they failed to discover when taking over the company be afraid of lawsuits when they already are showing a willingness to change the law to suit their desires?
From an article about George Bush respectfully choosing not to say anything critical about Obama. It is a non-story fluff article. But then there's this paragraph:
Bush said he wants Obama to succeed and said it's important that he has that support. Talk-show host Rush Limbaugh has said he hoped Obama would fail.
During tax season, I start thinking more and more about finances. While our finances are currently in pretty good shape, I keep looking for new ideas on how to make sure it stays that way. One of my new favorite blogs in this vein is Get Rich Slowly. Lots of good ideas in here (and I think my wife is tired of hearing me toss them around).
Today, a guest post from the author of the upcoming I Will Teach You To Be Rich discusses how to overcome the barriers that stop us from doing the things we know we should do, like working out more or spending less. It's not enough to cognatively know we should do these things. We have to clear away the barriers standing in the way of those goals, whether they be physical, mental, or other.
Go read it and then break down a barrier today! I'm going to buy stock. I've had a barrier against buying stock not because of the economy or because I didn't know what to invest in. My barrier was figuring out the right mechanism to purchase my investment. I'm going to get around that today! Wish me luck...
Google, that bastion of continuous improvement, suddenly, quietly, has added lots of surface streets to its traffic feature on its Maps. The Google Map I have on my iGoogle page shows Washington DC and it's set to show me the traffic (nevermind that I don't drive into work - it's still interesting and often makes me happy that I'm not driving). Now it shows traffic on 14th St and Connecticutt and Constitution and Independence - even some of the farther out arteries like 7 and route 50.
Very cool.
Today's Dilbert cartoon makes me want to invest in the drug companies.
Curious what's in the stimulus bill that will be so stimulating? The Wall Street Journal now has a whole long list of every line item. Some things that seem odd to me:
- $400 million for space shuttle construction - aren't we phasing out the shuttle?
- Under the "Justice" catagory, only one line item explicitly discusses something that creates jobs.
- Homeland Security got $1 billion for "Explosive detection systems for airports." How is that stimulus and not just a straight homeland security appropriations item?
- $2 billion in "funds for communities to buy and rehabilitate foreclosed and vacant properties." I'm just amused they put this in since they can just claim eminent domain for free!
There's a lot there and it's interesting to read through. I can definitely see things that would have fit nicely into a stimulus package. I see a lot of other things that would have been better applied in a relevant regular appropriations bill. I won't hold my breath in hope that the approps bills debated later this year won't double-dip on a lot of projects.
I've read a lot of horrible things the past few days that left me mouth agape - mostly about the "stimulus" madness - but nothing has floored me so much as this report of goings-on in San Francisco.
And these are the people we themselves progressive! If I ever try to go to San Fran, remind me of this post.
Best thing I've read today:
I liked the food a lot. Of course, my gf got sick afterwards. Prices are pretty good, the decor looks like it was decorated by a 10 year-old girl, but in a charming not repulsive way.
President Obama says [Commerce Secretary nominee Judd] Gregg withdrawal was "somewhat of a surprise."
Read an article in the Economist today about a little bookstore in China. The bookstore has established a significant following for its excellent collection of communist literature. The store's built a popular website, and even has a well-attended speaker series.
And it's private. And profitable. And quite good at marketing. So while they rail against the evils of capitalism and free markets, it is China's market liberalization that has allowed the store to even exist. The article mentioned that they've even had an impact on how public officials refer to things because of the store's growing influence.
If the ideas they promote were full put back into practice in China, it'd be the state telling the store what to do, what to sell, where to be located. There'd likely be no speaker series and surely no website.
It's stories like this that remind me of the power of the market. The invisible hand always moves, even for those who try to bite it.
My opposition to the so-called stimulus package stems largely from a philosophical bend away from massive government intrusion in the economy. In a crisis, there is certainly a role for government - I'm not so libertarian as to deny that. But to throw ridiculous amounts of taxpayer dollars at a problem, funding a little of everything in the hopes that something works, is beyond reasonable to me. We've tried this kind of government intrusion before and it didn't work: contrary to the President's scathing words last night, it was government meddling - not the lack of it - that extended both the Great Depression and Japan's "lost decade".
But let's setting aside principles for a moment, let's say I was all for throwing lots of money at the problem to fix it, with the one caveat that I would like the money to be spent effectively. A post on Econbrowser suggests the new "compromise" package from the Senate doesn't even meet that test. In comparing the House and Senate versions, it notes that the Senate managed to pluck out all the provisions that may have led to some actual, immediate stimulus.
Indeed, in so many of the cuts to the original Senate bill, the wrong things were cut. And the wrong things were expanded, including most importantly tax provisions. The tragedy is that so many of these tax provisions are clearly going to have little "stimulus" effect.
FreedomWorks has a great Top Ten list of reasons to oppose the stimulus. I learned another one at breakfast this morning: the bill contains various and sundry provisions that get us significantly closer to state-run health care. It does such things as provide the funding for the oversight board that Tom Daschele recommends in his health care manifesto.
Look, let's get something clear. It isn't that I and thousands of other conservatives are oppose a stimulus package of some kind. But I, along with thousands of others, am oppose to this so-called stimulus bill because it won't achieve real stimulus.
You want to stimulate the economy with targetted jobs programs, targetted handouts, and targetted tax cuts, fine. Let's have a debate about a bill focused on that. Let's set up benchmarks and let's set up a process and let's get it done.
But if you want to pass an overhaul to our health care system, make that a separate bill and let's have a debate on it. You want to give handouts to "green" energy sources and pick the winners and losers in the energy world, that's your perogative, but let's have a debate about. You want to give away money to Hollywood, pay to build (and furnish) a permanent home for Homeland Security, pay to renovate the Commerce building, or give lots of money to universities and other public institutions so long as they agree not to allow religiously affiliated groups to use their buildings, um, ok, but let's debate those things on their own merits in their own time. Let's not lump them all into an unrelated bill.
Passing this bloated bill is not the kind of change we were promised. This is taking all the bad things Democrats got mad at the Republicans for doing for years and multiplying it times ten. And this certainly is not stimulus. It's handouts to favored interests at the great expense of Real People.
Kill this bill. Start over. Do it right or don't do it.
Building on the last post - the GOP has another idea to meddle in the housing market, this time with the interest rates. The idea is to artificially suppress interest rates down to 4% to raise home prices.
The math doesn't work out, though, as this Wall Street Journal article points out. With a likely wave of refinancing to come from such a bill, taxpayers could be on the hook for more than $100 billion. I have a very smart friend who's already considering this option.
Ug. McConnell, quit diddling with the bill and just lead your caucus to vote no already.
It's easy to point the finger at Democrats for the ginormous stimulus package currently being debated in the Senate. They are the ones, after all, in leadership and who have set the rules up - particularly in the House - to limit or avoid altogether GOP amendments.
But Tyler Cowen at Marginal Revolution points out that Republicans get their share of blame too. The GOP added a $15,000 tax credit for homebuyers into SB 1. Tyler points out that this is unlikely to have a positive impact, and more likely will continue us down the road that helped get us into this current mess.
If GOP leaders want to help stimulate the economy, they need to vote against this bill and start over, either with new ideas or with the (small) pieces of the current bill that actually stimulate economic activity.
If you want to help, sign the petition at NoStimulus.com and give your Senators a call while you're at it.
