Are Michigan’s economic problems the result of too few taxes?

Great news for the residents of Michigan! The solution to what ails us has been discovered! What pray tell might it be? Tax hikes. Yes, it’s true. Turns out that Michigan has been a tax-cutting haven for the past 2 decades and that’s the reason our economy has stagnated.

Don’t believe me? Perhaps you’ll believe this new study out that says exactly that – http://www.masb.org/drake-report.aspx. It’s a leftist financed report designed to trump up support for more big government as our salvation. It certainly convinced this reporter who seems to wholeheartedly endorse its findings – http://www.mlive.com/lansing-news/index.ssf/2014/05/rick_haglund_are_you_happy_mic.html#incart_2box.

I could spend time going through the report and refuting its findings point-by-point but I have to tell you the weather is absolutely stellar outside today so that just seems like a waste of precious time.

As always, we can easily discount these ideological commercials dressed up as research quite easily. Ask yourself, what makes an economy grow? Is it higher taxes and more infrastructure spending? Would that spending result in reversing Michigan’s drop in per capita income from 18th to 35th as the report states?

Of course not. It is the expansion of wealth and productivity that results in economic growth. No sane economist would ever equate redistributing income through higher taxes as the way to grow an individual’s per capita income.

Does a quality infrastructure and education system affect an area’s economy? Absolutely. Is throwing more money at it the solution? Absolutely not. There are far too many extenuating circumstances involved here beyond the scope of a blog post to attempt to break down all of the factors involved. The key here is efficiency, not quantity.

A little research will show that Michigan hasn’t suffered from a lack of comparative investment in social engineering. Academia has profited quite handsomely in Michigan over the years. Michigan teachers rank 2nd in the nation in salary with the cost of living factored in.

The roads? A disaster. Michigan requires much more for transportation infrastructure compared to a southern state without the freeze/thaw cycles and road salting and plowing expenses. However, Michigan also allows higher commercial weight limits that lead to premature destruction of the road surfaces. Does the trucking industry benefit more by higher weight limits than the penalty incurred by poorer quality road surfaces?

Let history be your guide. The European example has shown that a system heavily weighted toward redistributive practices which require high levels of government efficiency in order to expand growth fail. The American economic engine has proven that enabling the private sector rather than the public sector results in far greater wealth creation. Period.

People may not agree with the status of societal issues with reduced public spending, but the facts are clear with regard to economic growth. The left will continue to try to sell the concept that government redistribution is preferable to private investment. Not if you want results. Unfortunately, the communist plank of equality of outcome has been a tried and true failure and just doesn’t sell on main street.

Need more proof? Take a look at the hotbed of socialist type policies and witness its rejection – http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/fd3975ce-e424-11e3-8565-00144feabdc0.html#axzz32m4I61Vp. Turns out that confiscatory tax policy followed by austerity after the system crashes isn’t so popular.

Advertisements

Obama want vets to pay for their health care, fact or fiction?

The VA scandal has brought back to the limelight the care of our nations veterans. Rush Limbaugh had a caller today resurrecting the story from March 17, 2009 in which the Obama Administration had floated the idea of forcing veterans to pay for their own health care – http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2014/05/22/flashback_obama_wanted_to_charge_wounded_veterans_for_treatment.

So our first caller of the day, Ralph, is really upset. He said he remembered me, or he thought it was me or Fox saying that when Obama was campaigning or first immaculated into office that he thought veterans, since they volunteer for service, should also pay their own health care.

CNN from March 12, 2009

“Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki confirmed Tuesday that the Obama [Regime] is considering a controversial plan to make veterans pay for treatment of service-related injuries with private insurance.”

This will have the pro-Obama crowd up in arms. He never said it! Urban myth! Here’s a story from Snopes doing a fact check – http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/veteranshealth.asp.

I received this in an e-mail. Is this true, did Obama say this?

HERE IS HIS RESPONSE WHEN HE BACKED OFF FROM HIS DECISION TO LET THE MILITARY PAY FOR THEIR WAR INJURIES

The President admitted that he was puzzled by the magnitude of the opposition to his proposal. “Look, it’s an all volunteer force,” Obama complained. “Nobody made these guys go to war. They had to have known and accepted the risks. Now they whine about bearing the costs of their choice? It doesn’t compute.”

“I thought these were people who were proud to sacrifice for their country,” Obama continued. “I wasn’t asking for blood — just money. With the country facing the worst financial crisis in its history, I’d have thought that the patriotic thing to do would be to try to help reduce the nation’s deficit. I guess I underestimated the selfishness of some of my fellow Americans.”

President Barack Obama did not utter any of the statements reproduced above; the quoted example is a bit of fictional dialogue excerpted from a satirical piece by conservative humorist John Semmens which was published on his site on 21 March 2009.

So what really happened here? More from the Snopes piece.

The basis of Mr. Semmens’ satire was that, in conjunction with meeting with several veterans groups in March 2009, the Obama administration floated a proposal to save the federal government an estimated $540 million per year by billing veterans’ private insurance companies for the
treatment of their combat injuries and other service-related health problems. (Currently only non-service-related medical treatments are so billed.) The proposal would not have, as was often misreported, forced veterans to pay for the treatment of their injuries out of their own pockets or required them to buy private insurance.

So Obama will once again duck blame by claiming that the proposal being floated was for veterans private insurance companies and not the policyholder veterans themselves.

HELLO!!! Are we allowed to think here? Clearly any costs passed on to veterans private insurance companies will subsequently be passed down to the veterans themselves in the form of higher premiums. The insurance companies won’t simply eat these costs. Typical of any Obama proposal in which he promises to punish corporations (evil oil companies for example) by imposing fines and fees or other escalated costs, those companies will pass on as much as possible rather than simply absorb them.

Limbaugh will be skewered for mis-reporting the facts. The media will remind us that this was only a proposal and never became policy.

The truth is that had Obama gone through with it, it was politically toxic. Remember, this was in 2009 when the left controlled all 3 branches and it was still too poisonous to push through.

Now the left will go all out and make the leap tying the VA issues to Bush. Bush took us to war in Iraq and Afghanistan and created all of these VA backlogs or some similar story.

UPDATE***- As predicted, Pelosi delivers the goods – http://washingtonexaminer.com/nancy-pelosi-blames-george-w.-bush-for-veterans-affairs-scandal/article/2548784

Adopt a pothole today!

Tired of destroying your vehicle smashing into the various sinkholes throughout your town? Here’s a great way to green up your city (and maybe slow down global warming too!) and allow you to practice some good old civil disobedience.

Does Michael Sam like green eggs and ham?

Michael Sam is brave? Not just for flying out of the closet but for kissing his boyfriend on live tv? Allen West disagrees.

The NFL draft is over and there was much ado over former Heisman Trophy winner Johnny Manziel and the first openly gay football player, Michael Sam. Of course, more media attention was given to Sam and “that kiss” when he learned he was drafted.

And astonishingly enough, comments about Sam’s kiss with his boyfriend drew some football players fines and a trip to adult timeout. Remember when NBA player, Jason Collins, came out as openly gay and the attention he received? Front page covers and a call from the president himself.

However, has anyone heard even a peep about Alejandro Villanueva? Well, he was picked up by the Philadelphia Eagles – a strapping fella at 6’9″ and most important, a graduate of the US Military Academy at West Point, and a former Army Ranger.

Read more at http://allenbwest.com/2014/05/sams-kiss-brave-villanuevas-bronze-star-now-thats-brave/#VwGcvOFYHzF6V48z.99

Interesting what qualifies as brave anymore. In honor of Sam’s incredible display of courage, I give you this.

I am Michael Sam.
Michael Sam I am.

That Michael Sam-I-am.
That gay Michael Sam-I-am!

I don’t much care that
Michael Sam is a gay man!

Does Michael Sam eat his green eggs with ham
or with a lifesaver colored leg of lamb?

Do you like your Rams with Michael Sam?
Is it even possible for the PC Rams to ever cut Michael Sam?

Is Michael Sam as a Ram just a sham?
Does anyone even give a damn that Michael Sam is a gay Ram?

Bottom line is just shut up and play football man!

Here’s the thing about breaking down barriers. Timing and perception are everything. Everyone knows Sam was gay anyway, so is going public really so brave? Take Shepard Smith from Fox News. Everyone knows he’s gay but he isn’t being “brave” and announcing it. Why? Because it doesn’t play well to the Fox audience. Is Smith not “brave” or is he just playing the good company soldier and waiting for the time when he is “allowed” to be brave? If he worked for ABC, he would wear his gay badge proudly and it wouldn’t even be a story.

Rosa Parks taught us all a wonderful lesson in being “brave” and breaking down barriers when she refused to sit in the back of the bus. Yet twelve years earlier she had done the same thing and it never made a headline. Timing is everything.

Do you really want to show us how brave you are Michael Sam? Volunteer for being the U.S. Ambassador to Benghazi with Obama as Commander-in-Chief and Clinton as your boss!

Happy Mother’s Day!

On this Mother’s Day 2014, besides honoring your own Mother, take note of this Michigan Mother, Amanda Keown, who bears recognition. Not only did she step up to defend her son, she took on the school mafia as well.

Mom Pays Off Every Student’s Balance Following Denial of School Lunch to Son

Keown, a single mother who holds two jobs to support her family, didn’t realize there were insufficient funds in Dominic’s account (a total of $4.95 was still owed on his account). Though he offered to pay $2 of the $2.45 tab that day with the money he had on him and then bring the remainder in the next day, his offer was turned down and his lunch was thrown in the trash by a school official. Not only was the 16-year-old humiliated in front of his peers by the very public incident, but his name was also posted, along with that of lots of other students with delinquent expenses, on a list in the cafeteria for everyone to see. “I was very angry to the point I was sick to my stomach,” Keown tells Yahoo Shine.

Upset that Dominic went the day without eating all because of an outstanding bill totaling to less than $5, Keown immediately rectified the situation. She paid the balance but, concerned about others like her son, offered to settle all of the other kids’ overdue balances, writing a check that included an additional $200 to be divided between the 19 teenagers named.

Happy Mother’s Day to you Amanda!