Archive for the ‘Socialism’ Category

After Democrat nominee Joe Biden’s faux America First announcement, Chief White House Economic Advisor Larry Kudlow shredded the Democrat’s proposal. Kudlow said “We must, we must not go back to high taxes and high regulations, we must not do that. It defies common sense after this pandemic contraction.”

Typical of Democrats’ tax policy, Biden’s plan is to make US corporations pay the highest tax rate in the world. Couple that with oppressive regulations, especially on the energy industry, and you’d set the economy back a decade or more. Right now, the US is energy independent and energy dominant. The Democrat’s regulations would essentially end fracking, send gas prices and heating prices through the roof and force us to rely on foreign supplies of energy again.

Kudlow continued shredding:

I respect them, and they have a right to do what they’re doing. But Mr. Biden’s going to be raising taxes across the board and then some. He said yesterday or the day before he wants to end something called ‘shareholder capitalism.’ We used to call that the investor class and if you buy for the long run you make a fortune for retirement. He’s opposed to that.

Biden said that he wants to bring medical supply chains home from China, which is the right thing to do. Unfortunately, he’s going about it the wrong way. He’s telling companies to return to the US but then telling them that they’ll get hit with the highest corporate taxes in the world:

This is from the Democrats’/Biden/Sanders plan:

Democrats believe there is a better way. We can and must build a thriving, equitable, and globally competitive clean energy economy that puts workers and communities first and leaves no one behind. We will help rebuild our economy from the COVID-19 pandemic and President Trump’s recession by mobilizing historic, transformative public and private investments to launch a clean energy revolution. We will use federal resources and authorities across all agencies to accelerate development of a clean energy economy and deploy proven clean energy solutions; create millions of family-supporting and union jobs; upgrade and make resilient our energy, water, wastewater, and transportation infrastructure; and develop and manufacture next generation technologies to address the climate crisis right here in the United States. And we will do all this with an eye to equity, access, benefits, and ownership opportunities for frontline communities—because Democrats believe we must embed environmental justice and climate justice at the heart of our policy and governing agenda.

Think Solyndra on steroids. Think taxpayer-funded subsidies for more expensive energy that won’t support the manufacturing industry.

Democrats will also mobilize a diverse new generation of young workers through a corps and cohort challenged to conserve our public lands; deliver new clean energy, including to low income communities and communities of color; and address the changing climate, including through pre-apprenticeship opportunities, joint labor-management registered apprenticeships for training, and direct-hire programs that put good-paying and union jobs within reach for more Americans.

TRANSLATION: Using a government command-and-control model, Democrats will pick winners and losers. Forget market forces determining the efficient distribution of investments. The Joe Biden-Bernie Sanders Democrats think they know what’s best.

If you don’t realize that Robert Reich, Bill Clinton’s former Labor Secretary, is a socialist by the time you reach the third paragraph of this article, then you’re either a Democrat or a product of a government school. The article starts by saying “Some societies center on social control, others on social investment.”

It continues, saying “Social-control societies put substantial resources into police, prisons, surveillance, immigration enforcement and the military. Their purpose is to utilize fear, punishment and violence, to maintain what they consider order. Social-investment societies put more resources into healthcare, education, affordable housing, jobless benefits and children. Their purpose is to free people from the risks and anxieties of daily life and give everyone a fair shot at making it.”

Does Reich really think that people who appreciate being safe push policies that “utilize fear, punishment and violence?” Does Reich, a hardline Democrat progressive, think that Democrats invest in policies that “free people from the risks and anxieties of daily life?” That’s the definition of socialism. Socialism guarantees equality of outcomes. That’s why it inevitably leads to a race to the bottom. Capitalism inevitably leads to innovation and prosperity. Then Reich said this:

Donald Trump epitomizes the former. He calls himself the “law and order” president. He even wants to sic the military on Americans protesting against police brutality.

That’s a lie. President Trump doesn’t want to use the military to put down peaceful protests. This video is proof of that:

The United States began as a control society. Slavery, America’s original sin, depended on the harshest conceivable controls. Jim Crow wasn’t much better. But in the decades following the second world war, the nation began inching toward social investment.

Slavery wasn’t just “America’s original sin.” It was many nations’ original sin. Native Americans took other tribes captive after their wars. Just because the MSM isn’t willing to talk about this doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. In fact, there’s lots of things that the MSM doesn’t write about that’s happened.

Reich’s propaganda is a rewriting of history. Thanks to civil order, more money could be invested in things like the military, the interstate highway system and other types of infrastructure. Also, as public employee unions gathered power, corruption set in. Rather than focusing on what’s best for students, the NEA and AFT worried about what’s best for their clients. Teachers, aka their clients, pushed for the status quo, which didn’t keep up with the students’ needs.

Insisting on maintaining civility didn’t cause the problems that Reich described. Officials who weren’t people of integrity had far more negative influence on the decline of society.

Recently, AOC peddled some socialist BS, talking about how “the country” must “strip profit motive out of our decisions and reprioritize for the public good.” That’s the fastest path to poverty invented in human history. Isn’t government prioritized “for the public good”? How often is government the source of our problems rather than the source of our solutions?

Let’s be clear about this. If a bureaucrat fails, what’s his/her incentive to improve? Better question: is there an incentive to improve? If schools fail, isn’t it guaranteed that EdMinn will simply insist that it’s a funding problem? There’s currently a crisis within the MN Department of Human Sacrifices Services. It’s been a crisis since the Dayton administration. Apparently, there isn’t an incentive to fix the problem because the problem persists.

There’s been a problem for about 5+ years with MNLARS. It was ‘only’ supposed to cost $10,000,000-$15,000,000 total. It’s supposedly getting fixed. The total cost to Minnesota’s taxpayers has been approximately $186,000,000 as of May 1,2019. It’ll certainly cost Minnesota’s taxpayers another $100,000,000 or more.

Again, when there isn’t a cost to the worker for failure, failure is inevitable or, at minimum, highly likely. It sounds good to move away from a profit motive — until you realize that profits drive markets and that markets drive innovation. The best explanation of this comes from legendary economist Milton Friedman:

Justin Haskins’ question nails it perfectly:

Just ask any parent with a teenager whether people who don’t have to work spend money as wisely as those who must earn it for themselves!

I’d think that’s more of a rhetorical question than anything else. A politician friend of mine talks about OPM, aka Other People’s Money. My friend says that spending other people’s money is addictive without the requisite character, to the point that it’s as addictive as another addictive drug, aka opium. Either way, it’s pronounced O-P-M. Then there’s this:

Omar, another far-left member of the “Squad,” was perhaps even more direct about her socialist demands in her video, in which she directly called for the federal government to nationalize key industries. “And so, it is important for us to nationalize the supply chain, it’s important for us to take action in nationalizing our health care system,” Omar said.

Does nationalizing industries promote accountability? It hasn’t happened yet that I’ve heard of. It’s produced tons of thuggery but it hasn’t produced accountability.

According to this article, enthusiasm is running high for what might be called the United Socialist States of America, aka USSA. That’s wishful thinking on the socialist activists’ part, in my opinion. Still, it’s worth noting that these activists’ enthusiasm is legitimate. It’s just that they’re overestimating their ability to persuade people into accepting their agenda.

Clearly, Bernie and AOC are the spiritual leaders of this movement. That doesn’t mean that they’ll soon dominate the entire political landscape. Their theories don’t play in real life. Socialism isn’t built on the notion of persuading people. It’s built on the notion of forcing people into doing things they don’t want to do.

For instance, Medicare-for-All is built on the premise that Bernie knows what’s best for all of us and that we should just listen to him because that’s what Bernie’s ideology dictates. It’s the opposite of capitalism. When the first iPhone hit the shelves, people wanted it so badly that they virtually flew off the shelves. Nobody forced customers to buy iPhones. People wanted them and bought them at unprecedented rates.

To stop this race-to-the-bottom cycle undercutting workers’ power and lay the groundwork for revolutionary change, we must erode the power of the capitalist class. We can accomplish that by, for example, imposing capital controls—measures that stop the free movement of capital in response to changing social and economic conditions. But to pass economic reforms as significant as these, we can’t just agitate in the streets, as important as that is. We have to be in power.

There you have it. The façade has been ripped off, the agenda exposed. This isn’t a debate over which ideas are best. In these socialist activists’ minds, that fight has been fought and the socialists won. Therefore, Democrats aren’t interested in debating. That’s why organizations like Antifa and Black Lives Matter were created.

They were created to intimidate, not persuade. With goal being to gain, then maintain, political power, the need to break down civil society is imperative. This is about ruling, not governing. If Republicans don’t figure that out ASAP, the socialists’ inroads will be too deep.

Fortunately, President Trump figured this out long ago. That’s why he told us in his 2019 State of the Union Address that the United States will never be a socialist nation:

Pundits are telling us that Bernie 2020 isn’t that much different than Trump 2016. I wholeheartedly disagree. The policies Bernie is espousing in 2020 are getting adopted by more and more Democrats but they still aren’t majority positions. The policies that President Trump espoused were majority positions, especially with Republicans but also with independents.

Voters will reject Bernie’s socialist policies. Thanks to Democrats challenging Biden, then Warren, then Bloomberg, Bernie’s policies haven’t gotten challenged. That’ll change the minute it’s a one-on-one fight with President Trump. President Trump won’t pull his punches like Warren, Klobuchar, Buttigieg, Bloomberg and Biden have pulled their punches.

By the time President Trump’s haymakers start landing, Bernie won’t know how to hand them. By the time Bernie figures it out, it’ll be over except counting the votes. Fortunately, Democrats won’t be in charge of that.

Doug Schoen’s op-ed is a valiant attempt to prevent a major political trainwreck. That isn’t likely since Schoen admits that studying the New Hampshire Primary “results reveals a Democratic Party at war with itself.” It isn’t a stretch to say that uniting the Democratic Party is difficult. Later in his op-ed, Schoen talks about Bernie as a socialist, which he is, and the moderates running. It’s insulting to hear Democrats talking about moderates as Democrat presidential candidates.

Schoen’s boss, Michael Bloomberg, is running as a moderate. That’s BS on steroids. With all the attention paid to Bloomberg’s racist statements this week, it isn’t surprising that few people know that Bloomberg wants to blow up the economy.

This article, published by Bloomberg’s newspaper, highlights the fact that a Bloomberg administration would feature a $5,000,000,000,000 tax hike. According to the article, “Michael Bloomberg said Saturday he would raise taxes on the wealthy, increase the corporate tax rate, and curb tax-free inheritances of large estates, elements of a tax plan that he says would raise $5 trillion over a decade.”

Then there’s this:

Bloomberg’s plan serves to show how he’d pay for an array of proposed new spending initiatives, which so far top $3 trillion. But his campaign cautioned that the tax plan could still change as the former New York mayor rolls out even more policy plans in the near future.

TRANSLATION: Bloomberg’s tax hike might go higher if he tries buying more votes.

Later, Schoen wrote this:

Moreover, Bloomberg is working to do exactly what the Democratic Party needs to do, working to unite African American voters, Hispanic voters, White voters, progressives, moderates and voters with varying degrees of education, so that the Democratic movement against Trump spans wider than the party’s base.

What Schoen doesn’t admit is that President Trump has cut into huge parts of the Democrats’ base. By signing the First Step Act and by highlighting school choice, opportunity scholarships and Opportunity Zones, President Trump is cutting into the Democrats’ base of minority voters. Democrats aren’t proactively reaching out to minority communities. Instead, Democrats are taking these communities for granted.

The dirty little secret is that President Trump is uniting minority communities through prosperity opportunities. Mike Bloomberg’s $5,000,000,000,000 tax hike would kill those prosperity opportunities. Further, this segment, on CNN of all places, isn’t uniting Democrats:

Bloomberg’s long-held position on stop-and-frisk won’t unite Democrats. His #MeToo problems won’t unite Democrats, either. Bloomberg’s $5,000,000,000,000 tax hike will unite independents and Republicans. At this point, the economy is uniting people around President Trump. This is hilarious:

To counteract Trump’s relative strengths, it is critical that the Democratic Party coalesces around a cohesive, inclusive, pro-growth message centered on jobs, the economy, health care and advancing equality of opportunity, while also highlighting President Trump’s own policy failures in these areas.

What a joke. Most of the Democrats’ presidential candidates are socialists or a step removed from being socialists. There’s no such thing as pro-growth socialist economic policies.

I almost feel sorry for Schoen. That’s because he’s caught betwixt and between defending Bloomberg’s anti-capitalist tax policies, Bloomberg’s government-knows-best nanny state policies and Bloomberg’s gun control policies.

For about the past decade, Democrats have proposed economic policies that’ve been based on fairness rather than policies that add value to the economy. As a result, jobs have been lost. As a result, communities have been ruined and institutions have gotten injured.

One such example of wrong-headed economic thinking is the Democrats’ push to raise the minimum wage to $15/hr. Wherever it’s tried, it’s failed. It doesn’t bring me joy knowing that it’s failed in progressive Seattle. It’s just that it wasn’t surprising.

This city’s minimum wage is rising to $16.39 an hour on Jan. 1. Instead of receiving a bigger paycheck, I’m left without any pay at all due to the policy change. That’s because the restaurant where I’ve worked for six years is closing as a consequence of the city’s harmful minimum-wage experiment.

I work for Tom Douglas, one of the best-known restaurateurs in Seattle. Mr. Douglas is in many ways responsible for the city’s reputation as a foodie paradise, and he recently celebrated his 30th anniversary in business. He’s a great boss, and his employees tend to stay at the company for a long time.

But being an established chef and a good employer doesn’t save you from the burden of a sharp minimum-wage increase, up 73% from $9.47 in 2015. For large-scale employers like Mr. Douglas, there’s no separate rate for workers who earn tips. In Washington and a handful of other states, tips aren’t counted as income earned on the job. That means restaurateurs are expected to pay servers like me the full minimum wage in addition to our considerable tip income.

Eventually, capitalism slaps everyone in the face. The difference between socialism and capitalism is simple. Socialism just requires government’s brute force, usually in the form of intrusive regulations. A perfect example of this was the ACA’s individual mandate.

With the ACA, the government told people what’s best for their families. They’d never met these families so they didn’t actually know what was best for them. A small group of progressives disconnected from reality told the nation what’s best for them.

This small group of autocrats anticipated that their product wouldn’t go well so they created the individual mandate to force people into buying a product they didn’t want. That’s a picture of socialism.

With capitalism comes competition, innovation and outstanding products that people want to buy. Capitalism gave us the iPhone and iPads. Socialism gave us the ACA and the individual mandate.

When socialists took over city councils, they started implementing policies like the $15.00/hr. minimum wage, which immediately hurt the hospitality industry. This is the end result:

I’ve lived in this city for almost 20 years, supporting my family thanks to the full-service-restaurant industry. Today I’m struggling because of a policy meant to help me. I’m proudly progressive in my politics, but my experience shows that progressives should reconsider minimum-wage laws that hurt the very workers they’re trying to protect.

This election is a clash between good intentions vs. great results. Wouldn’t people want bulging checking accounts and fat 401(k)s rather than empty checking accounts?

This election, Democrats have to fight against a well-funded incumbent and top-tier congressional candidates preaching the gospel of capitalism and a roaring economy. Democrats have to defend policies like the Push for $15, California’s homelessness and decisions like impeachment.

The opening paragraph from Speaker Pelosi’s statement on the November jobs report indicts the Speaker. Here’s what she said:

Despite some encouraging numbers, the November jobs report offers little solace to the farmers and hard-working families who are struggling to stay above water with the costs of living rising and uncertainty surging.

If she’s so worried about “farmers and hard-working families”, why hasn’t she brought USMCA up for a vote yet. For over a year, Ms. Pelosi has said that a) USMCA would be easy to pass and b) she was working her way to yes on ratifying it. Simply put, she’s failed farmers. Ms. Pelosi’s Do-Nothing Democrats have been more interested in impeaching a president who has created 7,000,000 jobs since taking office less than 3 years ago.

Ms. Pelosi’s Do-Nothing Democrats unanimously voted against the Trump-GOP tax cuts that have lit a fire under this economy. These Do-Nothing Democrats voted against eliminating the Obama administration’s regulations that would’ve killed the fossil fuel industry. In short, Pelosi’s Do-Nothing Democrats have stood in the way of pretty much every Trump administration plan that’s produced this prolific economy.

Thus far, the Trump administration’s record includes the lowest unemployment rate in half a century, the lowest black unemployment rate and the lowest Hispanic unemployment rate ever, the lowest unemployment rate for women since WWII, rising wages, improving workforce participation rate and soaring consumer confidence. That’s what Pelosi’s Do-Nothing Democrats voted against.

Getting lectured by Ms. Pelosi about “struggling” farmers and manufacturers is insulting. Ms. Pelosi’s focus on impeachment has prevented her from reaching yes on USMCA. She can complain all she wants about the 275 bills waiting for Senate action but that’s bad-faith whining. Why should we trust a caucus of Do-Nothing Democrat Socialists who voted against the policies that built this fantastic economy? This sums things up perfectly:

“What a contrast? A great economy, terrible politics.”

Pelosi’s Do-Nothing Democrats haven’t helped with anything. They’ve focused on impeachment, not the economy. They haven’t lifted a finger to close the asylum loopholes or the immigration system. The 275 bills are meaningless. It’s time for Democrats to focus on what’s important instead of focusing on appeasing their special interest base.

Let’s be blunt about something. Today’s collegiate-aged socialists aren’t too bright. Let me rephrase. A high percentage of them are downright stupid. Even more are historically ignorant. Victor Davis Hanson’s latest article offers proof of that accusation.

Progressive elitism is best seen on college campuses, where tuition costs rise at higher rates than everything except health insurance premiums after passage of the ACA. Meanwhile, the students’ bang-for-their-buck-ratio hasn’t positively increased in ages. That’s directly attributable to the ratio of junk degrees to worthwhile degrees. That, in turn, has led to mountains of student loan debt. Let’s pick up Prof. Hanson’s article at that point:

College-educated Americans collectively owe an estimated $1.5 trillion in unpaid student loans. Many of these debtors despair of ever paying the huge sums back. Canceling debt is an ancient socialist rallying cry. Starting over with a clean slate appeals to those “oppressed” with college loans.

A force multiplier of debt is the realization that many students borrowed to focus on mostly irrelevant college majors. Such degrees usually offer few opportunities to find jobs high-paying enough to pay back staggering obligations.

In other words, the federal government spent too many advertising dollars insisting that students would face desolation with degrees from 4-year universities. As a direct result of that dishonesty, students took out billions of dollars in student loans for Masters Degrees in Social Responsibility or one of the complaint degrees. (Think anything with the word Studies behind it.)

There’s a way to eliminate these degrees but it requires a spine, either from politicians or administrators or both. In other words, what’s required falls on the shoulders of students and parents because relying on politicians and pointy-headed academicians is foolish. The best way to prevent the elimination of $1,500,000,000,000 in student loan debt is by telling high school students that there are tons of great jobs paying lots of money that a) don’t require college degrees and that b) won’t require taking out $100,000 in student loans.

Just to stick the shiv in a little deeper, remind them of Cousin Alan, who graduated with a degree in Social Justice, has $75,000 in outstanding student loans and who now flips burgers at McDonalds for $8.50/hr.

Thanks to this strong Trump economy, lots of students with tons of student loan debt can find jobs that will pay off their loans faster. I’m serious when I say “Good for them.” I literally want everyone prospering. The difference between me and Democrat elitists like Elizabeth Warren is that I don’t care if there’s a disparity between what they make & what I make. Income inequality isn’t that big of a deal as long as I have a roof over my head, food to eat and enough to enjoy life a little.

Socialists haven’t figured out that socialism is a con. It sounds good but it fails every time it’s tried. At some point, shouldn’t socialists realize that they’re playing a rigged game? The game is rigged because, with socialism, there isn’t a middle class, which means there isn’t upward mobility. Whether you’re talking about the Iron Range in northeastern Minnesota or the former Soviet Union, socialism requires a system where there are oligarchs and there are poor people and nobody in between. Put differently, with socialism, you have 2 classes: the haves and the have nothings.

Finally, voting for Democrats isn’t the solution, as shown in this interview:

Voting Democrat to solve the problem is like hiring an arsonist as a consultant to the fire department. It’s outright stupidity.

Frank Luntz was in the debate hall for both nights of the Democrats’ presidential debates. To be honest, I thought that the supposed frontrunners sounded like idiot bomb-throwers while the lower tier candidates sounded reasonable in some instances. In this situation, reasonable is a relative term. Think John Hickenlooper, John Delaney, Michael Bennet.

I wouldn’t put Joe Biden in that category. At one point, Biden said “I am the only candidate whose plan limits the insurance companies from charging unreasonable prices. We should put some of these insurance executives who oppose my plan in jail for the 9,000,000,000 opioids they sell out there.”

Notice how Biden started by saying that “insurance executives who oppose [his] plan” should get thrown in prison before catching himself and mentioning opioids. Before that, Biden said that his plan “limits the insurance companies from charging unreasonable prices.” Who determines what’s unreasonable? The government? Once the government is the arbiter of what’s too expensive, what effects will that have on insurance companies? Has Biden thought about that? I’m betting he hasn’t.

So we supposedly have a fight for the soul of the Democratic Party. Frank Luntz thinks that that fight is over:

Luntz is right. This fight is over. At the first Democrat debate, every Democrat presidential candidate raised their hands when asked if they’d decriminalize illegally entering the United States. Listen to the ferocious reaction of the audience when attacking CEOs and corporations. Notice how far left Democrats have gone with illegal immigration. Changing it from a criminal charge to a civil fine is like sending out a notice that a small fine will be imposed for illegally entering the United States. That would open the floodgates and then some. People wouldn’t need to game the asylum system. They could just pay a fine, then become a legal resident of the US. Tell me the difference between that and open borders.

The Democratic Party of Bill Clinton is dead. Based on the criticism against President Obama, I could make a strong argument that the Democratic Party of President Obama is in hospice and fading fast. I’m not certain that the Democratic Party as it exists today will exist in 15 years.

I don’t have a problem with the SCTimes publishing this LTE. What I’ve got a problem with is the liberal stupidity in this LTE.

Liberal stupidity, aka DFL stupidity, is on full display when the author says the “problem with Jerry Relph and his Republican colleagues in the Minnesota Senate is that they completely ignore what income and wealth Minnesotans are creating and simply assume that none of us can afford to pay anything more in taxes.”

That’s BS. I wrote several articles over the weekend stating that it’s difficult, if not impossible, to raise taxes when there’s a surplus well in excess of $1,600,000,000 and there’s $2,523,000,000 in Minnesota’s Rainy Day Fund. Further, revenues are rapidly increasing. Further still, the DFL hasn’t lifted a finger to look into the money that fraudsters have ripped off out of the CCAP program or that the idiots at MnDOT have pissed away on rest stops.

While it is true that many Minnesotans have not had a real increase [inflation-adjusted] in wages in many years, there are some that are reaping huge rewards from our collective efforts.

Some blatantly argue “tax the rich.” I’m not saying that. I’m saying don’t assume that no one has made money from our state when some have made a lot. Look at who is making money and make them pay their fair share in light of what they are making. When Republicans like Jerry Relph refuse to make wealthier Minnesotans pay their fair share, it unfairly burdens everyone else.

Clearly, this idiot was taught economics by Bernie Sanders or one of his stooges. Ronald Reagan’s economy created tons of jobs, 22,000,000 to be precise. In Oct. of 1983, the economy created 1,100,000 jobs. Wage growth exploded. GDP that quarter jumped. President Reagan famously said that you can’t be pro-jobs if you have employers. The DFL hates employers.

The DFL hates employers by imposing high taxes and unreasonable levels of regulations while suing pipeline companies that play by the rules. No wonder wages are stagnant. No wonder why manufacturers have left Minnesota. What idiot would put his/her capital at risk with such policies in place? The guy who wrote this idiotic LTE should’ve watched this video first:

If he’d watched this video first, he might’ve prevented himself from making such a fool of himself. Then again, the odds of preventing DFL socialists from looking like DFL socialists are exceptionally high. DFL socialists are extraordinary economic illiterates.