Monthly Archives: December 2010

Tax Cuts? Baloney! Government Burden Has Grown

Debt, Government, Republicans, Ron Paul, Taxation

I understand why trusted and trustworthy representatives such as Ron Paul would vote for the tax-cut deal that has passed the Senate today (Wednesday).

Ron Paul: Pro, in an interview with Andrew Napolitano.

I certainly want to support the tax extension… they may put enough stuff in there to make me reconsider, but right now I would not want to participate in raising taxes on people.

[Via Slate]

As POLITICO put it: “House Republicans trying to tamp down discontent in their ranks from fiscal conservatives are issuing a simple message: This isn’t the bill we would’ve written, but it’s good enough.”

At work is the dreaded “compromise,” a word that sounds good, but is not: “the only time you want your representative to reach across the aisle is to grab a Democrat or an errant Republican by the throat.”

Since the above are my fighting words—political compromise is always a blow to principles—I’m with Peter Schiff, with some reservations. I disagree that “the compromise extension of the Bush era tax cuts” amounts to a “$900 billion package.” Tax cuts are never a cost. Since taxation is theft, a thief that has failed to secure the loot for himself has no right to write-off his losses. besides, money that is not taken by the state is money liberated, saved from waste. (The extension of unemployment benefits in the Bill did not amount to $900 Bil.)

“In truth however, there are no real tax cuts in this proposal. The true burden of government is not measured by how much it taxes but how much it spends. Since this deal ensures that government will be more expensive next year than it was this year, American citizens will have to shoulder the added cost. Just because Congress has decided to deliver the bill with debt rather than current taxes does not mean that the spending will not be paid for. The only thing the plan accomplishes is to alter the means by which government spending is financed.”

Gross Domestic Income? Never Heard of It

Capitalism, Political Economy

There is a reason Keynesians, to whom consumption is everything, never speak of the “flip side of Gross Domestic Product (GDP)”: Gross Domestic Income. The wellsprings of wealth are savings, investment and production. Why would proponents of a political theory that champions a credit-fueled, consumption-based bondage to government wish to encourage the power shift—intellectual and political—that comes with that understanding?

“What Does Gross Domestic Income – GDI Mean?
The sum of all income earned while producing goods and services within a nation’s borders. Gross domestic income (GDI) is a lesser-known calculation stat used by the Federal Reserve to gauge economic activity based on income. It differs from gross domestic product (GDP), which gauges economic activity on expenditure.”

If you can get past the grating tones, the following clip is also instructive:

Co-Equal, Or Colluding, Branches of Government?

Constitution, Federalism, Government, Healthcare, Law, States' Rights, The Courts

The problem with the Commonwealth of Virgina’s pleasing legal victory in challenging the constitutionality of Obama’s “healthscare” is this: The individual mandate and much of the health care bill may be manifestly violative, but most of the limits the Constitution placed on the federales (and the courts themselves) are no longer upheld by the courts (or by Congress, that other co-equal branch of government), starting with the Tenth Amendment.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

So, as PBS’s News Hour reported, once again so well (appending as it always does a PDF document of the Decision), “Federal judge Henry Hudson ruled Monday afternoon that a major provision of the health care reform law is unconstitutional. In his decision, the judge sided with Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, who argued that the Congress does not have the authority to require Americans to purchase health insurance. ‘The Minimum Essential Coverage Provision is neither within the letter nor the spirit of the Constitution,’ Judge Hudson wrote.”

But along could come the Supreme Court Justices and nullify the health-care preferences of the people of Virginia. That’s because the framers’ constitutional dispensation is now nothing but a sad joke. The Appellate Court could beat the SCOTUS to it.