Thursday, November 4, 2010
Monday, September 20, 2010
Received this today by email. It's been around for a few years, but definitely worth sharing, especially while Obama/Reid/Pelosi/Biden and their drones are out telling the "tax cuts for the rich" class warfare tales again.
THE TAX SYSTEM EXPLAINED IN BEERSuppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100...If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this..
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20." Drinks for the ten men would now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men? The paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.
So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage. They decided to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.
And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% saving).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% saving).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% saving).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% saving).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.
"I only got a dollar out of the $20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, " but he got $10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"
"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics.
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Monday, July 19, 2010
Monday, July 5, 2010
Sunday, June 13, 2010
Thursday, June 10, 2010
From Fox News:
White House report recommends oil drilling moratorium... Problem: authors of report actually say the opposite http://fxn.ws/cwrPyG
AFP Statement on Sen. Murkowski EPA Disapproval Resolution
Statement from AFP Vice President for Policy Phil Kerpen:
"Senator Murkowski's bipartisan resolution of disapproval is a huge step forward to restoring some sanity to economic policy by stopping the EPA's runaway bureaucracy. EPA's blueprint for its outrageous global warming power grab includes 18,000 pages of proposed regulations to control every aspect of the economy--everything that moves: planes, trains, buses, automobiles, tractors, lawn mowers, livestock--and lots of things that don't move, including commercial buildings and commercial kitchens that use natural gas as a cooking fuel.
"Sens. Lincoln (Ark.), Landrieu (La.), and Nelson (Neb.) deserve credit for crossing party lines and joining Murkowski's effort to reclaim control of economic policy for Congress. Under the Congressional Review Act it only takes 30 signatures to force a floor vote, so this will get voted on. It will only require 51 votes to prevail, and we encourage all senators to join this bipartisan effort not to outsource our economic future to bureaucrats at the EPA."
Read more: http://www.americansforprosperity.org/012210-afp-statement-sen-murkowski-epa-disapproval-resolution#ixzz0qSZ9kgXn
Senators Cornyn and Hutchison from Texas have already signed on in support of this resolution. If you live outside of Texas, contact your Senator NOW and ask them to support!
Senator Murkowski's full resolution is HERE in PDF.
Full writeup in The Hill.
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
Friday, June 4, 2010
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Does she really believe she's "prepared to answer" when He comes again? How does Pelosi really thing she's "measured up"?
Thursday, May 27, 2010
explained just how much he "cares" about the oil spill in the Gulf. I
almost drove off the road when I heard this:
"every morning when I'm shaving, Malia peeks her head in and asks, 'have
you plugged the hole yet daddy?'"
Does he really expect us to believe this made up anecdote? If so, then
he should be ashamed that his daughter thinks he has the power to stop an oil
leak on the bottom of the sea. Then again, he expected all of us to
believe that he could stop the rise of the oceans and heal the planet.
Malia is twelve years old. No way she's this naive. I think President Obama is the only one still living under this delusion of Messianic power.
Friday, May 21, 2010
BLITZER: So if people want to come from Guatemala or Honduras or El
Salvador or Nicaragua, they want to just come into Mexico, they can just walk
CALDERON: No. They need to fulfill a form. They need to establish their
right name. We analyze if they have not a criminal precedent. And they coming
into Mexico. Actually...
BLITZER: Do Mexican police go around asking for papers of people they
suspect are illegal immigrants?
CALDERON: Of course. Of course, in the border, we are asking the people,
who are you?And if they explain...
BLITZER: At the border, I understand, when they come in.
BLITZER: But once they're in...
CALDERON: But not -- but not in -- if -- once they are inside the -- inside
the country, what the Mexican police do is, of course, enforce the law. But by any means, immigration is a crime anymore in Mexico.
BLITZER: Immigration is not a crime, you're saying?
CALDERON: It's not a crime.
BLITZER: So in other words, if somebody sneaks in from Nicaragua or some
other country in Central America, through the southern border of Mexico, they wind up in Mexico, they can go get a job...
CALDERON: No, no.
BLITZER: They can work.
CALDERON: If -- if somebody do that without permission, we send back -- we send back them.
BLITZER: You find them and you send them back?
CALDERON: Yes. However, especially with the people of
Guatemala, we are providing a new system in which any single citizen from
Guatemala could be able to visit any single border (INAUDIBLE) in the south. And
even with all the requirements, he can or she can visit any parts of
"The police enforce the law" Find them and send them back"
Sounds very similar to Arizona Senate Bill 1070. In hearing Presidente Calderon's feelings about his own country's immigration policies, I can safely assume he has not read the Arizona law he so boldly opposes.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
I am not appalled by making it a campaign issue. The reason for my horror is knowing that a person can get a drivers license without being able to read English road signs, warning signs, etc. Call me naive, but I was not aware this was possible. I guess I never really thought about it.
I don't know if Texas offers the drivers license exam in languages other than English, but I can promise that I'm going to find out, and letting Rick Perry know what I think about it either way.
Before you go off calling me racially insensitive or anything else, please understand that this issue goes beyond immigration and assimilation of immigrants into American culture. This is a safety issue. Giving someone legal permission to drive, knowing they cannot read the road signs and warning signs, is putting that person in danger, as well as anyone else near them on the road. This is irresponsible and is a major failure of a core competency of any state government that allows it to happen.
Hats off to Tim James for shedding light on this issue in Alabama.
I have done a little research, and found that Texas gives the drivers' exam in English and Spanish. I have lived in Texas for most of my life, and have never seen a road sign in Spanish, so right away, I see a problem.
Kudos to the 9 states who only give the exam in English: Arizona, Hawaii, Kansas, Maine, New Hampshire, South Dakota, Oklahoma (changed last year to English only), Utah and Wyoming.
Biggest offenders (the leader and runner up here are no shock): California (32 languages), Massachusetts (25 languages) and Kentucky (23 languages). Kentucky surprised me.
California offers drivers exams in 32 languages, including: Amharic, Arabic, Armenian, Cambodian, Chinese, English, Farsi, French, German, Greek, Hebrew, Hindi, Hmong, Hungarian, Indonesian, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Laotian, Polish, Portuguese, Punjabi, Rumanian, Russian, Samoan, Serbo-Croatian, Spanish, Tagalog, Thai, Tongan, Turkish, and Vietnamese.
Check these and other states HERE.
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Monday, March 22, 2010
The pieces were all in place yesterday for conservative victory.....a united Republican party, with "principled", "pro-life" Democrats joining in opposition to what probably amounts to the most disastrous piece of legislation in at least 50 years: the bill we know as "Obamacare".
As we should have expected, Rep. Bart Stupak(D-Mich.), who led the coalition of "pro-life" Democrats in opposition to this bill due to its providing of federal funds for elective abortions, cut a deal that would allow him and his cohorts to vote with their party, and hence vote AGAINST their constituents, including those still in the womb. The "deal" is basically that Obama issued an executive order ensuring that no federal funding will go to pay for abortion under the health reform plans. In addition, Stupak got to state his concerns about abortion funding in the bill on the House floor during the debate.
This is a complete charade.......a total joke. First of all, everyone knows that an executive order does nothing in this situation, and can be rescinded by Obama or any other president on a whim. Secondly, and more importantly, this represents something that disgusts me today in congressional politics. Democrats are perfectly aware that most of their constituents did not want this bill passed into law, and many individual congressmen knew that going on record with a vote for this legislation would jeopardize or ruin their chances at reelection. So what happens from there is a dance that is done for the public to see, which allows the congressman to appear to be in opposition, then finally seeing the light to change his position at the last minute. He is then presented as "courageous" or "heroic".
Then there is the dance during the actual casting of the votes. If you've ever watched votes cast on the House floor on C-Span, you may notice that many times there are many "holdouts". There's a column on the far right that shows votes not cast. How, after 15 minutes, of voting, could there be someone who hasn't voted. We know they have already decided. These are the congressmen who are waiting. They are waiting for the outcome to be decided, so that they can't be labeled as having cast "the deciding vote". Many times it's even worse, and they are waiting for the outcome to be decided, so they can safely cast a vote in opposition, to appear to be voting the will of their constituency. This timing is predetermined, and is an outright deceit of the public. These legislators, who are representing districts in which they would be crucified for voting with the party, are strategically allowed to hold out til the end. They'll vote with the party if they must, but once the deciding vote has been cast, they can vote in a way that protects them during election time.
Stupak and his "pro-life" Democrats are the worst of this kind. They have run as "pro-life", and their constituency expects them to vote that way. If they don't, they will be voted out of office and they know it. Therefore, they put on a massive, weeks-long charade in defense of the unborn, only to execute an orchestrated "cave-in" at the 11th hour, abandoning the unborn, and joining Pelosi and the undead in passage of what will prove to be a job-killing, economy-killing, baby-killing bill. Appropriately, Bart Stupak was stripped of a "Defender of Life Award" he was to receive on Wednesday night. I'm guessing he'll be stripped of another title come November.
Saturday, February 20, 2010
I've had a cup of coffee, and haven't even read the paper yet. Just been poking around on Facebook and enjoying the SILENCE.
My wife is having this cool treatment now called "myofascial release". It seems to be a Godsend, and is helping her tremendously. We are trying to figure out a way to get her some intensive therapy to accelerate her progress.
The global warming apocalyptos continue to find themselves on an ever sinking ship, and this makes me very happy. I have always known this to be a complete scam, and now it's being exposed for just that. Just in time to hopefully save us from destructive cap/trade legislation. Of course, our brilliant president has doubled down on his climate change position, just like he did with his failed healthcare efforts. He is so beholden to his left-wing base that he can't budge, even when the facts are crystal clear that the "science" was all based on fraud. What a joke this Obama has become, which is no surprise to me. American hero Dick Cheney this week predicted Obama would be a one-term president, and I agree.
Caught up with an old friend from college this week on Facebook, and had lots of laughs. Probably will play some tennis this afternoon, then going to Parker, Texas tonight to meet up with some more old friends from college. Should be a fun evening of reliving some great memories.
Sunday, February 7, 2010
January 25th, 1981 is permanently embedded in my mind. When I watched the video linked above, everything about that day came roaring back.
I was 11 years old, and had been living in the same neighborhood, with the same kids for most of my life in South Arlington, Texas. One of those neighborhood friends was Heather. She was one of my first friends in Texas. My first dog was even the brother of her dog. I think they had been picked up as strays. Heather's family had recently moved out of the neighborhood, to a house on some land, with stables for their horses. There was a trail through their land that led back to our neighborhood.
On January 25th, 1981...it was the day of the Super Bowl (Eagles/Raiders), my dad took me out for a ride on his motorcycle. After about 15-20 minutes, we were down near that trail that led to Heather's house. It was Heather's birthday, and my dad asked if I wanted to ride down that trail to her house. We decided instead to go home and watch the Super Bowl.
Later that day, we heard of the tragedy. Heather's older brother Trey, and Kevin Curnutt (profiled in the video above), were riding their dirtbikes home from Rush Creek Christian Church, down that same trail, and the man that lived in the home next to the trail ambushed them with a shotgun from behind a shed. I never knew Kevin well, but I had known Trey for most of my life. Trey did not survive. For 29 years, I cannot even think of January 25th without thinking of Heather, and what emotion she must have every year on her birthday, what must cross her mind when she hears the words "happy birthday", every January 25th. I have wondered ever since what would have happened if my dad and I had decided to drive down that trail to wish Heather a happy birthday.