Rebane's Ruminations
January 2013
S M T W T F S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

ARCHIVES


OUR LINKS


YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

George Rebane

Debt is an injustice imposed on borrowers by greedy lenders who do not deserve to be repaid – from the liberal mind.

Forbes has identified eleven states that are in an economic “death spiral”.  These are the pictured states whose taker/maker ratios equal or exceed 1.00, states where takers are the government employees and welfare recipients, and makers are those who are taxed to pay for the takers.

TakerMakerMap
This list of shame reads New Mexico 1.53, Mississippi 1.49, California 1.39, Alabama 1.10, Maine 1.07, New York 1.07, South Carolina 1.06, Kentucky 1.05, Illinois 1.03, Hawaii 1.02, and Ohio 1.00.  From this we see that California has 1.39 takers for every diminishing maker in the state.  [H/T to regular reader for the heads up on this.]

Victor Davis Hanson is keeping a stiff upper lip as he reports the goings on in the once golden state.

Not just in its finances but almost wherever you look, the state’s vital signs are dipping. The average unemployment rate hovers above 10 percent. In the reading and math tests administered by the National Assessment of Educational Progress, California students rank near the bottom of the country, though their teachers earn far more than the average American teacher does. California’s penal system is the largest in the United States, with more than 165,000 inmates. Some studies estimate that the state prisons and county jails house more than 30,000 illegal aliens at a cost of $1 billion or more each year. Speaking of which: California has the nation’s largest population of illegal aliens, on whom it spends an estimated $10 billion annually in entitlements. The illegals also deprive the Golden State’s economy of billions of dollars every year by sending remittances to Latin America.

For those wanting more than a little depth on this entire issue, Nicholas Eberstadt has written an analysis that pulls together the magnitude of the disease our country is afflicted with in his A Nation of Takers – America’s Entitlements Epidemic (2012).

The government statistics he quotes that document our behavior over the last 50 years or so are devastating.  Many of them have also been presented on RR, and, of course, duly rejected by our leftwing neighbors.  Eberstadt cites that 98% of Americans over 65 receive SS and Medicare payments. But what is more shocking is that in 1960 only 0.65% of 18-64 year olds were receiving SS disability payments, and that number today has swollen to almost 6%.  And well over a third of these are getting checks for “musculoskeletal and connective tissue” maladies and “mood disorders” – clearly the nation has discovered and is exploiting a new commons and getting while the getting is good.

The problem, it appears, is that once the government spigot is put in place and turned on, there is little chance of stopping people from demanding more spigots flowing at ever greater rates.  Contributor to the book, Yuval Levin notes that “Liberal democracy has always depended upon a kind of person it does not produce.”  These stark factors that now describe the landscape of American propensities have formed the basis of my own established assessment that we are beyond the tipping point that forebodes failure in the great experiment of our ability to govern ourselves.  And by no means is this a solitary vision of our future.

Meanwhile the looney Left denies all of this, and with supermajorities in both houses in Sacramento, you ain’t seen nothing yet when it comes to taxing and regulating the state’s Makers.

 

 

Posted in , ,

202 responses to “Takers vs Makers”

  1. Paul Emery Avatar

    Scott Obermuller | 10 January 2013 at 12:37 PM
    “no one wants to pollute a stream with human waste ”
    Not true Scott.
    It took government intervention to mitigate the effects of industrial pollution in Lake Erie. Blame the polluters for creating the need for government intervention.
    “By the 1960s, Lake Erie had become extremely polluted, in part due to the heavy industry that lined its shores in Cleveland and other cities. Factories dumped pollutants into the lake and the waterways that flowed into it (like the Cuyahoga River) without much government oversight. Waste from city sewers made its way into the lake too, as did fertilizer and pesticides from agricultural runoff.
    As a result of these pollutants, Lake Erie contained increased levels of phosphorus and nitrogen, which contributed to eutrophication – a process that encourages the development of algal blooms. Dead fish littered the shoreline as a lack of oxygen in the water led to massive fish kills. Episodes like this led to the coining of the phrase – more sensational than factual – “Lake Erie is dead,” which started to appear in national publications in the late 1960s.”
    http://clevelandhistorical.org/items/show/58

    Like

  2. TheyMikeyMcD Avatar
    TheyMikeyMcD

    “First they came for the gun owners, and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a gun owner… then they came for ‘THE RICH’ and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t rich…”

    Like

  3. George Rebane Avatar

    PaulE 1143am – The distinctions are large and obvious beyond discussion; give it a try yourself.
    134pm – Our rivers and streams became commons for waste disposal way before the industrial age. That they weren’t polluted was due to Garrett Hardin’s observation that ‘The solution to pollution is dilution.’ But dilution only works when you don’t violate the carrying capacity of the commons. Those commons began to be violated by many types of agents beginning approximately after WW1. But as Hardin also taught, there are many ways that government can remove the commons ranging from draconian regulations and enforcement to enlightened regulations that allow distributed corrections and self-enforcement. Scumbag politicians always favor the former for re-election purposes.
    RyanM 134pm – “…the Green Libertarian would argue that a sustainable, clean environment is as important, if not more as a free and transparent marketplace.” And therein lies another ideological conundrum – to the extent that we diminish our free and transparent marketplace, to that extent and more we diminish our ability to maintain a sustainably clean environment. Only countries and jurisdictions that generate discretionary wealth are able to afford what the light-thinking Green Libertarian would mandate.

    Like

  4. Paul Emery Avatar

    George
    Excuse my dumbness but can you refresh me as to why the agreements of employment between Military workers and civilian workers have different criteria for fulfillment of promises?
    George
    I used Lake Erie as a response to Scotts contention that “no one wants to pollute a stream with human waste.” My position remains unchallenged.

    Like

  5. George Rebane Avatar

    PaulE 224pm – I may be prejudiced beyond recall, but to the extent that the compensation, work conditions, and pension plans for civilian government workers have been negotiated between rapacious public sector unions and corrupt politicians, they are not of the same category of obligation for me as a taxpayer to bear the burden. None of the parties to those agreements, always made in ‘executive session’ negotiations’ (aka dark of night) represented me or my interests. Tens of millions of taxpayers are of the same mind.
    To differentiate, what we got from those agreements was a government workforce predominated by private sector rejects and professional leeches who know how to play the public service game. The resulting contracts have driven jurisdictions across the land into untold levels of unfunded liabilities and Chapter 9 proceedings. We suffer for not heeding FDR’s depression era warnings about the so-called public service unions.
    Our all volunteer military is of a totally different caliber of people who continue to demonstrate a professionalism and constitutional proficiency (to secure the nation) that is a world class leader. Not in the ‘care’ of rapacious unions, their compensation has always lagged the federal pay scales.
    Will these categories of work contracts have “different criteria for fulfillment of promises?” De juris, NO. De facto, YES because 1) the civilian worker pension liabilities are at levels that cannot be retired, and 2) the taxpayers will revolt before paying the tax rates required to fulfill those union-negotiated contracts. That which cannot be paid will not be paid.

    Like

  6. Russ Steele Avatar

    Paul@2:24PM
    Paul,
    I am a 20 year retired Air Force Officer. I went through Aviation Cadet training and was commissioned as a Lt in the Air Force Reserves. After six years of outstanding service, early promotion, etc. I was offered a Commission in the Regular Air Force, assuring me at least 20 year to retirement if I did not commit a capital crime. My friend Mike came through ROTC and he was commission in the AF Reserve. He was not offered a regular commission and at 16 year into his AF career he was told they no longer need his services. Out he went no retirement. He did however live near an AF Base with a Reserve Unit and complete 30 year of service and a retirement check.
    I think it is hard to just layoff a federal worker at 16 years, with no retirement benefits, unless they have participate in some capital criminal activity. And, maybe not then.

    Like

  7. Scott Obermuller Avatar

    Ryan – we’re going to have to agree to disagree. There is no way in my mind to square the term ‘libertarian’ and ‘social justice’ or ‘libertarian’ and mandated ‘green’ policies. There is nothing ‘sustainable’ about any of the govt mandated edicts that I’ve seen from the greens. They will (are going to) absolutely collapse our economy.
    Social justice is all about govt meddling in the free market and that is 180 degrees from libertarian thinking. There are a lot of folks that tried to get their own renewable energy projects going and were stopped by govt policies. The govt is the enemy of truly ‘green’ policies. The worst ecological disasters in the world were in countries that had govts with massive power over the people. ‘Smart’ growth is another big loser from the greens. Since when does the govt have the power to force people to live in little boxes crammed in the city? And that is exactly what the ‘greens’ openly espouse. And the socialists love that kind of crap as well. In the end, social justice is just communism with a kinder face. It still turns out just as bad, because anytime you have the govt picking winners and losers, some one has to decide the outcome and have the power to enforce it. And what do you know, but the ‘deciders’ end up deciding they should have more than anyone else. Sorry – free market capitalism is not perfect, but it’s just way better than anything else that’s come down the pike. The greenest policies in the end are free market policies. I love to hear about folks thinking that there must be a better, new way and it’s never really new or better. We either have more freedom or less. More freedom is not Eden or Heaven. It is always saddled with problems. It comes with added work and responsibilities. But it’s far better than any alternative. History has shown us that.

    Like

  8. Scott Obermuller Avatar

    re Paul at 2:24 – “My position remains unchallenged.” What the hell is your position? I’m not sure that you even can keep track.

    Like

  9. Ryan Mount Avatar

    Scott-
    First Off, I’m not advocating anything in particular. I just happen to have sympathies for these movements…to a point.
    Real Leftish Libertarians are very rare in this country for a variety of reasons. If said factions involve the State, they’re usually Social Democrats or Progressives. I think Federal Central Planning is inherently evil and destructive.

    here is nothing ‘sustainable’ about any of the govt mandated edicts that I’ve seen from the greens.
    I agree. My form of green politicking generally involves attacking the government and it’s cronies for damage. (see my comment regarding Hawaii above where the government is destroying native food stores with the help of their environmental NGOs and Multi-national Agri-businesses) We have an relatively strong court system here as you mentioned above to handle such things. My point is Left Libertarian-ism activism has much more traction in the developing world as per my Chevron/Ecuador comments above. In governments that are highly corrupt (or weak), grass-roots environmental activism makes more sense. And is very dangerous and born typically out of desperation.
    Social justice is all about govt meddling in the free market and that is 180 degrees from libertarian thinking.
    Yes, in countries such as ours it certainly serves no or little purpose other than to make white middle class people feel like they’re making a difference in paying someone’s iPhone bill. It’s necessary, but not nearly in its current scope.
    social justice is just communism with a kinder face
    Communism and Centrally Controlled State Communism are two distinct precepts. There are people who live quite happy and healthy lives all over the world in quasi Communism communities. The garish and screwed-up former Eastern Block variety is quite different.
    it’s far better than any alternative
    Totally agree.

    Like

  10. Paul Emery Avatar

    Scott
    My position is of course that some people do indeed knowingly pee in the water if they can get away with it. As far as environmental compliance to do the right think do you think for a minute hydrolic gold miners the sierra would have voluntarily quit without government orders?

    Like

  11. Scott Obermuller Avatar

    Paul – There is a gigantic difference between peeing in a stream and a massive flow of toxic waste into a large body of water. Actually, if I found out that someone was peeing in a stream that ran through my property, I wouldn’t care a bit. It would help our discussions here if you would be a bit more forthright and not so obtuse. When large industries started dumping waste in the rivers and lakes, no one cared. In the 1860’s everyone all over the world dumped everything into whatever body of water was available. As time went on, there was an uneven change in opinion as to how much it hurt the lakes and rivers and even as to whether there was even a problem. Your blind spot is that you think everyone is in full agreement about what constitutes harm to the environment. The hydraulic mining would have been shut down one way or the other. It wasn’t the Sierra Club that went to court, it was the cities of Marysville and Yuba City that were upset because all of the sediment was settling down around their towns and causing flooding in the spring. They would have used violence to settle it if the courts hadn’t ruled in the cities’ favor. By the way – whom do we sue for all of the debris that washed down out of the Grand Canyon?
    “As far as environmental compliance to do the right thing” I see that you have been named Pope Paul and are issuing edicts as to what is the “right” thing. Preach it, brother! Thump that holy book! Paul knows what is “right”. You will find, brother Paul, that there is a big world out there with a multitude of ideas as to what is “right’.

    Like

  12. Michael Anderson Avatar
    Michael Anderson

    Scott opined: “I just think that trying to call yourself a green/progressive and then also trying to call yourself a libertarian is far beyond ‘nuance’…”
    and then Paul wrote: “The true libertarian is the one who acts responsibly and in everyone’s common interest and prevents government intrusion.”
    What Paul said.

    Like

  13. Scott Obermuller Avatar

    re M Anderson’s post at 7:08 – Who gets to decide what is ‘responsible’ and who gets to decide what is in ‘everyone’s common interest’? What sort of ‘actions’ are you talking about? The way you prevent govt intrusion, dear sirs, is to elect folks that will follow the Constitution, such as Ron Paul. Voting for a Green Party or progressive pol will result in increased govt intrusion. You cannot have it both ways.

    Like

  14. Paul Emery Avatar

    Scott
    To respond to your expostulation of 4:27 I must quote Plato
    “good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws”
    Scott, I know this is difficult for you but here’s more Plato
    “We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light.”
    Also Socrates
    “To be able to know or choose the right rule, two types of goodness are required: goodness of character (moral goodness) and goodness of intellect.”
    Aristotle goes on to say that the morally weak are aware of the correct rule but do not possess the fortitude to follow it. The wicked, on the other hand, deliberately choose the wrong rule

    Like

  15. Scott Obermuller Avatar

    I take it that neither Paul nor Michael can answer my questions. Paul simply repeats himself. It’s all blather. Go knock on any door in town and inquire if the good folks inside feel they are acting responsibly. Amazingly, everyone is! So, no more laws and no more govt! Good work, Paul. After all of this, we are back to square one. If you all on the left were farmers and grew crops as you make arguments, you would starve.

    Like

  16. Michael Anderson Avatar
    Michael Anderson

    Scott, I don’t know how much more clear we can be. We’re green/progressive but want people to clean up their own messes and be responsible for themselves. It’s an ethic, a moral code if you will. But if a person or group fails to protect the commons on their own, then the gov’t we elected as a locale, state, or nation must step in to prevent damage. Does that help?

    Like

  17. George Rebane Avatar

    Re MichaelA’s 719am – commons are inevitably destroyed, only at different rates depending on their growth of their consuming populations. Having a commons maintained by the gun is the least enlightened way to attempt its salvation. That is for two reasons, 1) the guns multiply and begin managing more and more of the commonwealth in non-productive ways, and 2) the guns come into our private lives to manage what we do there also. The enlightened way is to change stressed commons into assets that are controlled in the most local and distributed means possible (see Garrett’s example of using the Mississippi for a drinking water source). Today conservatives seem to be the only ones who know that. The Left just wants to expand Leviathan.

    Like

  18. Paul Emery Avatar
    Paul Emery

    Scott
    Here’s one for you about the environmental responsibility of living on earth
    Leviticus 25:23-24
    The land must not be sold permanently, because the land is mine and you are but aliens and my tenants. Throughout the country that you hold as a possession, you must provide for the redemption of the land

    Like

  19. Scott Obermuller Avatar

    Now the left is quoting the bible. Gotta love it.
    re M Anderson at 7:19 – Oh, I get it. I got it a long time ago. It’s you on the left that can’t understand. ” but want people to clean up their own messes and be responsible for themselves.”
    I want that too. The rub comes when we get down to what constitutes a “mess” and who gets to decide the actions necessary to be considered “responsible”. It seems to be sailing right over your heads that folks have vastly different views on the subject.
    I am taking care of my property and it isn’t a mess. So, why are there all of these govt agencies on my back? It doesn’t seem to be working as you claim.

    Like

  20. Ken Jones Avatar
    Ken Jones

    Scott we all know the right are the only true believers and followers of the Bible. Didn’t know God took political sides. Pure sanctimonious bs.

    Like

  21. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    No time to read through the very predictable responses but think the upside down thinking of the modern “conservative” mind that puts those who benefit off the labor of others somehow are the makers while those who actual toil are the takers.
    There is no disputing the fact that it is labor that creates or makes wealth/ value. Those who take initial risk over time become the takers while those they employ are actually the makers.
    If people want more workers to pay income taxes than lets pay workers enough to qualify to pay income taxes. I pay as a self employed person more percentage in FICA alone than Romney pays in total percentage. Romney is a taker in the worst way, he is a vulture capitalist that buys out companies, dumps the debt from the purchase onto the company and its workers and then after the workers pay the debt off the company is then disassembled and sold off with the profit going to Romney.
    Bernie Sanders (I) VT top ten tax dodgers or takers.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CUUA8g3DPw

    Like

  22. George Rebane Avatar

    BenE 1152am – Perhaps a more careful read “through the very predictable responses” would have helped.
    No one has posited that workers in a wealth producing enterprise are takers (did your Marxist blinders get in the way of that?).
    It also sounds as if you may be a proponent of the flat tax. If so, that’s a refreshing revelation.
    In the aggregate, Romney et al saved and created more jobs than the leftwing trumpets cite that they eliminated. But that is an aspect of capitalistic free enterprise that is invisible to the liberal mind. More formally, it is the part “not seen” as explained most lucidly by Bastiat over 150 years ago.
    http://bastiat.org/en/twisatwins.html

    Like

  23. Gregory Avatar

    Paul stated, and MA seconded, the idea that “The true libertarian is the one who acts responsibly and in everyone’s common interest and prevents government intrusion.”
    PJ O’Rourke’s two rules of government is the most succinct statement of libertarian principles I’ve seen:
    “There are just two rules of governance in a free society: Mind your own business. Keep your hands to yourself.”
    Given the year, he added in explanation (in a Cato Institute address), “Keep your hands to yourself, Bill. Hillary, mind your own business.”
    I think Paul is confusing libertarianism with communitarianism, which has a focus on the common interest, or community, unlike libertarianism where the focus is on individual liberty, to mind your own business as long as you keep your fingers out of your neighbor’s.
    “Green” and “Progressive” libertarians seem all too ready to use the powers of the state to coerce others to bow to the “common interest” they hold dear. That’s not very libertarian.

    Like

  24. Scott Obermuller Avatar

    re Ken Jones at 10:53 – You miss the point completely, sir. When the conservatives ever bring up Christian views and values as to their relevance to a topic involving the govt, we are shouted down as ‘bible thumpers’ and trying to impose our narrow views on others. We are told to keep our views to ourselves and that religion has no place in the conversation. Then the left starts quoting the bible. That’s hypocrisy.
    It goes on all the time in politics. Democrats love to campaign in churches during regular Sunday services, and talk about how they believe Jesus would want them to enact certain laws. Then they decry the ‘intrusion’ of the religious right into politics. The phoney “wall of separation between church and state” seems only to apply to conservatives. When it suits the left, they trot out men of the cloth to back them up every time they can. I never intended to imply that God takes sides in politics. I’d just like to know when we start playing by the same rules.

    Like

  25. Paul Emery Avatar

    Yeah Scott
    The Bible is pretty much llke the Constitution, you can go to it with any preconceived belief and find scriptures to support your beliefs. Iraq war, Homeland Security Act Constitutional? No problem for the Repubs. Bomb children with Drones? No problem for the Thumpers and Dems. “………..you must provide for the redemption of the land” no problem unless I want to make a buck off it then I’ll rip it to the bedrock and leave it bare.

    Like

  26. Scott Obermuller Avatar

    Paul, if you want to pick and choose the devil can quote the Bible. The Constitution is like the Bible in that it has a central theme that runs through it. That theme is clear in both instances. You are free to twist that theme to your heart’s content. Of course you can pick and choose what you want to believe from any book you pick up. Please don’t start throwing the actions of the Rs in my face as I’m not a R and don’t like a lot of what they do. When did I advocate – “make a buck off it then I’ll rip it to the bedrock and leave it bare”.? You are now off into fabrication land. Try to stay in the realm of reality, Paul.

    Like

  27. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    George,
    Maybe it is you that has the blinders on by writing a post that is titled “Makers vs Takers”. I took the traditional meaning of the term/ meme. I stopped trying to read your posts because they are filled with 85% circular logic and 15% substance hidden in academia vernacular that is steeped in extreme right wing ideology. Its a waste of my time. But what I find is that most of these conversations take on the shape of the mainstream pundits that are part of the establishment and powers that be along with their talking points/agenda. When we accept the establishments narrative on almost any issue we are just pissing in the wind because it is formulated to concentrate on our differences and ignore our commonalities. These commonalities would threaten those who control the levers of power and their wealth. You my friend are a master at concentrating on our differences, thus are a tool of the establishment and want to continue the status quo. Most people who are driven by selfishness want to keep the status quo if they are doing alright despite all of the other people who are doing poorly.
    Flat Tax on luxury Items only then I will be in but a flat tax on daily items is the most regressive tax that could be implemented.
    We need to move away from promoting consumption on a finite planet as the main driver for an economy, especially with half the planets population moving into the developed world. The economy will sustain itself if we change our way of measuring it but if we continue to measure it by growth only we will continue to experience peak and trough cycles. We are on one a one way street to self annihilation.

    Like

  28. Paul Emery Avatar

    Scott
    My diversion to biblical and philosophical quotes intended to put a historical perspective on my contention that the true Libertarians are those who live responsibly and within the limits that a sustainable lifestyle provides. This makes government intrusion unnecessary Phoney Libertarians are those whose main concerns are centered on “me and my stuff”. Don’t take it personal unless you want to.

    Like

  29. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    George,
    To finish my thought on you being used as a tool by repeating mainstream pundits talking points and memes. As far as a know you’re not even being paid for your devote service in promoting the agenda of the establishment. This establishment would be equivalent to the powers that the American Revolutionaries/ Insurgents/ Terrorist fought against.
    Those who call themselves political commentators that dominate corporate media do so because they are earning a very good living by doing so. Makers vs Takers is a corporate narrative pushed by think tanks and big business that promotes keeping the status quo. Those with power invest 7 days a week 24 hours a day at keeping their wealth and power but only when ordinary people push back it is called “Class Warfare”. I guess when their is no push back it should just be called corporate despotism or Fascism. They figured out the best way to achieve this is by multi pronged approach of buying off government and massive PR marketing. A quote by one of your favorites Upton Sinclair that goes to show no matter how things seem to change they stay the same.
    “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” Upton Sinclair
    It has always been that way and will always be that way, less than 2% of the worlds population dominate the worlds policies and equality gap never seems to be filled for long term because those who have done alright will oppress those below them so they will not lose what they perceive as their hard earned gains, which were only created by opportunities they now seek to take from the others. You are a perfect example of this idea. Public schools, government jobs and contracts, access to affordable public universities, ect.. but you continuously write in RR about taking these very same opportunities from other people.
    When we only repeat the agenda of the status quo we become irrelevant because we are blind to the real issues at hand.

    Like

  30. George Rebane Avatar

    BenE 1020am – thank you for that thoughtful and civil criticism of RR. But my takeaway is a conundrum. For years I have been accused by the Left as a lonely and somewhat deranged voice in these mountains, foisting solitary positions that are beyond any ideological fringe. Now you accuse me of being simply an echo chamber for established and sinister rightwing interests.
    I contend that I hold intellectually defendable and well-defended tenets of an amalgamated ideology that I call conservetarian, an ideology that blends ideas from conservative and classical liberal (libertarian) thought. And as a quick perusal of these pages will reveal, I almost always lead the national media with my interpretative commentary on major happenings; usually by hours or a day, sometimes even by weeks if not longer (as examples my ideas on par force are just now beginning to gain some recognition from commentators, and the Bayesian basis for discrimination and prejudice are still unknown in the media world). Nevertheless, I do also weigh in on other people’s opinions with my own peculiar take, and cite them as I do so.
    Were I really as you judge me, there would be no profit in your or anyone else’s commenting and debating on these pages. There are many other more prominent blogs where your ideological labors would then bear more abundant and visible fruit. If the ideas and their dissection there is the same or even better, why tarry?
    All that said, I continue to welcome your visits to RR, and the perspectives you bring to the topics discussed.

    Like

  31. Ken Jones Avatar
    Ken Jones

    No Scott I didn’t miss the point. I am not a Democrat but you are quick to infer that only Democrats have issues with the use of the Bible in political context. I know both liberals and conservatives that view the Bible as the text of God, not a book to be used as a political pawn. I find many conservatives that like to quote the Bible when they feel it would help their politics yet fail to live by the values within the book. Liberals too. The hypocrisy in this argument is one side believing they are more moral than the other. I have a huge issue with those who are morally flexible depending on current politics.

    Like

  32. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    George,
    There is very little profit to be had commenting on these pages outside a person self satisfaction.
    You have either given in or have never understood that you’re a stooge for the republican party leadership. If you truly wanted to create the change you present on these pages then you would abandon the republican party because they are 100% corrupted by those who put their profits over your liberties and freedoms. The democratic party is just as corrupt and do the same to those who blindly or willingly vote for their leadership as well. We have a government that is, for, and by big business, which is not in the best interests of the nation or those of us who live in it.

    Like

  33. George Rebane Avatar

    BenE 226pm – You’re welcome.

    Like

  34. Paul Emery Avatar

    True Ben
    It’s the crack in the cathedral to claim to be a Conservative intellectual and yet show such naivete when it comes to party allegiance. It totally discredits the integrity of the opinion when, for example, Obama is accused for abuse of power for various things and Reagan’s role in Iran Contra is shrugged off with a “you gotta do what you gotta do” attitude. The hens come home to roost when the sun goes down.

    Like

  35. George Rebane Avatar

    JesusB 1020am – thanks for the link. Reuters does indeed put a good spin on all news progressive. But you should see this week’s big spread in The Economist re the marked right turn that all Nordic countries have taken, and are continuing on as we speak. That prestigious newspaper has belatedly discovered what’s been reported for years on RR – that their entitlement and social programs are not sustainable (Norway being the slowest to go broke because it has offshore oil reserves that are vast for a country of 4M souls.)

    Like

  36. Paul Emery Avatar

    George
    Is this the article you refer to from this weeks Economist? Seems quite complimentary to me as something that is likely to be emulated.
    http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21571136-politicians-both-right-and-left-could-learn-nordic-countries-next-supermodel
    “That is partly because the four main Nordics—Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Finland—are doing rather well. If you had to be reborn anywhere in the world as a person with average talents and income, you would want to be a Viking. The Nordics cluster at the top of league tables of everything from economic competitiveness to social health to happiness. They have avoided both southern Europe’s economic sclerosis and America’s extreme inequality………he main lesson to learn from the Nordics is not ideological but practical. The state is popular not because it is big but because it works. A Swede pays tax more willingly than a Californian because he gets decent schools and free health care. The Nordics have pushed far-reaching reforms past unions and business lobbies. The proof is there. You can inject market mechanisms into the welfare state to sharpen its performance. You can put entitlement programmes on sound foundations to avoid beggaring future generations. But you need to be willing to root out corruption and vested interests. And you must be ready to abandon tired orthodoxies of the left and right and forage for good ideas across the political spectrum. The world will be studying the Nordic model for years to come.

    Like

  37. Gregory Avatar

    Paul, you found social Democrat friendly quotes, let’s look at the meat of the article:
    “Taxes have been cut: the corporate rate is 22%, far lower than America’s. The Nordics have focused on balancing the books. While Mr Obama and Congress dither over entitlement reform, Sweden has reformed its pension system (see Free exchange). Its budget deficit is 0.3% of GDP; America’s is 7%… On public services the Nordics have been similarly pragmatic. So long as public services work, they do not mind who provides them. Denmark and Norway allow private firms to run public hospitals. Sweden has a universal system of school vouchers, with private for-profit schools competing with public schools. Denmark also has vouchers—but ones that you can top up. When it comes to choice, Milton Friedman would be more at home in Stockholm than in Washington, DC.”
    Not a haven for teachers and schools that don’t teach, imagine that.

    Like

  38. Paul Emery Avatar

    Of course I saw that Gregory. What I didn’t see was any indication they are going broke and heading for bayonets in the streets as George likes to take things. “Norway being the slowest to go broke”
    I’ve always advocated that there is a necessary push and pull between both sides that creates healthy options and the Economist agrees. the article gives no indication they are going to abandon their national health care systems for example.

    Like

  39. Gregory Avatar

    George, it’s often difficult to get what the people of another country really think about their own institutions, but Norway and NYC have something of a cross cultural comedy that does a great job of poking fun at their petty bureaucrats and their overbearing ways. “Lillyhammer” was originally a Norwegian sitcom idea that sometime Sopranos actor (and E Street Band guitarist) Steven Van Zandt became involved with as the star.
    Available on Netflix. We got hooked and are awaiting the second season’s episodes. The treatment of the decent but overbearing Police chief mooching goodies at a citizen’s table while confiscating the rifle in the room lest they be tempted to hunt the wolf who had killed a child’s sheep was telling, was was the Employment Department functionary who misused their position in a number of ways. Even petty power corrupts.
    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1958961/

    Like

  40. George Rebane Avatar

    PaulE 231pm – It would be naive to expect a public announcement of abandoning a long standing national healthcare system. It won’t happen – ever. Instead, as I have argued, the services will suffer a thousand cuts. Any program which demands an ever increasing share of the budget is not sustainable. Things not sustainable will not be sustained (you can write that down). The Economist also makes it clear that for the last 20 years all Nordics have been turning to the right to solve their social and economic problems – for such solutions socialism provided the chirping of crickets.
    Thanks for the tip Greg (237pm).

    Like

  41. Paul Emery Avatar

    So the Economist got it wrong when they wrote
    “The proof is there. You can inject market mechanisms into the welfare state to sharpen its performance. You can put entitlement programmes on sound foundations to avoid beggaring future generations.”

    Like

  42. Paul Emery Avatar

    George
    To put it simple the Nordic countries have no intention to abandon their national health care programs. That’s your editorial opinion and not from this article
    Gregory
    Here’s some insights on what Corporations actually pay in taxes
    “A comprehensive study released on Thursday found that 280 of the biggest publicly traded American companies faced federal income tax bills equal to 18.5 percent of their profits during the last three years — little more than half the official corporate rate of 35 percent and lower than their competitors in many industrialized countries……American corporations are paying a smaller share of taxes than in previous decades. They paid a total of $191 billion in federal income taxes in 2010, the Internal Revenue Service said, representing about 1.3 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product. That is down from about 6 percent during the 1950s (although some of the decline is because a smaller percentage of businesses now file as corporations). ”
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/03/business/280-big-public-firms-paid-little-us-tax-study-finds.html?_r=0

    Like

  43. George Rebane Avatar

    PaulE 245pm – we don’t know whether The Economist is right or not in its pronouncement. No one has yet to put in place an entitlement program that doesn’t wind up eating an increasing share of the national budget. When we find one that satisfies the beneficiaries and is at least stable, then we can see a ray of hope. Please don’t misunderstand, I have never said that such an entitlement (redistribution) program cannot be found. Instead, I have recommended a very large one myself. But I can say with complete confidence that no declared socialist political party will ever emplace a sustainable entitlement program.

    Like

  44. Gregory Avatar

    Paul, I await your thoughts on injecting market mechanisms into Education in California.
    Regarding healthcare, we abandoned the free market in the US beginning in WWII when the unintended side effect of income tax law began our long march to employer provided health care, where the individual has little control over just what is being purchased or for how much. Obamacare makes it worse.

    Like

  45. Paul Emery Avatar

    But George isn’t that what the Economist article implies? (sustainable entitlement program)

    Like

  46. Paul Emery Avatar

    Gregory 3:03 PM
    That’s one of my favorite topics. I am a strong supporter of Charter Schools and a type of Voucher system. For example the Yuba Charter School and School for the Arts are thriving in Nevada County while most schools are suffering from declining enrollment. That’s because parents are offered a choice. I can be convinced about vouchers to private schools if the voucher amount was the total tuition.
    A good question is how do we evaluate school success? Most testing systems are government mandated and managed and that certainly takes away an independent look at their success especially if we were to use vouchers to fund tuition to private schools. As a strong supporter of Waldorf education I believe strongly in what Rudolf Steiner writes that education is a function of a culture not the government.

    Like

  47. George Rebane Avatar

    PaulE 338pm – The implication is there, but the supportive data doesn’t exist. And a more careful reading of the article’s (editorial’s) conclusion tells the reader that, in spite of these positive results, to “sharpen” the performance of the welfare state require that the govt is “willing to root out corruption and vested interests.” Such efforts are hard to come by, especially in governments willing to do neither.
    The larger follow-on survey article in The Economist tells us that the successes the Nordics achieve is primarily due to their focus on quantitative results, and not on pursuing ideological shibboleths which are the norm in progressive America.
    But with all the good stuff we can learn from the Nordics, they still have the most serious of socio-economic problems, they don’t have a wealth creating system that can sustain their growth and cultural diversification (which is an incipient disaster). The Economist summarizes, “Despite all of its entrepreneurial energy, the Nordic region still finds it hard to turn start-ups into enduring companies.”

    Like

  48. Gregory Avatar

    “I can be convinced about vouchers to private schools if the voucher amount was the total tuition.”
    Paul, at the moment, in California, payments to charter schools don’t even get close to the total subsidies that the main public schools get. All your “total tuition” proscription does is ensure the most expensive private schools (that may or may not be better) are out of the reach of the middle classes.
    The Yuba River Charter does have its proponents, and I can understand why such a community of learners might eschew standardized assessments, since by the state Academic Performance Index the school is at the absolute bottom of the list of its 100 most similar schools…
    http://api.cde.ca.gov/Acnt2012/2011BaseSchSS.aspx?allcds=29102980114322

    Like

  49. Paul Emery Avatar

    Gregory
    What I like about charter schools is that their success is not based on government surveys but more on what parents desire in an educational philosophy and that may not test well under government sponsored evaluations. I would think that in this case we would be in agreement that it’s essentially not the governments business in this matter. I am totally in favor of charter schools based on spiritual leanings as well since it supports the desires of the parents. This will distance me from many in my camp but I strongly believe that education is the business of the parents and should be part of our culture not a government dictate, It gets pretty messy though when you look at funding through taxation but I can stand up to that discussion if necessary.

    Like

Leave a comment