Look At It This Way (#LAITW)

Economist Thomas Sowell was on the show Coast to Coast (Fox Business Network). He explained why he toyed with socialism as a good idea once, and why he ultimately rejected it. Facts. When asked if he thought the U.S. would become socialist, he said, “I do have a great fear that in the long run we may not make it, and I hate to say that. And the one thing that keeps me from being despairing is, of course, we don’t know. There’s so many things we can’t possibly know, and so we may make it. But I wouldn’t — I wouldn’t bet on it.”

As Limbaugh said, “if you don’t have the facts — if you’re never taught the facts, if you are never taught the empirical data of truth — then you’re left to wallow in the rhetoric.”

Sad to think moving to socialism is any kind of possibility in the U.S.

Socialism for the Uninformed by Dr. Thomas Sowell.

Kinda gets back to the old adage, “Socialism works great until you run out of other people’s money.”

If demand outpaces supply, prices go up. Vice versa, vice versa. Socialism, which gives by taking, is doomed to failure. Always has been, always will be.

Did you see Oregon just passed the first statewide rent control? Oops. That won’t end well; see above.

The history of human existence is one of tyranny, bondage, slavery. It wasn’t until those “old white guys” constituted a nation that focused on the individual and limited, very limited, government. They understood that nearly all the woes of the people historically came from too much government – whether a king, a dictator, a dynasty, communism, socialism, you name it. And it has lasted now well over 200 years. The question is, will the folks who want to use government to control individuals (and enrich themselves in the process) succeed, or not.

The United States, how originally prescribed, is better.

And while I’m at it, let’s try to remember this (among many important) factoids. The United States is NOT a democracy, it’s a republic. Those that don’t understand the difference are doomed to regret.

Hillsdale College has a free online course to teach you all about it: click here.

A couple of “Say Whats?!”s were in my inbox this morning:

1. The NFL fined Dallas Cowboys running back Ezekiel Elliot $13,369 for “unsportsmanlike conduct” when his touchdown celebration included dropping $21 in a Salvation Army pot. I hope the NFL will give that $13K to the Salvation Army. I’ll let the NFL entertain me with football on TV whenever I want, but don’t count on me to even watch their commercials or support their sponsors let alone buy a ticket.
2. A catholic church in Massachusetts put a Nativity scene in a metal cage behind a border wall (of sorts) to make some kind of point about immigration. That’s pretty blue of them (of course, it is MA). The real problem is it shows a clear lack of understanding of Mary and Joseph. They weren’t illegal immigrants. They weren’t immigrants at all. They were abiding by the law of the land to comply with a census and pay taxes. Maybe these church folks thought they were going to Bethlehem to collect their welfare check. Who knows what they were thinking.

Here’s an interesting series of articles from RedState:

Part 1: America IS Exceptional

Part 2: The Family

Part 3: A Moral Compass

Part 4: National Security

Part 5: Yes…The Left IS The Enemy

It’s all about choices. It’s being able to rationally weigh alternatives and pick the ones most helpful to the most people. Individuals can have a hard time doing this. Governments have a very hard time doing this.

For instance, what could California use most: 1. More airplanes that can scoop water and fight fires? 2. Desalination plants for freshwater? 3. Another way to get between LA and San Fran that doesn’t cost any less and doesn’t save any time (high-speed rail)?

#3 has cost California $11 billion so far, with not much to show for it. That same $11 billion could have bought 37 Super Scoopers (pictured) at $37 million a piece AND 25 desalination plants at $100 million a piece AND had about $7 billion left over.

Reminds me of some environmental horse crap in terms of clean air. When no medical evidence suggest harm below a certain level of exposure, the enviros say, “well if that’s safe, then we better keep it under 1/10th or 1/100th that exposure.” Problem is, the difference between meeting the real safe exposure level and the really-really-safe levels involves beaucoups bucks. Money that could have, and should have, been spent solving other real problems.

From a Facebook post by Fred Murfin…

An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.

The professor then said, “OK, we will have an experiment in this class on this plan”. All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A…. (substituting grades for dollars – something closer to home and more readily understood by all as socialism).

After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.

The second test average was a D! No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.

As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.

To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.These are possibly the 5 best sentences you’ll ever read and all applicable to this experiment:

1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.

2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.

3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.

4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!

5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.

I know, it’s been a while since I last posted. I’ll spare you the excuses. I saw this on Facebook this morning and was jogged into posting again. Clearly, I thought it was worth sharing. Not because it’s news (these are actually self-evident to those paying attention), but because many need reminding…

SIX BRUTAL TRUTHS That Will Make You a Better Person

Nobody is actually too busy to respond to you.

Everyone has their own best interests at heart.

You are never going to please everyone.

Your actions define you, not your thoughts.

The world owes you nothing.

Nobody is coming to save you from your life.

https://upvee.co/6-brutal-truths-will-make-better-person/

The American Health Care Act is supposedly the ObamaCare repeal/replacement. But, it…

1. Doesn’t Improve Care. Obamacare expanded the federal bureaucracy at the expense of quality care. Tax dollars were taken from providers and used to pay administrators, consultants, lobbyists, insurers, and regulators. The House bill does nothing to change that dynamic.

2. Raises Insurance Premiums. The Congressional Budget Office believes that the bill will raise insurance premiums by 15-20 percent on average in the next two years, with even higher spikes in some areas. Americans care most about lowering health costs and making coverage affordable—yet the bill falls short on that count, retaining all but one of Obamacare’s costly mandated benefits and insurance regulations.

3. Doesn’t Repeal Obamacare. Lost in the question of whether or not the bill’s replacement provisions represent “Obamacare Lite” is the fact that the bill as currently drafted represents “Repeal Lite”—when compared not only to full repeal, but even to the 2015 reconciliation bill that passed both houses of Congress. The bill retains all but one of Obamacare’s benefit mandates, some of its taxes, and keeps Medicaid expansion to the able-bodied in perpetuity.

4. Expands Obamacare. Rather than repealing all of the law, the House Republican bill instead expands Obamacare’s subsidy regime—extending it to millions of individuals off of insurance Exchanges for 2018 and 2019—and revises the subsidy regime for 2019. Some conservatives may question the need to “fix” Obamacare, when House Republicans’ legislation should revolve around repealing Obamacare.

5. Creates New Entitlement. Beginning in 2020, the bill creates an entirely new entitlement—advanceable, refundable tax credits—replacing Obamacare’s form of subsidized health insurance with another.

6. Fiscal Gimmicks? Under the bill, the transition from the Obamacare subsidy regime to the new system of tax credits, and a reformed Medicaid program, will take place beginning in January 2020—a presidential election year. If Congress or the Administration delay or abandon the transition due to political blowback, the cost of the House billwill soar.

7. Permanent Bailout Fund for Insurers? While failing to repeal Obamacare’s risk corridors and reinsurance bailouts, the bill also creates a new “Patient and State Stability Fund,” designed to provide most of its $100 billion in grants to subsidize health insurers. Some conservatives may question whether this grant program will end in 2026 as scheduled
under the bill, or whether health insurers instead will make claims on Washington for federal bailouts to the tune of billions of dollars annually.

8. Federally Controlled, Not Patient-Centered. Notwithstanding some important structural changes to Medicaid that respect states, the House bill claims to be patient-centered but still denies a 60-year old the ability to opt out of paying for maternity benefits. Supporters of the House bill talk about giving more flexibility to states, but leave all the federal insurance mandates in place.

9. Perpetuates Medicaid Expansion. The House Republican bill allows states to keep their Medicaid expansion to the able-bodied in perpetuity—a major change compared to the 2015 repeal bill. CBO concluded that many states will, in fact, keep their expansions, diverting funds from covering the most vulnerable to expand Medicaid to able-bodied adults. Moreover, the House bill maintains Obamacare’s enhanced Medicaid match for nearly three years, encouraging expansion states to sign up more able-bodied adults between now and January 2020 to receive additional federal funding.

10. Inadequate Verification. By relying on Obamacare’s system of verifying eligibility for the new tax credit entitlement, the bill requires verification of citizenship but not identity—continuing Obamacare’s problems of fraudulent applicants obtaining subsidies. In addition, some conservatives may be concerned that even these inadequate verification provisions could be stripped due to procedural concerns in the Senate.

Prepared by the Texas Public Policy Foundation.