What is being done to future generations of Americans today in Congress is one of the most shameful acts in our country's history. It's the equivalent of stealing the baby's milk money to buy Viagra and it is selfish, contemptible, and unworthy of the proud legacy we've been left by previous generations of Americans.
Yes.
Tuesday, March 03, 2009
Monday, March 02, 2009
TODAY’S LAUGH
True or not, it’s a great anecdote.
In addition to communicating with the local Air Traffic Control facility, all aircraft in the Persian Gulf AOR are required to give the Iranian Air Defense Radar (military) a ten minute ‘heads up’ if they will be transiting Iranian airspace. This is a common procedure for commercial aircraft and involves giving them your call sign, transponder code, type aircraft, and points of origin and destination.
This was on the VHF Guard (emergency) frequency of 121.5 MHz while flying from Europe to Dubai. It’s too good not to pass along.
Via Don Surber.
In addition to communicating with the local Air Traffic Control facility, all aircraft in the Persian Gulf AOR are required to give the Iranian Air Defense Radar (military) a ten minute ‘heads up’ if they will be transiting Iranian airspace. This is a common procedure for commercial aircraft and involves giving them your call sign, transponder code, type aircraft, and points of origin and destination.
This was on the VHF Guard (emergency) frequency of 121.5 MHz while flying from Europe to Dubai. It’s too good not to pass along.
Iranian Air Defense Radar: “Unknown aircraft you are in Iranian airspace. Identify yourself.”
Pilot: “This is a United States aircraft. I am in Iraqi airspace.”
Iranian Air Defense Radar: “You are in Iranian airspace. If you do not depart our airspace we will launch interceptor aircraft!”
Pilot: “This is a United States Marine Corps F/A-18 fighter. Send ‘em up, I’ll wait!”
Iranian Air Defense Radar: (no response … total silence)
Via Don Surber.
OPPORTUNITY FOR OBAMA
“You never want a serious crisis go to waste.” That’s the thought of Rahm Emanuel, the President’s chief of staff.
And that’s exactly what the Obama administration did.
Welcome to the Welfare States of America.
As the economic signs grow ever more grim, so do the problems facing the incoming Obama administration.
That's one way of looking at things. Here's another:
As the economic signs grow ever more grim, the opportunities for the Obama administration to drive through its agenda actually are getting better.
And that’s exactly what the Obama administration did.
The most notable feature of the budget is its fundamental reordering of the role of government. In the fiscal year starting in October. Obama wants to spend a 10-year total of $630 billion for a downpayment on a government takeover of the healthcare system, green the nation’s energy economy, make college education an entitlement and otherwise heavily involve the federal government in education system.
Welcome to the Welfare States of America.
A SENATOR RESPONDS
My Senator, Jim Webb ($-VA), finally responded to my concerns about the spending ... oops, “stimulus” package passed by Congress:
OK, Jimbo, one question: just how do plan to pay for this trillion (Ed: that’s 12 zeros, my friend) dollar “bi-partisan” (Ed: I see; it takes 3 Republican votes to be bi-partisan) “responsibly-crafted legislation” (Ed: your words, not mine: responsible must mean vote for without reading)?
Capital gains tax? Hey, I’ve already got enough long-term capital losses to offset any “gains” for the next five years.
Tax the rich? Don’t get your hopes up. My wife and I would qualify as “rich” by Democrat standards if we both worked full-time, which we don’t – and won’t. The blunt fact is that our marginal tax rate is so high that it’s not worth working full time.
So let me ask again: how do the Democrats plan to pay for this abortion? The honest answer, of course, is that our children and grandchildren will pay. Are you willing to answer honestly?
Dear Dr. Hankamer:
Thank you for contacting my office regarding the ongoing economic crisis and the federal government's response. I appreciate your taking the time to share your concerns with me.
The United States is facing an economic crisis that is causing American families to fall behind. Communities are being hard hit by home foreclosures, failing businesses, and job losses that are almost unprecedented in recent history. As your U.S. Senator, I am committed to supporting policies that will help end the economic crisis and will help restore basic fairness for all Americans.
It is for this reason that I supported the bi-partisan American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (H.R. 1). This economic recovery package is designed to swiftly drive money into our struggling economy. With help for struggling families, meaningful tax cuts and concentrated funding on key infrastructure programs, I am hopeful that this responsibly-crafted legislation will create millions of new jobs and begin immediately to restore America's economic strength.
As one of those who were concerned with many aspects of the original proposal, I was pleased to work with colleagues from both sides of the aisle to put this plan into place within a set of targeted parameters for economic renewal. My Senate colleagues and I focused on programs to help families struggling under today's serious economic downturn, on shovel-ready infrastructure and public works projects, and on addressing the housing crisis. I am pleased that we were able to remove almost $100 billion in spending from the original proposal.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act also contains tax cuts for families and businesses, provisions to help unemployed Americans keep their health care and find new employment, and provides aid to help the most vulnerable. While this legislation is an important step, other measures must be adopted to restore the health of our economy. These include appropriate reforms of our banking and financial systems, tax fairness, and measures to place the nation on a long-term path to fiscal responsibility.
I appreciate hearing from my constituents. Your correspondence helps me serve you better in the Senate. I hope that you will continue to share your views with me and my staff in the years ahead.
I would also invite you to visit my website at www.webb.senate.gov for regular updates about my activities and positions on matters that are important to Virginia and our nation.
Thank you once again for contacting my office.
Sincerely,
Jim Webb
United States Senator
OK, Jimbo, one question: just how do plan to pay for this trillion (Ed: that’s 12 zeros, my friend) dollar “bi-partisan” (Ed: I see; it takes 3 Republican votes to be bi-partisan) “responsibly-crafted legislation” (Ed: your words, not mine: responsible must mean vote for without reading)?
Capital gains tax? Hey, I’ve already got enough long-term capital losses to offset any “gains” for the next five years.
Tax the rich? Don’t get your hopes up. My wife and I would qualify as “rich” by Democrat standards if we both worked full-time, which we don’t – and won’t. The blunt fact is that our marginal tax rate is so high that it’s not worth working full time.
So let me ask again: how do the Democrats plan to pay for this abortion? The honest answer, of course, is that our children and grandchildren will pay. Are you willing to answer honestly?
A CULTURE OF IMPUNITY?
From Glenn Reynolds, writing in the Washington DC Examiner:
Despite all the faux-outrage about Wall Street bonuses on Capitol Hill, it seems to be the members of the political class who are getting away with things. Some examples:
We've gone from a "culture of corruption" in which people who figured in scandals faced actual consequences, to a ”culture of impunity.”
By all accounts, we're heading into a rough period, with the economy spiraling downward, the federal government near bankruptcy, and many state and local governments actually broke. And the fault will lie with our political class, which has done so much to forfeit the trust that, ultimately, makes a nation possible.
Despite all the faux-outrage about Wall Street bonuses on Capitol Hill, it seems to be the members of the political class who are getting away with things. Some examples:
Obama's appointee as Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner, turns out not to have paid all of his taxes.
Tom Daschle had a $100,000 tax problem, which caused him to forfeit his nomination as Secretary of Health and Human Services.
Rep. Charles Rangel, D-NY, faces too many scandals to count, from tax problems, to real estate questions, to an interest-group-funded Caribbean junket that violated House ethics rules.
Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-CT, had sweetheart loans from Countrywide Mortgage -- a subprime lender under the jurisdiction of the Senate Banking Committee, which he chairs.
We've gone from a "culture of corruption" in which people who figured in scandals faced actual consequences, to a ”culture of impunity.”
By all accounts, we're heading into a rough period, with the economy spiraling downward, the federal government near bankruptcy, and many state and local governments actually broke. And the fault will lie with our political class, which has done so much to forfeit the trust that, ultimately, makes a nation possible.
BRING IT ON
Michigan Sen. Debbie Stabenow apparently wants to bring back the Fairness Doctrine to “balance right-wing talk on the radio dial.”
That tempts me to say “bring it on!” Can you imagine Rush Limbaugh or Neal Boortz on NBC? or CBS? or ABC?
What the liberals fail to recognize is that this knife cuts both ways.
By the way, Stabenow is married to Tom Athans, a liberal talk radio executive.
That tempts me to say “bring it on!” Can you imagine Rush Limbaugh or Neal Boortz on NBC? or CBS? or ABC?
What the liberals fail to recognize is that this knife cuts both ways.
By the way, Stabenow is married to Tom Athans, a liberal talk radio executive.
Sunday, March 01, 2009
NO MORE PRESIDENT EEYORE?
Mike Baker returns:
Don’t limit yourself to my excerpts – read it all.
It’s the damndest thing… one minute you’re in the land of the free, brave and capitalist…the next, in the words of the now famous Newsweek cover, we’re all socialists now.
~~~~
Pillory big business, tax anyone making more than you do, redistribute assets, toss in a little protectionist rhetoric… this is the change we’ve been waiting for? My parents got this change back in the early 1930’s and it led to another depression in the late 1930’s.
~~~~
President Obama has spent the past couple of weeks explaining that the sky is falling. Tuesday night during his Not-a-State-of-the-Union Address to the nation, he sounded more hopeful and optimistic. This is because polls, pundits and now advisors are telling him that he can’t be President Eeyore anymore.
Don’t limit yourself to my excerpts – read it all.
BON APPETIT
Hmm. A better analogy, I think, is that food is the progressives' new religion, and its high priest and priestesses are the Nanny Police.
THE SIX TRILLION DOLLAR MAN
Mark Steyn at his best: "Of course, when Barack Obama is accused of creating his Six-Trillion-Dollar Man “because I believe in bigger government” he denies it: “I don’t,” he says flatly. This is like Clark Kent telling Lois Lane he’s not Superman: They just look a bit similar when he removes his glasses. Likewise, any connection between Obama and a Big Government behemoth swallowing everything in sight is entirely coincidental."
I AM AN AMERICAN
I am an American. I will not give up my liberty.
I am an American. I will not give up my liberty.
I am an American. I will not give up my liberty.
I WILL NOT GIVE UP MY LIBERTY
I’ve been skimming back through the blogs I frequent, looking for a post I vaguely recall applauding the “tea party” while expressing the concern that the protests were inchoate and lacked a common theme.
The New Pamphleteers expressed the concern this way:
I agree that, initially at least, the concern was valid. But after attending the Washington DC “tea party” I believe there is beginning to be an overarching grand theme. It begins with Rush Limbaugh’s “first address to the Nation” at CPAC last night, where Limbaugh said in effect that “ when I look out here, I don’t see (insert your favorite victim group), I see Americans” and it ends with Rick Santelli’s CNBC rant, somewhat misleadingly described as an “I’m mad as hell ...” speech.
The point is, there is a “Grand Theme” for the tea parties in those moments.
I AM AN AMERICAN. From Rush Limbaugh. It matters not my ethnicity, religion, economic status, political leanings, or geographic origin; I am an American, first, foremost, and always.
I AM A TAXPAYER. My contribution. As a taxpayer, I have an investment in America, and don’t want that investment frittered away to the point that the United States becomes a debtors’ prison for my children and grandchildren.
I AM MAD AS HELL. From Rick Santelli. His complaint was with the mortgage buyout, but it’s larger than that. As a taxpayer and part-owner in America, I’m angered by what is essentially a “hostile takeover” of my country. And, yes, I’m mad as hell about that.
And the Grand Theme, I believe, is best expressed in this picture I took at the DC “tea party.”
I WILL NOT GIVE UP MY LIBERTY.
The New Pamphleteers expressed the concern this way:
What is the target of our protest? Are we protesting the President and Congress for an act already passed, or are we petitioning our state and local governments to refuse to accept the stimulus money?
What do we do if these protests do not result in the change in policies we are asking for? What happens next?
Make no mistake, once a movement like this has begun, it will, sooner or later, have to answer these difficult questions or risk failure. Now is the seed-time of liberty, and the steps we take and the words we use will either be recalled triumphantly by our grandchildren, or seen as a sad charade conducted by children who could not muster the strength and conviction of their ancestors.
I agree that, initially at least, the concern was valid. But after attending the Washington DC “tea party” I believe there is beginning to be an overarching grand theme. It begins with Rush Limbaugh’s “first address to the Nation” at CPAC last night, where Limbaugh said in effect that “ when I look out here, I don’t see (insert your favorite victim group), I see Americans” and it ends with Rick Santelli’s CNBC rant, somewhat misleadingly described as an “I’m mad as hell ...” speech.
The point is, there is a “Grand Theme” for the tea parties in those moments.
I AM AN AMERICAN. From Rush Limbaugh. It matters not my ethnicity, religion, economic status, political leanings, or geographic origin; I am an American, first, foremost, and always.
I AM A TAXPAYER. My contribution. As a taxpayer, I have an investment in America, and don’t want that investment frittered away to the point that the United States becomes a debtors’ prison for my children and grandchildren.
I AM MAD AS HELL. From Rick Santelli. His complaint was with the mortgage buyout, but it’s larger than that. As a taxpayer and part-owner in America, I’m angered by what is essentially a “hostile takeover” of my country. And, yes, I’m mad as hell about that.
And the Grand Theme, I believe, is best expressed in this picture I took at the DC “tea party.”
I WILL NOT GIVE UP MY LIBERTY.
Saturday, February 28, 2009
SOCIAL SECURITY REVISITED
In January Allan Sloan, senior editor at large of Fortune magazine wrote about privatization of Social Security:
Sloan argues that’s bad, because
Those quotes interest me, since I first wrote about privatizing Social Security here. In that post I used my own FICA tax history to show that I would have gotten a much better return on the FICA withholdings if they had simply invested in the stocks comprising the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) and the accumulation annuitized on retirement.
In a later post, I looked at John and James Doe, identical twins with the same minimum wage history, one invested in the DJIA and the other invested in Social Security over a 50 year period. On retirement, James, who had invested in the stock market, had a retirement income 31% greater than that of his brother.
Both of Sloan’s statements above are true, of course, but they are beside the point. The real question is this: Even if the market goes south – way south – just before retirement, are you still better off than you would be under Social Security?
The question isn’t academic to me; I’m in exactly that position. So I reopened my original investigation using today’s market drop to see what happens. Here’s the methodology.
I first calculated my Social Security income starting in January 2011, the year following my 66th birthday. I used the detailed ANYPIA calculator available from the Social Security website with my FICA contribution history. It’s accurate to within a few pennies.
I then calculated what the growth of my FICA contributions would have been had they been invested in DJIA stocks in the year the FICA contribution was made, dating from the first contribution in 1962 through the 32% market drop in 2008.
For 2009 and 2010 I used FICA contributions based on current salary, and assumed that in 2009 the market will drop an additional 16% and recover in 2010 to grow at a modest 6%.
These assumptions are roughly equivalent to market conditions during the recession of 1973-74.
I then converted the accumulated growth to a joint life with 10-year minimum payout annuity to get the equivalent Social Security payout. An annuity calculator is available here.
The results? If only the employee half of the FICA contributions had been invested in the stock market, in 2011 I would take home 20.6% more than my predicted Social Security income. If both employee and employer contributions were invested, my take-home in 2011 would be a whopping 41.2% more than Social Security.
But, you say, Social Security benefits will always be there. Sorry, not so. Social Security is already in trouble; it’s running out of money and the demographics are wrong for a tax-increase solution. I’ll probably be okay, but my children and grandchildren will not.
The truth is that the stock market will always be there; Social Security may not.
If your year-end 401(k) statement made you feel like barfing, I have one consolation for you: it could be worse. How's that possible, given how horrible last year was for investors? Simple: If you're not close to retirement, you've got time to recover.
If, however, you were forced to buy a lifetime annuity with your current balance - when you buy such an annuity, you trade your cash for a series of guaranteed payments for the rest of your life - you'd be making your loss permanent.
Sloan argues that’s bad, because
Social Security benefits, of course, are set by a formula that isn't affected by markets moving up, down or sideways.
Those quotes interest me, since I first wrote about privatizing Social Security here. In that post I used my own FICA tax history to show that I would have gotten a much better return on the FICA withholdings if they had simply invested in the stocks comprising the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) and the accumulation annuitized on retirement.
In a later post, I looked at John and James Doe, identical twins with the same minimum wage history, one invested in the DJIA and the other invested in Social Security over a 50 year period. On retirement, James, who had invested in the stock market, had a retirement income 31% greater than that of his brother.
Both of Sloan’s statements above are true, of course, but they are beside the point. The real question is this: Even if the market goes south – way south – just before retirement, are you still better off than you would be under Social Security?
The question isn’t academic to me; I’m in exactly that position. So I reopened my original investigation using today’s market drop to see what happens. Here’s the methodology.
I first calculated my Social Security income starting in January 2011, the year following my 66th birthday. I used the detailed ANYPIA calculator available from the Social Security website with my FICA contribution history. It’s accurate to within a few pennies.
I then calculated what the growth of my FICA contributions would have been had they been invested in DJIA stocks in the year the FICA contribution was made, dating from the first contribution in 1962 through the 32% market drop in 2008.
For 2009 and 2010 I used FICA contributions based on current salary, and assumed that in 2009 the market will drop an additional 16% and recover in 2010 to grow at a modest 6%.
These assumptions are roughly equivalent to market conditions during the recession of 1973-74.
I then converted the accumulated growth to a joint life with 10-year minimum payout annuity to get the equivalent Social Security payout. An annuity calculator is available here.
The results? If only the employee half of the FICA contributions had been invested in the stock market, in 2011 I would take home 20.6% more than my predicted Social Security income. If both employee and employer contributions were invested, my take-home in 2011 would be a whopping 41.2% more than Social Security.
But, you say, Social Security benefits will always be there. Sorry, not so. Social Security is already in trouble; it’s running out of money and the demographics are wrong for a tax-increase solution. I’ll probably be okay, but my children and grandchildren will not.
The truth is that the stock market will always be there; Social Security may not.
ANOTHER SLOGAN FOR "TEA PARTY" GOERS
I WILL NOT GIVE UP MY FREEDOM
Courtesy of Rush Limbaugh at CPAC 2009
Courtesy of Rush Limbaugh at CPAC 2009
TEA PARTY II
My contribution to the next round of tea parties:
If anyone uses it, please send me a picture.
If anyone uses it, please send me a picture.
Friday, February 27, 2009
DC TEA PARTY
I stopped by the Washington DC "Tea Party" anti-stimulus protest at Lafayette Park across from the White House today. There were about 500 protestors - not bad, I think, for a hastily put together protest organized over the internet. Michelle Malkin of Hot Air and Roger Simon of Pajamas Media were there, as was Reason TV. I was impressed by the quality of the crowd - these were serious people, not the usual clowns you see at most protest rallies.
Here are some photos from the protest.
The protest begins with the first speaker.
"Porkulus" - the protest mascot.
Here are some signs. Are you unhappy with your "change?" Don't worry, soon you won't have two nickels to rub together.
Are you better off than you were four weeks ago?
Michelle Malkin following her speech to the crowd.
My neighbor bought a big house and all I got was the payment.
War on achievement is not the answer.
Yes, we care. A reference to Senator Shumer's (Pork-IL) claim that Americans don't care about the "little bit" of pork in the stimulus bill.
Their mother kindly let me take a picture of this young gentleman and lady. Thank you!
It's probably safe to say he's not working too hard.
The plan for tomorrow.
And a final thought about what the protest is all about.
Here are some photos from the protest.
The protest begins with the first speaker.
"Porkulus" - the protest mascot.
Here are some signs. Are you unhappy with your "change?" Don't worry, soon you won't have two nickels to rub together.
Are you better off than you were four weeks ago?
Michelle Malkin following her speech to the crowd.
My neighbor bought a big house and all I got was the payment.
War on achievement is not the answer.
Yes, we care. A reference to Senator Shumer's (Pork-IL) claim that Americans don't care about the "little bit" of pork in the stimulus bill.
Their mother kindly let me take a picture of this young gentleman and lady. Thank you!
It's probably safe to say he's not working too hard.
The plan for tomorrow.
And a final thought about what the protest is all about.
ARE YOU HAPPY NOW, MR. OBAMA?
My daughter had a job, not a great job, but a good job: a decent salary, life insurance, health insurance, a 401k. She had already taken a few steps up the ladder to success.
But her job was dependent in part on “the rich” and the “greedy capitalists” you and your Democrat colleagues so successfully demonized.
Now she doesn’t have a job - and neither do 15 of her co-workers.
And by the way, my wife and I will be staying in the workforce for another few years, denying those behind us on the ladder the opportunity to move up a few rungs.
Are you happy now?
But her job was dependent in part on “the rich” and the “greedy capitalists” you and your Democrat colleagues so successfully demonized.
Now she doesn’t have a job - and neither do 15 of her co-workers.
And by the way, my wife and I will be staying in the workforce for another few years, denying those behind us on the ladder the opportunity to move up a few rungs.
Are you happy now?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)