The Patriot Factor is down today for routine site maintenance. Sorry if this causes any inconvenience for anyone but these things routinely have to be done.
Will return tomorrow with a rip-roaring article on Facebook blockings and bannings. Have a great Saturday and see you all tomorrow.
Saturday, March 16, 2013
Friday, March 15, 2013
The Real Cost of Obama: $19 Trillion
It’s not merely garden-variety government waste that's the problem either. It's monumental stupidity by the government, combined with venial cupidity by voters who think they can get others to pay for their free lunch.
This government-created storm has, more than any other factor, contributed to the fiscal crisis; a crisis that is creating more expansive government programs, robbing us of more GDP, thus ensuring the political class will take more actions that punish the most productive and dynamic elements of our society.
You know? The people who create economic growth?
In order to understand how this storm is being fed, you need only consult some official government figures.
The labor participation rates released recently by the Bureau of Labor Statistics now stands at 63.6, near Carter-recession levels.
According to policy scholar and historian, Professor Richard Vedder of Ohio University, that means as many as 14 million of people are officially out of the labor pool. And the professor from Ohio says it's the government's own unemployment program that's helping to reduce the number of bodies willing to work.
“If you give people money to not work,” says Vedder, “some people will say ‘Gee that’s a pretty good option.’… There have been a lot of studies over the years going back to the 1970s that show these programs on balance added a bit to the unemployment rate.”
Because unemployment compensation has lasted so long, however, unemployment rates have gone up “a couple of percentage points” from where it would otherwise be.
Vedder's back-of-the-envelope calculations that he shared with me says that those missing workers could be costing the economy as much as $800 billion in GDP per year. “That’s $2500 for every person, or $10,000 for every family” in GDP he says.
But that's not all: Multiplied and compounded over 10 years, that's not $8 trillion missing from the economy, but rather $9 trillion.
If you want to know why we have an entitlement crisis, why some cities, like Detroit, can't afford to pay for basic services or why teacher pension plans have to cut back benefits, it's not because tax rates are too low, or spending has been cut to the bone. It's because politicians have made off with $9 trillion from our GDP. That's not just missing GDP, you see; it's missing payroll taxes, income taxes, sales taxes and teacher pension contributions.
While our political and cultural elite like to pretend that there is a settled science that supports the notion that government creates "revenue” by Acts of Congress and the generosity of the Executive Office, once again they have it exactly backwards: All public revenues first start out as private money in the economy. When that money is missing from the private sector, it can never afterward make its way to the public sector.
Now here's the bad news: Labor participation rates, and the effect they have on GDP, are just long spring showers that someday will end compared to the storm created by the regulatory burden in the country.
According to a report in 2011 by the Heritage Foundation, the government's own Small Business Administration estimates that compliance with various federal regulatory structures cost the economy another $1.75 trillion every year. And that's before we even account for the costs of Obamacare and Dodd-Frank financial "reform" - both of which appear to have higher price tags than originally touted.
While we will never have a regulation-free government- nor should we- it bears asking how long we can afford to pay 13 percent of our GDP to comply with federal mandates, over and above taxes that we pay to support basic services like the common defense.
Because doing my own back-of-the-envelope calculation says that by cutting regulatory costs to half of what they are currently means we can add another $9.8 trillion in GDP as well. If we combine that growth with policies that encourage employment, we can add $19 trillion to GDP over ten years.
$19 trillion could go very far toward righting our fiscal ship even as the fiscal storm continues.
Because the fiscal storm that we see happening in western, industrialized counties isn't just fiscal, it's also demographic. With aging populations and near zero internal birth rates, we can no longer rely, as we once did, on a riding tide of population to lift all boats in our economy.
We need to get back the private GDP that politicians today are so happily squandering through myriad government schemes like Sarbanes-Oxley or emergency unemployment benefits. Since it’s unrealistic to expect politicians to make meaningful cuts in government spending, we have to reduce the burden of government- over 40 percent of our GDP in 2013- by growing the private sector more rapidly.
Or we risk being swamped in the face of this man-caused, government sponsored super storm.
Op-ed:The FB police have crossed the line this time By: Diane Sori
Oh woe is me as I'm in a FB timeout again for something I did NOT do...had NO part in...and NO knowledge of. FB thy name is 'selective enforcement.'
Selective enforcement...the ability that executors of the law (in this case the FB police) have to arbitrarily select choice individuals as being outside of the law...in my case Facebook's Community Standards. The only problem here is I violated NOTHING as first, I was NOT online when the post in question was put up, and second, when the post was making the rounds I was NOT only NOT online I was 50+ miles away from my computer sitting in a dentist's chair (ugh).
This Feature is Temporarily Blocked...
You recently posted something that violates Facebook policies, so you're temporarily blocked from using this feature. Learn More.
To keep from getting blocked again, please make sure you've read and understand Facebook's Community Standards.
This block will be active for 30 days.
This Feature is Temporarily Blocked...how I hate those words but that was the message I received from FB as soon as I logged on later in the day along with what the post was that I 'supposedly' put up. What's amazing was how I could post when my carrier (Comcast) was down for the entire previous evening, including at the time I was supposed to have posted the oh so terrible post...which by the way was a post showing muslim brutality against Christians.
But the point is I did NOT post it...in fact the person who did (a fellow adman on a site I administer on) admitted to posting it and made NO apologies for it...nor should he have had to because muslim brutality against Christians is a daily occurrence in the cesspool that is the Middle East and North Africa. You'd think FB would then lift my blocking and the others they blocked after the person who posted it came clean but here's where it gets interesting...they released the admitted poster and everyone else they blocked except for yours truly and one other adman.
Why NOT also release us from this unjust blocking...the only thing I can come up with is that it has to be because both this other person and I are vocal critics of the corrupt Obama administration, and of Obama's sanctioned islamization of our government and our beloved country.
And when you've been blocked guess what...there's NO way to actually reach FB and talk to a human one on one to appeal your blocking. Sure FB has a Help Center but it's basically just for overcoming posting problems, friends problems, and downloading pics and such problems...how to appeal a blocking is NOWHERE to be found.
So what is one to do...you call a FB number that you're given by a previous FB time-outer and give that a try but guess what...yes you do get connected to FB but, and here's the kicker...a recorded message comes on that says FB does NOT take personal calls or personal issues at this time. So NO way to appeal a blocking online or by phone.
Grrrrrrrrrrr...puts it mildly.
That left contacting FB via e-mail on a link that a friend gave me...but I can only send off a few lines as the space allotted is small beyond belief. Anyway, this is what I finally sent them after they did NOT answer my X-number of e-mails as they promised they would...after all, they really do NOT want to be contacted as they think of themselves as untouchable.
“l have NOT yet received a response to the message I sent you about my being blocked for 30 days for something I did NOT do. This is the link to explain it all and it has gone viral over the internet."
http://www.examiner.com/article/facebook-bans-conservative-blogger-for-link-she-did-not-post
"Being that I had NOTHING...I REPEAT NOTHING TO DO WITH THE QUESTIONABLE POST...I DEMAND in the strongest terms possible that you remove my blocking NOW as I will continue to pursue this until you respond. Your actions (falsely punishing me for something I did NOT do) are hurting my reputation and could be actionable in court.”
And so I wait to get out of the infamous FB jail (27 more days to go) relying on friends to post for me...to help me get the truth out about the lies told by this president along with my conservative message. But one good thing is that when something like this happens you do find out who your true friends are...those that help you out when asked...and those phony friends who hang onto you just for the ride or for the notoriety.
So the unfairness by FB continues along with their double standards, censorship against conservative bloggers and posters, love fest with Obama and anything leftist, and now add selective enforcement into the mix...and selective enforcement crosses legal boundaries as their selective blocking of me for something I did NOT do has harmed my reputation by saying I am a FB 'lawbreaker' when I am NOTHING of the sort.
I'm in this battle for as long as it takes as FB will NOT take me down for I did NOT do what I was accused of, and I do truly believe that in the end the truth will prevail and I will be set free from the infamous FB jail...which by the way no file will help me get out of...must keep a sense of humor about all this you know.
Thursday, March 14, 2013
The Keystone Pipeline, Delay is the Name of the Game
The application to permit construction on the Keystone pipeline was filed in September 2008. Since then, four reports have been produced on the potential environmental impact of the pipeline—each coming in with essentially the same conclusion. Earlier this month, the US Department of State issued a 2,000-page draft reporton the potential environmental impact of the pipeline. As Business Week concluded: “Overall, the report does not raise any huge environmental red flags.” Yet, the Obama Administration has blocked construction of the 875 mile segment of the pipeline which would carry crude oil produced from Canada’s oil sands to US refineries in the Gulf Coast.
Despite the widespread public approvalfor the pipeline and the report’s conclusionthat “other options to get the oil from Canada to US Gulf Coast refineries are worse for climate change,” the State Department made no recommendation for or against the project moving ahead. Instead, Kerri-Ann Jones, State’s assistant secretary for Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs, told reporters, “We’re looking for feedback now from the public to help us shape this going forward” and “We’re very anxious to have a lot of public comment.” Interestingly, the government has already received millions of comments on the pipeline.
It is a complicated matter.
Environmental activists—who are major Obama backers—have been roaring opposition to the pipeline and development of the oil sands resource for years and just last month staged a rallyand engaged in civil disobediencein Washington. They aren’t happy that the latest report didn’t predict a host of environmental catastrophes. One outspoken opponent is actress Daryl Hannah, who, along with Robert Kennedy Jr., Sierra Club executive director Michael Brune, and dozens of others, was arrested for attaching herself to the White House gates. Hannah dismisses the new report sayingit is: “bogus” and “totally wrong, flat out totally wrong.” These environmental activists think President Obama, who has the last say in the matter, should have slammed the door closed long ago.
On the other hand there are several major labor unions, also big supporters of Obama, who favor proceeding with the project, which promises to create tens of thousands of jobs. Then there are the Canadians to think of, they badly want a friendly, nearby market for their oil (already Canada is the leading supplier of foreign crude to the United States).
And, of course, there are the people. Here’s what the Heritage Foundationsays about Keystone: “The project will accommodate up to 830,000 barrels of oil per day, create some 179,000 jobs on American soil, and continue good trade relations with a close ally. The benefits won’t stop with the oil sector, though—the Keystone project will have a positive ripple effect even in areas without the pipeline that will provide goods and services to support the pipeline.”
Environmental activists have pegged their opposition to climate change alarmism. But even the State Department report dismisses such concerns, essentially because blocking the pipeline would not prevent the production of crude oil from Canada’s oil sands. The truth is, environmental groups oppose any use or expansion of fossil fuels in our economy. In a recent debate broadcast on Minnesota Public Radio, Sierra Club’s Brune advocated keeping two-thirds of all the world’s oil, coal, and gas reserves “in the ground.”
Factions in Canada have already made it known that the market for oil in China is growing by leaps and bounds, so if production from the oil sands doesn’t flow south to their US neighbors, it can move westto the coast and go by tanker to China—where China’s environmental laws and oil refining industry is not nearly as advanced as the US. Increased emissions would undoubtedly be significant.
Such a development should be of great concern to environmental activists, who know that China is already the number one emitter of so-called greenhouse gases and currently accounts for 70 percent of new emissionseach year—and expanding. Acknowledging that the world will continue its reliance on fossil fuels, Brune says: “The fossil fuels that are produced have to be produced according to the highest standard in terms of protecting our air, our water, our wildlands, and our climate.” If that is really his position, Brune should be campaigning for the pipeline, not blocking it and thereby sending it to China.
A decision on the Keystone XL pipeline should be an easy one for the Administration. Charles Krauthammercalls the decision “the most open and shut case I have ever seen” and says that if Obama refuses the pipeline, “it will really show how partisan considerations way outweigh the national interest.”
With high unemployment still dogging the US labor force, the quick creation of jobs to construct the pipeline and the long-term ripple effects throughout the economy should be welcome. So, too, should be the significant economic effects that will ultimately produce billions of dollars in tax revenues for local, state, and federal coffers.
The other significant benefit of the XL pipeline would be increased energy security and reduced imports that come by tanker from the Persian Gulf and Venezuela (Venezuelan crude is even “dirtier” than what we get from Canada’s oil sands). Can anyone doubt that getting a larger percentage of our oil supplies from a friendly neighbor would be better than continued reliance on less secure foreign sources?
Combined with the growing production of US oil—and the reduction in demand due to the poor economy and increased efficiency of motor vehicles—the addition of Canadian crude would move us closer to the goal of energy self-sufficiency.
Instead of signaling support, the Administration has delayedand delayed—wanting “addition information.” The additional information is in, now a decision is delayed by a 45-day commentperiod, before a 90-day review process begins. Some reports project a September decision. Alex Pourbaix, TransCanada’s president of energy and oil pipelines, says “If a decision is pushed past September, the company faces choosing between spending more or delaying startup until mid-2015.” And delay seems to be the name of the game because, according to NASA scientist James Hansen, “fully exploiting the tar sands would effectively mean ‘game over’ for the climate.”
LIAR!!!
Obama: "Not my fault" - White House to Re-Open
Four days after slamming the doors of
the White House closed, Barack "It's-not-my-fault" Obama says he's going
to ask the Secret Service if to reconsider.
“I have to say this was not a decision that went up to the White House,” Obama said in the interview with Stephanopoulos. “But what the Secret Service explained to us was that they’re going to have to furlough some folks."
"The question for them is, you know, how deeply do they have to furlough their staff and is it worth it to make sure that we’ve got White House tours that means that you got a whole bunch of families who are depending on a paycheck, who suddenly are seeing a 5 percent or 10 percent reduction in their pay,” Obama said.
Obama's contention stands in stark contrast to the words of Jay Carney, the President's spokesman who specifically announced last week that the White House did, in fact, make the decision to close the doors.
“In order to allow the Secret Service to best fulfill its core mission, the White House made the decision that we would, unfortunately, have to temporarily suspend these tours,” spokesman Jay Carney told reporters last week.
ABC News also reports that Secret Service officials confirmed that the decision to cancel public tours was made by the White House.
Not accepting responsibility and flat our contradictions are nothing new to this White House. It's more like standard operating procedure. "What difference does it make?" – Hillary Clinton's Benghazi defense – may well be the motto of the Obama "No-Fault" Administration.
Ryan’s Plan Deserves Kudos, Not Boos
Democrats in both houses of the Congress and the Obama Administration, along with many media-based pundits, began to loudly criticize the Ryan proposal even before it was presented. They whine that it is soft on some details and that it -- Heaven forbid -- focuses on spending cuts as the preferred way tobalance the budget rather than revenue enhancements (also known as “tax increases”).
Instead of wailing and gnashing of fiscal teeth, Congress and the President ought to be heaving a sigh of relief and heaping kudos on the former vice-presidential nominee, for doing what they collectively and separately have failed to accomplish. The young Congressman from Wisconsin actually put together a thoughtful, substantive and comprehensive budget. But, of course, Washington does not operate with the same logical, problem-solving approach as a business; according to which a proposal would be viewed as a starting point from which to construct a final solution.
In the deeply partisan environment prevailing today in our nation’s capital, a real plan such as Ryan’s is savaged by the other party for every manner of reason; with no effort to, or interest in, working toward an ultimate solution.
Opponents howl that Ryan’s plan slashes government spending so deeply it would -- if enacted -- essentially doom America to a lengthy and massive depression. Yet, if viewed for what it actually is -- a budget providing for a rate of increase in federal spending at a historically healthy 3.4 percent -- the plan envisions robust federal outlays more than sufficient to avoid economic calamity. Indeed, rather than a miserly budget plan causing America’s children to languish in bread lines, Ryan’s budget proposes federal spending of $41 trillion over the next decade -- hardly a draconian approach to budgeting.
Fundamentally, Ryan’s budget recognizes the reality President Obama and his Democratic colleagues in the Congress absolutely refuse to acknowledge: We do have a spending problem. It then proposes what is to the Democrats, unthinkable: reducing spending rather than increasing taxes. The Democrats’ blind and absolute adherence to a philosophy of addressing the budget deficit by seeking ways to increase revenues (“taxes”) thus leads Obama’s Party to refuse to even consider Ryan’s proposal as a collection of ideas from which to negotiate; to them, it is seen as nothing more than an infected bed sheet during the Black Plague -- something to be burned and buried.
Some among the chattering class have been quick to reject the Ryan proposal because it does not address in detail every aspect of the federal budget morass that has given us $1.0 trillion-plus deficits every year in which this president has been in office. Of course, had Ryan’s initial plan, as unveiled yesterday, included every detail of an overhaul of our current income tax and entitlement systems -- systems Rube Goldberg would be proud to claim as his own -- the congressman’s detractors would have scoffed that the plan was “too complex” to work.
Central, of course, to the Democrats’ knee-jerk rejection of the Ryan plan is that it contemplates and incorporates an approach to healthcare reform fully at odds with the sacred cow that is “ObamaCare.”
This alone dooms the plan to the graveyard into which that political party throws any proposal founded on the notion of individual choice rather than government mandate.
Hopefully, Republicans in the Congress -- including the leadership -- will run with the Ryan Plan. It is worthy of adoption not because every member and every faction within the GOP agrees with its every element; rather, the plan should be employed as a visible and strong framework with which to construct for the American people a workable, balanced federal budget within a realistic timeframe that also incorporates vital reforms of the myriad government programs that have been permitted to grow uncontrollably and led us to the brink of fiscal collapse.
Paul Ryan has teed up a worthy proposal; let’s now see if the GOP hits it down the fairway or whiffs it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)