American Republic Online

If the Democrats have their way,

“We would actually have for more people higher tax rates than what we had under Jimmy Carter” is the way Lawrence Lindsey, former director of President Bush’s National Economic Council, described to me what might happen if the tax reform bill from House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charlie Rangel ever became law.

So says James Pethokoukis. It would seem that they think the White House will inevitably be blue come January, 2009. I have little doubt that they will try their hardest to bring taxes back up. However, the allusion to Carter raises an interesting thought: what happened after Carter? Reagan Revolution anyone? This follows a similar thought I commented on a couple weeks ago:

If [Thompson] loses the election (or nomination for that matter) it would be on principle: he stuck to his guns. Or, as Henry Clay once said, “I’d rather be right than president.” And then if a Democrat wins and promotes a “progressive” agenda [or raises taxes like crazy], he can point out his unflinching conservative principles, and float to a win in 2012.

Read the full article »

 It’s for the kids!

John Edwards has a plan. It is so ground-breaking he’s calling it a “New Deal-like plan:”

[T]he federal government should underwrite universal pre-kindergarten, create matching savings accounts for low-income people, mandate a minimum wage of $9.50 and provide a million new Section 8 housing vouchers for the poor. He also pledged to start a government-funded public higher education program called “College for Everyone.”

“It is central to what I want to do as president to do something about economic inequality. I do not believe it is okay for the United States of America to have 37 million people living in poverty,” he said in a meeting with Monitor reporters and editors this week. “And I think we need, desperately need, a president who will say that to America and call on Americans to show their character.”

Character huh? By giving them free money? I wish my father had the same definition of building character. “You need more character Jeff. Your older brother has been working hard at his job, so I took some of his money and I’m going to give it to you.” That sure would have inspired me to go out and follow my brother’s lead to shrink that gap in our income. How about this: a president who says, “Look, the government really can’t do that much for you (haven’t we proved that over the past few decades?). If you want to be successful, you’re going to have to do it. However, I will try my hardest to keep the government out of your way as you try and fulfill your dreams.” And then maybe we can look for inspiration somewhere else besides the government?
As far as the “college for everyone” goes, why stop there? Why not grad school? New cars? Make everyone a millionaire: you’ve got the printing presses.

Read the full article »

Perhaps named for the hope that the voters wouldn’t notice this time, the DREAM act amnesty failed cloture and was killed before it could get going. Here’s the latest plan for stealth amnesty:

Legal status for illegals that are less than 30, have graduated high school or have a GED and claim that they entered the country illegally before turning 16. (We’ll just check that against their immigration records - oh wait.) Also, in the interest of “family unity” or other “humanitarian purposes”, their families can stay. Families simply need to be claimed not verified by blood test or other means.

Popular guess-timates place this at legalizing 12 of the guess-timated 20 million illegals. It did strike me as funny that when the Dems are trying to slip amnesty under the radar, “a child” is defined as someone under 16, but when they’re expanding government health care “a child” is someone under 26.

Read the full article »

This is just sad really…

• Six illegal immigrants arrested at Qualcomm

Disguised as a “fix” for the Alternative Minimum Tax, the Dems have proposed a 4% surcharge on anyone making over $150k ($200k for couples). This coupled with the decision to let the tax cuts that spurred our economy to new records expire (an easy way to raise taxes) means the top bracket for individuals will become 44% in the US. For comparison, the average for developed countries is 35.7%.

Now some of you may say that such wealthy people can afford to give us all their money. Unfortunately, small businesses owners and farmers, often pay taxes as individuals not as businesses (like corporations do). So if you’re out to screw the rich - remember that when the family loses their farm, or the small business down the street has slow customer service because they had to lay off some help to pay the new 9% of taxes.

And it’s actually even worse: the 4% increase is a surcharge not a rate hike. The difference? Surcharges are applied before tax deductions. Got a kid in college? Paying all that mortgage interest? Gave a large donation to Katrina relief? Doesn’t matter… 4% on it ALL.

So on top of punishing the successful, we’re now going to take away their incentive to give money to charity? Though, I guess if we just take even more of their money away it won’t matter if they give to charity ’cause the government can fill that void as well. Well at least until they rich take their money & income to another country to avoid the taxes. 50%, 70%, even 100% of nothing is less that 35% of something.

Read the full article »

So the tax implications of Barry Bonds’ 756th home run ball has been discussed by several “experts” and all have failed to see the obvious: this is utterly ridiculous. I can’t think of something more American than eating a hot dog, drinking a beer and catching a home run ball while enjoying America’s past time: baseball.

And I can’t think of a better example of how deranged our tax code has become that we have made it economically infeasible to keep said memento. Seriously, you go to a game, you catch a ball, you suddenly owe the government $250,000+!!! Why is no one else objecting to the seer lunacy of this? “I feel like I’m taking crazy pills!” (Mugatu)

If poor Matt Murphy had decided not to sell his souvenir he would still owe 35% of whatever the IRS guess-ti mated it’s worth. The fair market value of a one of a kind ball (until the record is again broken) mixed with the taint of an asterisk? We’re talking a range of hundreds of thousands of dollars here. So who picks the worth?

Now I’ve heard several people argue that the ball’s value IS that so high because a few people would be willing to pay an exorbitant amount for it. But lets take that logic and apply it else where - like Real Estate. The South, lately, has been getting an influx of people retiring from the North East. These people are paying 2 to 3 times the normal rate per sq ft for homes marketed to them because they’re idiots their cost of living comparison is such that those homes still seem cheap to them. Does the fact that some people are paying 3 as much for a house down the street from mine triple the value of my house? Did clever distance marketing just triple my property taxes?

Read the full article »

So have the eco-hippies officially lost it when they start talking about the environmental impact of a natural process of mother nature?

What’s next, pollution control measures for volcanoes?  Coming up with a way to stop the genocide of the bunnies by the wolves?

If you look closely at the “damage” done to the environment, it comes down to the pretty plants being replaced in some areas by less pretty, hardier plants. Don’t we support natural selection any more?  Seriously though, why does it always come back to being pretty?  You know what this is going to lead to: anorexic weeds.

Read the full article »

Yet again, the Clintons have been caught receiving illegal campaign contributions from Chinese people. Off the top of my head, this is the third time they’ve been caught doing this. I’m not sure which is scarier - the abundance of the illegal contributions, or the common Chinese thread.

Oh well, at least its all for a good cause: the first female President milestone is certainly worth overlooking a few several improprieties.

Read the full article »