Greece is about to default on its public debt or ruin the European Union, or both. The Greeks are destroying themselves today much as they did during the Peloponnesian War. This looks like the inevitable result of the welfare statism and entitlement mentality that is destroying the entire Western world. We see similar forces of anarchy at work in the “Occupy” movements in American cities.

An important factor in these movements is the fundamentally anarcho-syndicalist tenor of the union movement, which demands an ever greater share of national income. Public-sector unions like the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees have been prominent in the “occupy” movement. Wisconsin AFSCME proudly sent pizzas “in solidarity” with the Wall Street occupiers.

Rutgers University labor economist Leo Troy calls public-sector unionism “the new socialism.” The old socialism was based on state ownership of the means of production. The new socialism involves the transfer of an ever greater share of the economy to the public sector. Government at all levels took about 5% of GDP a century ago and 13% on the eve of the Great Depression. The New Deal increased the proportion to one-third by 1960. We are in the forty percent range now, and the full nationalization of health care will put us over half.

Unions have been a primary force in the expansion of state power. Even the reputedly “conservative” American Federation of Labor called for “the abolition of the wage system.” A.F.L. President Samuel Gompers put organized labor’s goal as simply “more” — exactly what Johnny Rocco, the Al Capone-like figure portrayed by Edward G. Robinson in the 1939 film “Key Largo,” explained as his ultimate end. The New Deal’s expansion of state power was based principally on private-sector unionism that began with the “occupy Flint” sit-down strikes of 1936.

(more…)

While Obama tours the country promoting his personal donation plan, the Republican Presidential hopefuls are in a pitched battle for the nomination and arguing which tax simplification plan is best. Threatened with the possibility of rate cuts, the Media and politicians trot out the usual suspects of lies about tax hikes and tax cuts.  This is a battle Republicans must win and, to do so, they need to expose those lies.

Keep in mind that the battle between those who create wealth and those that want to redistribute it, mainly politicians, is as old as civilization itself.  We read of tax battles and even reform in every age, like Urukagina’s tax reductions in Babylonia/Sumer in 2350 BC.  Equally venerable are the constant set of demagogic lies by those against tax cuts and simplification.  It is important to note that politicians like complicated tax codes and high tax rates because they control those rates and dispense the loopholes and regulations that complicate the tax code.  Tax simplification means they lose power.  As a result, resistance to tax reform is more often the rule than reform. As for the lies, they abound, so let’s consider just a few:

Lie # 1: Tax cuts cause deficits/Tax hikes balance the budget.  The Media and the Left often say that the Reagan and Bush tax cuts led to deficits while Clinton’s tax hikes led to a balanced budget. In truth, according to the IRS, federal tax revenues rose dramatically after the overall Reagan tax cuts/reforms (98%) and the Bush tax cuts (a record $700+ billion). This is just as they did after the Harding/Coolidge cuts (61% revenue increase) and after the Kennedy/Johnson cuts (62% revenue increase).  Those are the four major income tax reductions we have had since the inception of the income tax in 1913 and every time revenues rose after they were in place – every time.

So did the tax rate cut cause a deficit? The lie, of course, is to blame the revenue gathering mechanism (tax code/rate cut) instead of the revenue spending mechanism, i.e. Congress/Presidents.  The spenders kept spending – often at an accelerated rate when they saw the new revenues.  Thus, the fault for continuing deficits lies not with tax rate cuts, which produced higher revenues, but with politicians who spent too much.

(more…)

American political fortunes have long been tied directly to the economy… so you would think that politicians would do a better job understanding how to improve the economy.  We know consumer demand is down – because consumers don’t have the money or home equity they used to have.  That alone is keeping the economy down.  Businesses, however, are said to have money but they are not spending or investing it.  Why? Because for them it’s the early 1920’s all over again.

Our so-called brilliant, Nobel Prize-winning President, for months, has exhorted American businesses to hire employees and invest – as if wishing for an economic recovery would make it so.  Recently, however, Democrat and mega-businessman Steve Wynn told the country – and Obama, if he was listening – why cash rich business is not hiring and investing.  According to Wynn, “this administration is the greatest wet blanket to business, and progress and job creation in my lifetime . . . those of us who have business opportunities and the capital to do it are going to sit in fear of the President . . .”

President Calvin Coolidge used to say, “The chief business of the American people is business.”  Even so, business doesn’t invest just for fun – they invest for profit – and they don’t invest if they think the risk of not making an acceptable profit is too high.  I wrote “acceptable” because business weighs the fact that even if they make money, it will be taxed.  As such, a business must decide not only if it will be able to make a profit, but will the profit be so much that it would be worth the trouble/risk after taking taxes into consideration.  Keep in mind business knows that it carries all of the downside risk and that government will take a good portion of any upside.  If at some point the risk gets too high, business investment and spending is stalled.

Today, Steve Wynn, and much of American business, believes that the risk of not making a decent profit is too high for several reasons.  For instance, business doesn’t see sufficient consumer demand – so they don’t stock their shelves or expand production as they otherwise might.  Regulations and the threat of more regulations are so high that they hold back money to pay for future costs.  Taxes and the threat of higher taxes are also high – and that too causes business to hold back spending in order to pay those future taxes.  As a result, business investment and spending is stalled.

(more…)

The Democratic/government-union days of rage in Madison, Wis., are a disgrace. Wisconsin congressman Paul Ryan calls it Cairo coming to Madison. But the protesters in Egypt were pro-democracy. The government-union protesters in Madison are anti-democracy; they are trying to prevent a vote in the legislature. In fact, Democratic legislators themselves are fleeing the state so as not to vote on Gov. Scott Walker’s budget cuts.

That’s not democracy.

The teachers’ union is going on strike in Milwaukee and elsewhere. They ought to be fired. Think Ronald Reagan PATCO in 1981. Think Calvin Coolidge police strike in 1919.

The teachers’ union on strike? Wisconsin parents should go on strike against the teachers’ union. A friend e-mailed me to say that the graduation rate in Milwaukee public schools is 46 percent. The graduation rate for African-Americans in Milwaukee public schools is 34 percent. Shouldn’t somebody be protesting that?

Governor Walker is facing a $3.6 billion budget deficit, and he wants state workers to pay one-half of their pension costs and 12.6 percent of their health benefits. Currently, most state employees pay nothing for their pensions and virtually nothing for their health insurance. That’s an outrage.

(more…)

Corporate profits are at all-time highs and bond rates in the Treasury market are virtually at record lows. That’s a good combination for stocks, and it helped trigger a 255 point rally in Wednesday’s trading. What’s more, a surprisingly positive read on the ISM August manufacturing report delivered a strong blow to the double-dip recession pessimism that has plagued investors for many months.

Without question, the jobs picture is going to remain cloudy. There’s just too much uncertainty over the economy and the tax-and-regulatory threats coming out of Washington. Businesses can’t be sure about the costs of hiring. Meanwhile, over in housing — our other weakest sector — an inventory glut threatens further price declines.

But make no mistake about this: Businesses, at least the publically owned ones, are in very good shape. U.S. firms scored a record $1.2 trillion in profits during the second quarter and are sitting on roughly $2 trillion in cash. Our private-sector companies are resilient, and they have recovered significantly from the economic plunge.

And while their hiring is still behind schedule, they have begun the process of investing in equipment, software, and other capital goods. Business investment in the June quarter rose 16 percent above year-ago levels. This is all to the good. Healthy businesses are crucial to the stock market as well as the overall economic outlook.

In fact, since 2001, business profits have doubled, even while the stock market dial has hardly moved. If Washington can just keep its paws off of business and let market processes work, firms will continue to prosper domestically and internationally and will eventually pick up their hiring.

(more…)

When, in The Federalist, Alexander Hamilton writes that “energy in the executive is a leading character in the definition of good government,” he refrains from asserting that energy in the executive is the leading character in the definition of good government. He is right to deploy the indefinite, rather than the definite, article. Had he chosen the latter, Thomas Jefferson’s accusations would have been on the mark: our first Secretary of the Treasury really would have been a monarchist of sorts.

What Hamilton had in mind, however, when he insisted on the necessity that the new nation be endowed with an energetic executive is the fact that a government in which the laws are not vigorously executed and in which emergencies are not confronted and handled with decision and dispatch is hardly a government at all. He knew that wisdom, prudence, and moderation are also required for a government to be good, and he recognized as well that the ends and sphere proper to government are limited. He was no less committed to the principles of the Declaration of Independence than was the man who had drafted it.

Hamilton was also aware that that Julius Caesar and Oliver Cromwell had been energetic executives, and to their number we can now add such luminaries as Napoleon Bonaparte, Benito Mussolini, Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin, Mao Tse-Tung, Fidel Castro, and Pol Pot. The executive temperament necessary for good government is not, alas, sufficient to guarantee its achievement.

If, as I argued in mid-June, it is now abundantly clear that Barack Obama lacks the temperament requisite in an executive, if, as I contended, he is inclined to shirk responsibility, shift the blame, dither, and punt, his administration is beyond question a government insufficient for our needs. This does not mean, however, that – merely by demonstrating energy, vigor, and dispatch in shouldering the responsibilities of executive office – Bobby Jindal of Lousiana, Chris Christie of New Jersey, Mitch Daniels of Indiana, Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota, Mitt Romney of Massachusetts, Jeb Bush of Florida, Haley Barbour of Mississippi, or any of the other potential presidential aspirants in the Republican Party who have been effective governors has demonstrated that he possesses all of the qualities called for in the grave crisis we now face.

All of the individuals I have named are impressive – as are, for example, Sarah Palin and Mike Huckabee. The moment has not yet arrived, however, for a thorough assessment of the qualities and outlook of each. There will be plenty of time for sorting through the candidates after the midterm elections.

(more…)

No, not because this is the day that the 30th President of the United States, Calvin Coolidge, was sworn into office; although the words of “Silent Cal” lend credence to the modern movement in opposition to progressive-statism.  Take a gander:

Civilization and profit go hand in hand.

Don’t expect to build up the weak by pulling down the strong.

There is no dignity quite so impressive, and no one independence quite so important, as living within your means.

Collecting more taxes than is absolutely necessary is legalized robbery.

Perhaps one of the most important accomplishments of my administration has been minding my own business.

To live under the American Constitution is the greatest political privilege that was ever accorded to the human race.

President Coolidge may be the most under-rated president in American history, but his words do little to roll back the progressive machine now.  The beginning of that roll-back does not occur on November 2, but much earlier.  On August 3, 2010, Missouri voters will be tasked with the responsibility of taking the first stand against Obamacare, the progressive panacea, by voting for the Missouri Health Care Freedom Act (MHCFA) in a public referendum.

(more…)

Ronald Reagan admired him  a lot. In fact, when Reagan was looking over his new house—the White House—shortly after his inaugural in 1981, he entered into the Cabinet Room.

On the wall were portraits of Truman, Jefferson, and Lincoln. The White House curator commented at the time, “If you don’t like Mr. Truman, you can move Mr. Truman out.” Even though Reagan, a former Democrat, had voted for Truman back in 1948, he made his decision: Truman’s portrait was removed and one of Calvin Coolidge was dusted off and put in its place.

Nowadays, in all the “right” circles [to be found primarily among the academic elite], the person of Coolidge is a source of amusement, if not outright derision. Why, he was a do-nothing president, someone who didn’t use the power of the office as he should have. Probably his most grievous sin, in their view, was the way he put the brakes on destiny: he was a foe of the progressive movement that was intended to reshape American government and culture.

(more…)

On April 15th, it is always a worthy enterprise to reflect on one of the major motivations of the American Patriots that caused them to break away from England. Of course, I am referring to “Taxation Without Representation.” Today, we know from the Tea Parties multiplying around the Country that Gerald Berzan is quite to say right that “Taxation with representation ain’t so hot either.” Perhaps that is why Douglas Adams declared that he was “spending a year dead for tax reasons.”

In that lively spirit, I give you my Top 10 Anti-Taxation Quotes with my annotations:

No. 10.

“In this world nothing is certain but death and taxes.” Benjamin Franklin. It is hard to start anywhere else. The little known full quote is “Our Constitution is in actual operation; everything appears to promise that it will last; but in this world nothing is certain but death and taxes.” The Founders, who framed a Constitution to protect us from government, did not dare consider an income tax. Franklin obviously did not trust future politicians.

No. 9.

“I am in favor of cutting taxes under any circumstances and for any excuse, for any reason, whenever it’s possible.” Milton Friedman. The 1st of two Friedman quotes in this countdown brings up the question: Why the Republican Party is (or should be) so anti-tax? Franklin obviously warned us. Friedman accepted his warning and knew that unless we fought them at every turn, taxes would be more than inevitable.

No. 8.

“Anyone may arrange his affairs so that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which best pays the treasury. There is not even a patriotic duty to increase one’s taxes. Over and over again the Courts have said that there is nothing sinister in so arranging affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everyone does it, rich and poor alike and all do right, for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands.” Legendary Judge Learned Hand. I guess it turns out Joe Biden was wrong?

No. 7.

“The power to tax is the power to destroy.” The first of John Marshall’s 2 quotes in the countdown: Simply stated, but sadly not well understood: that maxim also applies to income as well – which is why higher rates result in less tax revenue. Later Alan Greenspan would say that “Whatever you tax, you get less of.” It REALLY is that simple – if only our politicans would learn that lesson.

(more…)

The US economy remains in a tepid stage at best – subject to a multiple dip recession at worst.  Unemployment is high and private sector jobs are taking longer than usual to rebound.  Even the Obama Administration is forced to admit unemployment will be high for a long time to come.   Starting two years ago this July, I said if Obama was elected President, we would have a difficult economy, at best, for at least six years.  Unless our governments, federal and state, make a concerted effort to change the economic psychology facing Americans today, that prediction can’t help but come true.

There is no question that the American economy is in bad shape.  Unemployment has only been this high one other time since World War II, i.e. in the 1980’s.  Recessions similar or deeper than this recession occurred in 1918, the Great Depression, the 3 recessions of the 1950’s, and the stagflation of the late 1970’s and early 1980’s.

Recessions of this magnitude take on a life of their own because both businesses and consumers are plagued with doubts – doubts about future government policy, doubts about consumer spending, doubts about the prospects for future investments.  Those doubts literally diminish future economic activity as investors and consumers favor caution over investing and spending.  The psychology of larger recessions exaggerates downturns as fears mount.  That Psychology of Doubt delays recoveries in ways that cannot be measured by statistics alone.

In order to break that Psychology of Doubt, it takes bold action on the part of governments – not half measures or technical adjustments.  Indeed, each of those recessions did not end until there was a dramatic change in the government policy – usually a change to the very policies that drove our economy into the ditch in the first place – excepting only World War II’s effect on the Great Depression.

(more…)

They criticize me for harping on the obvious; if all the folks in the United States would do the few simple things they know they ought to do, most of our big problems would take care of themselves.