Monthly Archives: February 2018

Bigger Budgets and Spending Cuts

Posted on by
Reply

Last week, Congress passed and President Donald Trump signed, a budget covering the next two years that has significantly larger spending caps than the last several budgets have had, including in particular a large increase in domestic spending.  Of course, that means spending must rise, right?  Every dollar budgeted must be spent; the budget is a spending floor, not a cap?

Not at all, as the budget proposal Trump has sent over to Congress for FY2019 demonstrates.

The Trump budget is proposing to reduce nondefense discretionary spending caps by 41% over the coming decade.

Cuts to domestic spending instead of spending every dollar budgeted.  Hmm….

Costs, and Costs

Posted on by
Reply

The fight to drive the Daesh out of Iraq (while killing too few of them IMNSHO) has caused more than $45 billion in infrastructure damage to Iraq.

That’s roughly half the cost of the damage a couple of hurricanes did in Texas and Florida last year, an even smaller ratio when Puerto Rico is figured in.  But it’s a lot of damage for a nation like Iraq.

What might that imply, besides the relative wealth of the two nations?

One is the relative dependence we have on our more highly developed, and so expensive, infrastructure compared to Iraq.  Iraq is scraping by with that level of damage and already beginning to recover.

If we suffered the same relative level of damage to our infrastructure, particularly our electric grid, how well would we fare?

Against Their Own Interest

Posted on by
Reply

Fast food workers began protesting yesterday, demanding higher wages and the right to join a union.  Ashley Cathey, a 29-year-old Memphis fast food person, had this:

Fast-food cooks and cashiers like me are fighting for higher pay and union rights, the same things striking sanitation workers fought for 50 years ago.  We’re not striking and marching just to commemorate what they did—we’re carrying their fight forward. And we won’t stop until everyone in this country can be paid $15 an hour and has the right to join a union.

The work they do isn’t worth $15 per hour.  They’re just looking to price themselves out of their jobs, to be replaced by automated kiosks, as so many fast food restaurants already are doing.  Worse, if their unions, through strikes, force those higher wages, that will end with two outcomes: higher food prices for consumers, and from that, lessened demand for those restaurants’ fast food.  That, in turn, will result in fast food restaurants accelerating the move to kiosks or going out of business.  That last will cost not only the demanders their jobs, it’ll cost everyone in those restaurants their jobs.

And the right to join a union?  They already have that.  These folks should know that; they’re being misled by union leadership and the SJWs in the mix.

A Sandbag Attempt

Posted on by
Reply

House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Adam Schiff (D, CA), in response to the Committee’s Republican members’ four-page memo—the Nunes Memo—regarding the FBI’s abuse of FISA court-approved surveillance of Americans, produced a ten-page Progressive-Democrat member response, which the committee voted unanimously to release to the House with an eye to getting the memo released to the public via the White House’s security vetting.  The House approved the release and sent it to President Donald Trump, who had five days to disapprove the document, or it would be released.

Concerns that the Progressive-Democrat members had larded their memo with information that, if released, would jeopardize intelligence and FBI methods and sources in order to make political hay over their redactions have been justified.

The White House on Friday told Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee to redraft their rebuttal to a controversial GOP memo alleging government surveillance abuse during the 2016 campaign, saying sensitive details need to be stripped out before the document can be made public.

It isn’t simply a refusal to release the memo with its cynically included classified information, though, nor is the White House playing guessing games with the Progressive-Democrats about what would be releasable.  In a letter advising the committee that the Progressive-Democrat memo could not be released in its current form, White House Counsel Don McGahn wrote,

However, given the public interest in transparency in these unprecedented circumstances, the President has directed that Justice Department personnel be available to give technical assistance to the Committee, should the Committee wish to revise the February 5th Memorandum [the Schiff Memo] to mitigate the risks identified by the Department.  The President encourages the Committee to undertake these efforts.

Notice that.  It’s not a refusal to release at all, as the committee’s Progressive-Democrat members had voted to do with the Nunes memo.  It’s a refusal to release with the deliberately included classified material and a willingness to release with those data removed by the Progressive-Democrats in coordination with DoJ.

And the Progressive-Democrats are busy growing their political hay.

Progressive-Democrats and Free Speech

Posted on by
Reply

The DoJ and several States are moving to protect free speech on college campuses, with three States moving to pass legislation explicitly for the purpose, and ten others with legislation already pending.

Liberals and their Progressive-Democrats object.

Many Democrats say the Constitution already protects free speech, and that states have no need to micromanage how colleges handle student demonstrations and speakers.

This is just cynical, though.  Or, 8th-grade Civics wasn’t a safe space for them, and they were triggered into not listening.  These Progressive-Democrats are ignoring the fact that the mere existence of our Constitution is no protection at all; it must be actively enforced.

And:

Many also object to the penalties some measures are calling for, such as fining or firing—in the case of professors and other college employees—those who are deemed to have deprived the free speech rights of a person or group.

No, we can’t hold Liberal professors or others favored by Progressive-Democrats accountable—those folks are special.