Monthly Archives: October 2021

“Take the American People for Fools”

Posted on by
Reply

That’s what Congressman Jodey Arrington (R, TX) says the Biden-Harris administration and their Progressive-Democratic Party syndicate are doing to us average Americans with their claims that their $3.5 trillion reconciliation package won’t cost us anything.

It’s actually more like $5 trillion, Maria, and their gamesmanship and their sleight of hand will be to try to truncate the duration of these policies. But no matter how short the duration the policies are, they will be extended, they will be made permanent, and they will be expanded like every other mandatory spending and entitlement program that has ever showed up on the balance sheet of our government.

But it’s not only Biden-Harris and their syndicate who are taking us for fools.

They will be extended. They will be extended only because politicians—Republicans and alleged Conservatives, as well as Progressive-Democrats—will actively vote to extend them, and Presidents—Republican and alleged Conservative, as well as Progressive-Democrat—will sign those extensions into law.

Certainly, it’s hard to cancel, or to expire, such policies. Certainly, it’s hard to stop trading welfare payments—however unneeded they are in truth, however damaging to our free market economy, and so to our individual liberties and responsibilities, they might be. It only gets harder, though, the longer such unneeded programs are allowed to exist.

Those who vote for extension, permanence, expansion while proclaiming the damages such programs do are choosing their own, their personal, political fortunes over what they know to be their duty to their constituents and to our nation.

It’s often hard to do one’s duty. Hard, though, means possible. And duty is a necessity, not a nice to have.

Those who, like Arrington, claim to be against such programs yet keep extending them are the ones who take us for the biggest fools. Just like they do with every other mandatory spending and entitlement program that has ever showed up.

Zeroing In

Posted on by
Reply

That’s what the Biden-Harris administration claims is all it wants to do with its “new and improved” personal bank account monitoring scheme.

…banks, credit unions, and other financial institutions would be required to report annually on accounts with deposits and withdrawals worth more than $10,000….

Here’s Biden-Harris’ Treasury Secretary, Janet Yellen:

Today’s new proposal reflects the administration’s strong belief that we should zero in on those at the top of the income scale who don’t pay the taxes they owe, while protecting American workers by setting the bank account threshold at $10,000 and providing an exemption for wage earners like teachers and firefighters

Because some American workers are more equal than others of us, and so more deserving of protection from this government spying.

On top of that is the Biden-Harris/Yellen disingenuousness and that of their Progressive-Democratic Party syndicate that this is solely about tracking down those Evil Rich Tax Dodgers. Even at $10,000, though, those Evil Ones would need hundreds, if not thousands, of bank accounts to get down to sizes even approaching that $10k threshold. No, this move remains centered on the prurient interest those peopling our government have in the private doings of us common citizens.

After all, rather than spying on those of us average Americans of whom this administration disapproves (remember how narrow the “exemption” really is), the government could simply audit those Evil Rich individuals. No peeking in windows necessary that way.

Besides, I have it on good authority that the men and women in our government already know what income has gone unreported and how much tax is owed. From that, those worthies also already know where that missing income is and who owes it. If anyone.

I Thought Supply-Side Economics was a Myth

Posted on by
Reply

At least, that’s what so many tax-and-spend Progressive-Democrats have been insisting since the Reagan years.

But Fed Chairman Jerome Powell thinks supply-side economics actually is a thing.

Supply-side constraints have gotten worse[.]

He said that in his rationalization for his “watching carefully” indications that households and businesses are expecting sustained price pressures to continue and associated Fed manipulations of interest rates and debt asset purchasing.

Along those lines is this:

[Fed] Officials don’t want to be in a position where they feel compelled to raise rates at a time when they are still fueling monetary stimulus by purchasing assets.

Well, NSS.

Maybe there really is something to this supply-side business.

An EU Attack on National Sovereignty

Posted on by
Reply

Poland’s Prime Minister, Mateusz Morawiecki, is objecting to the European Union’s claims to overriding authority over its independent constituent nations, Poland in particular. In an open letter to the EU’s parliament, then in debate during the next parliament session, he said

…EU mission creep…would lead to a “centrally managed organism, governed by institutions deprived of democratic control.”

And then,

EU competencies have clear boundaries, we must not remain silent when those boundaries are breached. So we are saying yes to European universalism, but we say no to European centralism.”

Which argument for the sovereignty of the Union’s constituent nations was answered dismissively by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen:

Your arguments are not getting better. You’re just escaping the debate[.]

She then laid out three options by which the EU would seek to compel Poland’s acceptance of EU suzerainty:

  • first: a so-called infringement, where the European Commission legally challenges the Polish court’s judgment, which could lead to fines
  • second: a conditionality mechanism and other financial tools whereby EU funds would be withheld from Poland
  • third: application of Article 7 of the EU’s treaties. Under this, rights of member states—including the right to vote on EU decisions—can be suspended because they have breached core values of the bloc

Despite this,

Poland’s ruling nationalist Law and Justice party says it has no plans for a “Polexit[.]”

Maybe the party and the citizens should begin thinking about it.

Stall

Posted on by
Reply

And outright disregard for court rulings and the law. That’s the Biden-Harris administration’s position regarding the prior administration’s Remain in Mexico policy—the Migrant Protection Protocols—implemented to stem the flow of illegal aliens into our nation, and by extension, the flow of illegal aliens into and through Mexico.

The Supreme Court, ‘way last August, ruled that the Remain in Mexico policy must remain in force, but Biden-Harris and their DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas say they’ll get around to it in another month—mid-November. -Ish.

Stall. And disobey.

Mayorkas, in an unsigned DHS statement:

Mexico is a sovereign nation that must make an independent decision to accept the return of individuals without status in Mexico as part of any reimplementation of MPP.  Discussions with the Government of Mexico concerning when and how MPP will be reimplemented are ongoing.

Stall. And disobey.

The protocols are in place. Mexico had already agreed. The only reason it’s taken eight weeks already is the Biden-Harris stall. And disobey.

The only reason it’ll take another four weeks, at least, is…stall. And disobey.