Tag Archives: government

Pay No Attention to the Woman Behind the Curtain

Posted on by
Reply

That’s the mantra of Progressive-Democrats, who are enthusiastically supportive of President Joe Biden’s (D) nominee for Comptroller of the Currency, Saule Omarova.

Ms Omarova wants to put an “‘end to banking’ as we know it”—again, her words—and transfer private banking functions to the Federal Reserve, where accounts would “fully replace” private bank deposits. The Fed would control “systemically important prices” for fuel, food, raw materials, metals, natural resources, home prices and wages.

And, she says

the Fed should be remade into what she calls “The People’s Ledger.”

And

She calls for “reimagining” the role of central banks “as the ultimate public platform for generating, modulating, and allocating financial resources in a modern economy.”

But ignore those calls for Soviet finance controls. She’s the lady the Progressive-Democrats want to inflict on us.

Shut up about that flapping curtain; vote her up.

Restoring Police Funding

Posted on by
Reply

…in Progressive-Democrat-run cities. But I repeat myself. There aren’t any Republican/Conservative-run cities that have defunded, or even tried to defund, their police departments.

Some of those Progressive-Democrat jurisdictions are seemingly starting to refund their police departments.

In Texas, the Democrat-led Austin City Council voted last August to cut funding for the Austin Police Department by $150 million, slashing a range of services that one year later have proven to be sorely missed. Last month, the department announced it was no longer responding to non-life-threatening emergency 911 calls, and its homicide rate spiked.

But not unless forced:

In response, a citizen-led movement collected enough signatures for a petition that resulted in adding a November ballot measure to restore police funding.

Baltimore is another being forced to refund and expand:

Maryland Republican Governor Larry Hogan (R) announced the state was investing $150 million in a “re-fund the police” initiative. …
“Our $150 million ‘re-fund the police’ initiative will provide a desperately needed shot in the arm to our state and local police agencies and their critical efforts to stop crime,” Hogan said.
…
The city of Baltimore is a poster child for the basic failure to stop lawlessness. There’s a prosecutor who refuses to prosecute crime.

And this foolishness in Seattle:

[T]the Downtown Seattle Association called on city leadership to use federal COVID relief money to subsidize private security costs….

Because there aren’t enough cops left on the force.

New York City and Los Angeles are trying pay raises to stem the outflow of officers from their departments and to recruit replacements.

Burlington, VT’s, “Democratic/progressive-led city council”

cut the police budget and ordered a 30% reduction in the number of uniformed officers.

Now the city is trying $10,000 bonuses just to keep existing officers from walking and $15,000 signing bonuses for new hires. And Burlington suburbs

South Burlington is offering a $7,000 sign-on bonus to fully certified officers, Berlin a $4,000 bonus to senior officers, and St. Albans a $10,000 bonus[.]

Frankly, I can’t think of any reason why anyone would want to go to work, or go back to work, in any of these Progressive-Democrat-run cities, no matter the level of claimed “refunding.” Especially since in at least some of those jurisdictions, the refunding has to be forced into their unwilling budgets.

At least not until the incumbents in those city governments have been replaced 100%. Those worthies already have demonstrated they cannot be trusted actually to support police or policing.

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.

Paranoia Strikes Deep

Posted on by
Reply

President Joe Biden’s (D) Treasury Secretary, Janet Yellen, is at it again.

She’s defending the plan, buried in the Progressive-Democrats’ reconciliation bill, to snoop into all of our deposit accounts to collect data on each of our transactions of $600 or more. In a CBS News interview, cited by Fox Business, Yellen had this:

…there are “individuals” the IRS does not receive enough information about.
“Look, the big picture is that we have a tax gap that over the next decade is estimated at $7 trillion,” she continued. “Namely, a shortfall in the amount that the IRS is collecting due to a failure of individuals to report the income that they have earned.”

And,

But high-income individuals with opaque sources of income that are not reported to the IRS, there’s a lot of tax fraud and cheating that’s going on….

If she’s not getting enough information on what folks have earned, what information is she using to support her allegation of underreporting? She doesn’t say.

Her “tax gap” is estimated at $7 trillion. Estimated by whom? She doesn’t say.

[A] lot of tax fraud and cheating that’s going on. Based on what evidence does she make this claim of this magnitude of cheating and fraud? She doesn’t say.

Most likely, there is a measure, even a significant measure, of tax cheating and fraud. But when it comes to individuals—including members of the Left’s hated rich and successful—speculation must give way to facts and specific achievements. Beyond that, these allegations of tax cheating and fraud are allegations of crimes, and to investigate these, including snooping into personal or business financial matters, specific probable cause must be demonstrated before a judge and warrants must issue before the snooping can be done.

Absent hard data that we all can see, this preemptive snooping that Progressive-Democrats want to do is simply borne of paranoia.

Into their hearts it has creeped.

Preemptive Surrender

Posted on by
Reply

This time it’s Senator Roger Marshall (R, KS) who’s announcing his surrender, even before the fight is joined.

Not that fight, the fight to block the President Joe Biden’s (D) and his syndicate’s, the Progressive-Democratic Party, spend- and tax-a-thon reconciliation bill that will take us far down the road to intrusive Big Government and toward outright socialism.

No, Marshall is surrendering before the fight is even begun that will be necessary to undo Party’s destructive policies in one and three years.

The fight in Washington, DC, right now is this: do we want big government socialism or do we want economic freedom? That’s what really this fight is all about. Once they start these programs, they’ll never end.

Once they start these programs, they’ll never end. Not of necessity. They don’t end, they continue, only as long as politicians—any collection of them, Republican Party politicians, for instance—are too timid, too outright chicken, to put an end to those programs when they return to power.

After all, once a different set of politicians are in power, they’ll have the votes, by definition, to undo the Progressive-Democrats’ policies, root and branch. That’ll be hard to do, certainly. But “hard” means “possible.” Look it up.

Worried about losing their seats after taking such supposedly drastic action, such “tough votes?” A potful of Progressive-Democrats voted up Obamacare and then got tossed at the next election. We still have Obamacare.

All those newly elected politicians—Republicans, say—would lack is the will to act. The courage then of the words now that they’re bleating. And a drastic change in their underlying mindset. To stop playing, to coin a term, the victim.

That’s Marshall’s preemptive surrender. His and his ilk’s acceptance in advance of their victimhood. That and his—and his fellows’—preference for the perks and prestige of their office over their integrity.