Disingenuosity in our “Elite” Universities

Posted on by
Reply

Recall that the Department of Energy has frozen or cut Federal funding to a number of our allegedly elite universities over their refusal to deal with the antisemitic bigots and terrorist supporters in their student bodies and professor work force, and recall the Department’s decision to cap at 15% what those universities skim off the top of the research grants the Department sends for what those universities are pleased to call indirect costs. Now, MIT, Brown University, Cornell University, and Princeton University among others, are suing DoE over the cuts.

Per their lawsuit:

The pace of scientific discoveries in the national interest will be slowed. Progress on a safe and effective nuclear deterrent, novel energy sources, and cures for debilitating and life-threatening illness will be obstructed. America’s rivals will celebrate, even as science and industry in the United States suffer.

This is disingenuous. The universities do not have an inherent right to those Federal—our tax-remitted—dollars, which is the only rational reason for that claim. To the extent the pace will be slowed, to the extent that progress will obstructed, that’s entirely on these universities, and their demand for continuing the Federal spigot flow. These universities each have large and burgeoning endowments that would support their programs for decades, which would be plenty of time into which to shoehorn in the weeks required for the required reforms.

To the extent our national rivals—the universities’ cynical lumping in of our enemies with our competitors—will celebrate, that’s also on these universities and their desperation to continue receiving the…donations…these enemy nations and competitors pay over.

A Mistake

Posted on by
Reply

The Trump administration may be getting soft on Iran, at least relative to past positions by then- and now-President Donald Trump (R).

US special envoy Steve Witkoff said that the Trump administration is prepared to allow Iran to enrich uranium at a low level if it is subject to stringent verification, a significant shift from the White House’s initial demand that Tehran’s nuclear program be dismantled.

Witkoff said

They do not need to enrich past 3.67%. This is going to be much about verification on the enrichment program and then ultimately verification on weaponization.

This is the mistake. Iranian insistence on enriching past 3.67%–to 60% and above, with that 60% level just a kitten’s whisker way from bomb-grade purity—and its history of requiring weeks to months of advance notice on inspections, interfering with inspections, outright barring inspectors’ access, and its development and maintenance of secret sites outside the reach of inspectors demonstrate that the Iranian government cannot be trusted with uranium at any level.

The only appropriate level for Iran’s uranium enrichment program is 0.00%, with no notice inspections at any location the inspectors choose. Otherwise, the only legitimate solution is kinetic obstruction of Iran’s nuclear weapons—and its nuclear, generally—programs.

Responsibility

Posted on by
Reply

The Republican caucuses in the Senate and House are considering restrict[ing] the [provider] taxes’ use to finance state Medicaid contributions entirely, which would have the effect of putting more of a State’s expenditures under Medicaid on the State itself: overall, the restriction would save the Federal government—which is us taxpaying citizens writ nationwide—some $600 billion over 10 years.

There are objections, of course, by those whose money tree would be severely pruned. Ryan Cross, Franciscan Missionaries of Our Lady Health System’s Government Affairs VP:

If you end provider taxes, you’re going to shift that burden to the state, either harming Medicaid patients and healthcare-provider reimbursement, or leading to higher state and local taxes[.]

This is disingenuous. Any harm done Medicaid patients, who as citizens of their State are the responsibility of that State, and of healthcare providers, who as operators in that State also are the responsibility of that State, is done by that State through its own decisions regarding the tax remittals of that State’s own citizens. Regarding those decisions, it apparently is inconceivable to Cross and the rest of the Leftists that the State could reallocate its spending to cover the costs rather than just knee-jerk and willy-nilly raise its taxes.

These are $600 billion dollars for which us taxpaying citizens of our nation have better use.

Because Yesterday was the Season

Posted on by
Reply

And I did not file for an extension.

What’s the difference between a tax auditor and a rottweiler?
A rottweiler eventually lets go.

There are just two rules for creating a successful accountancy business:
Number 1: Don’t tell them everything you know. Number 2: [Redacted]

I’m proud to pay taxes in the United States; the only thing is, I could be just as proud for half the money.
—Arthur Godfrey

A tax loophole is something that benefits the other guy. If it benefits you, it is tax reform.
—Senator Russell Long

People who complain about taxes can be divided into two classes: men and women.
—Unknown

The IRS tax agents decide to audit an elderly man, and summon him to the IRS office. The IRS auditor was not surprised when the old man showed up with his attorney.
The auditor said, “Well, sir, you have an extravagant lifestyle and no full-time employment, which you explain by saying that you win money gambling. I’m not sure the IRS finds that believable.”
“I’m a great gambler, and I can prove it”, says the elderly guy. “How about a demonstration?”
The auditor thinks for a moment and says, “Okay. Go ahead.”
The old guy says,”‘I’ll bet you a thousand dollars that I can bite my own eye.”
The auditor thinks a moment and says, “It’s a bet.”
The elderly guy removes his glass eye and bites it. The auditor’s jaw drops. The old guy then says, “Now, I’ll bet you two thousand dollars that I can bite my other eye.”
The auditor can tell he isn’t blind, so he takes the bet. The elderly guy removes his dentures and bites his good eye.
The stunned auditor now realises he has wagered and lost three grand, with his attorney as a witness. He starts to get nervous.
“Want to go double or nothing?” the elderly person asks. “I’ll bet you six thousand dollars that I can stand on one side of your desk, and pee into that wastebasket on the other side, and never get a drop anywhere in between.”
The auditor, twice burned, is cautious now, but he looks carefully and decides there’s no way this old guy could possibly manage that stunt, so he agrees again.
The old guy stands beside the desk and unzips his pants, but although he strains mightily, he can’t make the stream reach the wastebasket on the other side, so he pretty much urinates all over the auditor’s desk.
The auditor leaps with joy, realising that he has just turned a major loss into a huge win, but the elderly guy’s attorney moans and puts his head in his hands.
“Are you okay?” the auditor asks.
“Not really,” says the attorney. “This morning, when he told me he’d been summoned for an audit, he bet me twenty-five thousand dollars that he could come in here and pee all over your desk and that you’d be happy about it.”

Backwards

Posted on by
Reply

The headline and lede demonstrate the utter misunderstanding (to the point of cynically offered distortion?) of the press in the ongoing fight between the Left and the Trump administration’s efforts to streamline our bloated Federal government, bring its spending into line with necessarily lowered income tax rates, and revamp our failed immigration behaviors.

Trump Floods Supreme Court With Appeals to Push Through Agenda
A cascade of Trump administration cases is flooding the Supreme Court, putting the justices on the spot over the administration’s aggressive moves to eliminate federal programs, abolish independent agencies, and recast immigration law without congressional approval.

No. Without the Left weaponizing all of our courts with their lawsuits over every step the Trump administration takes, there would be nothing to appeal to the Supreme Court, emergency or otherwise. This Leftist obstructionism is borne solely of their disdain for, if not hatred of, all things Trump, Republican, or Conservative.

Nor is President Donald Trump (R) seeking to bypass Congress with any of his moves. He and his Cabinet Secretaries understand full well that his moves alone cannot be expected to last past the next election of a Progressive-Democrat President. He and his know full well that Congress needs to statutorily codify his moves in order for them to have any durability.

Trump also knows full well that continuing to wait through Congress’ stately political pace will mean nothing continues to get done in any of those milieus and that waiting through the court system’s drawn out judicial deliberation, suit, countersuit ad nauseum will mean not very much will get done.

The businessman simply is moving at the pace of business rather than at the dither pace of politics and judges. That’s to the good of our nation, no matter the gnashing of the Left and its Progressive-Democratic Party obstructors.