Tag Archives: political economy

Senator Rick Scott Has a Plan

Posted on by
Reply

No, in this article, I’m not referring to his 11 Point Plan to Rescue America; I’m writing about his urging American businesses to divest themselves of their investments and other business connections inside the People’s Republic of China.

Earlier this month, I wrote an open letter to American business leaders with a simple message: it’s time to cut ties with and decouple our supply chains from Communist China to realign US business with American values.

He went on.

We need a strategic economic decoupling from Communist China—that includes ending investment and partnerships with companies controlled by the CCP. This is something I have been calling for over a year. While decoupling must begin now, we know it’s not a process that will be completed overnight. Supply chains must readjust and be removed from the grasp of the Chinese Communist Party.

Scott is absolutely right. The PRC is an enemy nation, and business—any economic—ties with the nation are fraught with danger, not only for the individual business—the intellectual property and technology thefts Scott references—but for our national security—those intellectual property and technology thefts along with defense and diplomacy-related espionage and technology thefts. Every nation carries out such espionage, but that espionage by the PRC is strongly facilitated by the nature of the business ties PRC laws impose on companies doing business in, or with businesses in, the PRC.

What needs to be understood here, though, and I’m not sure even Scott fully understands the matter, is that every business in the PRC is under the thumb of the Communist Party of China. The PRC’s 2017 National Intelligence Law makes them so: every PRC company must answer all of that nation’s intelligence community requests for information regarding the company’s internal affairs, the company’s business dealings with other businesses, and the company’s information gleaned from its customers, whether individual or business. And if the company doesn’t have that information, it’s required to try to get it.

Micromanaging

Posted on by
Reply

A State government is reaching into the business decisions of private enterprise, presuming to dictate to State-domiciled businesses what their business decisions must be in an otherwise competitive labor market. Here’s Pennsylvania House of Representative Jennifer O’Mara (D, Delaware):

The Healthy Employee and Healthy Workplace Act will help Pennsylvania’s families by requiring employers to provide paid sick leave to their employees. Workers would be able to use paid sick leave to seek treatment for an illness or a family member’s illness, in addition to treatment related to domestic violence or sexual assault.

Elizabeth Stelle, director of policy analysis at the Commonwealth Foundation offers one reason this is a counterproductive, if not outright idiotic, idea.

The real question is how to help the small percentage of workers that don’t have this benefit. The answer is more flexibility, not more regulation. For example, the federal Working Families Flexibility Act would allow employers to give hourly workers the choice of accumulating “comp time” in lieu of overtime pay[.]

The Progressive-Democrat O’Mara and her cohorts don’t care about such trivia. For Progressive-Democrats, it’s not about individual choice—us average Americans are just too grindingly stupid to be trusted with making our own choices.

I offer another, more general objection, to the principle so plainly underlying O’Mara’s proposal. It’s about accruing personal and Party power in government and the ego trip of controlling other people’s lives and businesses.

There’s no need for this bill. That competitive labor market I mentioned will solve the matter. Just like “dental” and then health insurance became, in the competition for labor, a standard benefit and not a perk for the few.

Just like paid vacation became, in the competition for labor, a standard part of the worker’s pay package, and then grew from a few days to a week, to two weeks, and more. With accrual from year to year.

Just like paid sick leave became standard….

Now paid vacation and paid sick leave rapidly are becoming simply paid time off—adding the two original time blocks into a single time block with the same number of days that the two pay components separately had—with the worker no longer having to differentiate between the two because employers, if not Progressive-Democrats, trust their employees’ decisions.

They Haven’t Taken Enough

Posted on by
Reply

…so they want more. And more. And….

President Biden made a renewed push on Monday to galvanize congressional Democrats to overhaul the nation’s tax code and dramatically raise rates on corporations and ultra-wealthy Americans.
… Under his proposal, taxes would rise by $2.5 trillion….

And

The higher taxes would largely be borne by Wall Street and the top sliver of US households, in the form of a steeper corporate rate, a modified wealth tax….

That raised corporate tax rate is, in part, a withdrawal of the corporate tax cuts of the Trump administration, a reduction that made our companies globally competitive and brought their investments back home as well as encouraged increased foreign company investment in our nation. It’s also a net increase in rates over what existed prior to the Trump cuts.

That wealth tax includes a

minimum 20% tax on the incomes of US households worth $100 million or more

along with a tax on unrealized capital gains—that’s the “worth more” part. Those unrealized gains aren’t even income, either, since the assets experiencing the growth isn’t income.

Withdrawing all that money from the private economy is money that won’t be, can’t be, committed to R&D, other innovation, production facility improvement, production facility construction, wage and benefit increases for employees, job creation for additional employees, and on and on and on.

President Joe Biden (D) said his budget demands ensure that

corporations and the very wealthy pay their fair share.

Pay our fair share? What, I ask, is our fair share? Biden and his Progressive-Democrat cronies answer, “All that you have.”

Even one of the founders of the modern Progressive Movement, TR Roosevelt, might demur from this bit of confiscation:

Our country, this great Republic, means nothing unless it means the triumph…in the long run, of an economic system under which each man shall be guaranteed the opportunity to show the best that there is in him.

That is the essence of the American Dream, but Biden-Harris and his cronies want to cap our Dream and punish us American citizens for being successful.

Envy

Posted on by
Reply

President Joe Biden’s (D) Success in the American Dream tax. That’s what he and his Progressive-Democratic Party cronies are about to propose and to try to inflict on us. A minimum tax of 20% on income, and on the increased value of non-income assets over the prior year—whether or not those assets were sold and actual income received from the sale.

Because success—making it especially big—in our nation without the “help” of Big Government is anathema to Progressive-Democrats. Such success goes against their mantra that us average Americans can’t be trusted with our own decisions; our own definitions of our needs, our wants, our charities (and how to support them); our own means of satisfying our responsibilities and living with our liberties.

No, our American Dream must be, and must be limited to, what Progressive-Democrats say it is for all of us, not what each of the 330 million of us individuals say it is for each of us individuals.

Oh, and this: Biden and his syndicate cronies don’t even have a use for the tax money, nor have they claimed a plausible one. They just want it. They’re jealous that others have more of it than they do.

Idiocy

Posted on by
Reply

David Cameron, once (and future?) British Prime Minister, thinks that if Russian President Vladimir Putin attends the upcoming G-20 meeting, everyone else should boycott the meeting.

Cameron griped, among other things that when Putin and then-President Barack Obama (D) attended the G-20 meetings in ’14 and ’15,

the conversations with Mr Putin were worse than pointless.

Then Cameron gave the game away, amusingly, without recognizing it.

What does or doesn’t happen at the G-20 won’t change the world.

Indeed. The G-20 is a coffee klatch wherein previously and behind the scenes decisions are announced. Otherwise, the gathering is just a see-and-be-scene show for the political glitterati of the developed world.

Conversations with Putin are, indeed, worse than pointless, but avoiding the G-20 because Putin shows up is the wrong answer.

Instead, boycott Putin, don’t waste time on conversations with him. Don’t interact with him at all. For those two seated next to him at dinners, they should turn their backs on him and converse with the dinner companions on the other side.

Boycotting the G-20 if he shows up would be just a toddler-ish face-spiting nose-cutting temper tantrum. Or a cowering away from the Big Bad Man.