Households taxed 100% of their income.
"The Constitutional Council has judged such a high
rate of taxation to be unfair, leaving the government to rehash it to
hit companies rather than individuals."
"Since then, a top administrative court has
determined that a marginal tax rate higher than 66.66 percent on a
single household risked being considered as confiscatory by the council."
You fucking think?
So remember folks, while Obama's leftist ideas on wealth and economics scares you, it ain't French.
Which leads me to wonder, why do wealthy families stay in France? I know many are indeed leaving but what are others waiting for? Socialists drain you.
****
Top 10 countries for tax evasion:
True, high tax rates doesn't equate to tax evasion as the American example shows.
Quotes from the link:
From Washington, D.C., and Brasilia to Moscow and Madrid, the taxman is
on a mission to squeeze more revenue from people, many of whom are
struggling to make ends meet amid the worst economic slowdown since the
Great Depression.
Naturally, go after the small guy? Don't focus on the bigger fish. No sirreeeee. What a disturbing sentence.
"Countries made the list because they either lack the will or the
resources to collect all the monies that they are owed. The U.S. ranks
first based on absolute dollars partly because its economy is so big.
After all, it’s the world’s largest. Americans, though, are more willing
to pay their taxes than people in other countries are, which is known
as “tax morale.” A 2005 study published by Yale University found that
the U.S. had a higher rate of tax morale than other counties surveyed."
There you go. Tax reform. Try it.
"In third-place Italy, the media is full of reports about people with no legitimate income driving expensive sports cars."
Hi-larious. According to the article Italy's black marker is 27% of GDP. I read it could be as high as 36%. When I was in Italy for the first time in 1990 it was interesting to see all these kids riding in Aprilia motorcycles. I could barely afford to buy a bicycle.
Quote from the comments thread:
"...Then there would be no tax cheating and no punishing people for their
NATURAL BEHAVIOUR - tax dodging. It's like punishing a tiger for killing
a human being. But tigers, wolves etc. are wild animals and they need
to eat!
Unless! The governments get FREE SLAVES by placing the
tax evaders in prisons and confiscating their money and property. Then
such governments are criminals themselves.
TAPOS = Tax At Point Of Sale."
2013-05-20
Non-Sequitur: Ordering Pizza
INT. Room. Late day. Hairy figure much like Chewbacca on the phone ordering a pizza.
Chewbacca: It's Chew-Bacco! Chew...aw forget it.
Chewbacca: It's Chew-Bacco! Chew...aw forget it.
Happy Victoria Day
Quebec nationalists decided to make this day 'Patriot's Day' in this province but no one outside the parochial chambers of hardliners really cares.
I'm not much of a monarchist but Victoria had a global impact so I'll stick with her.
I'm not much of a monarchist but Victoria had a global impact so I'll stick with her.
2013-05-18
Lost Classics
Can Detroit Ever Comeback?
Take note - and heart - Detroit. By the late 16th century Rome's population had fallen to a mere 25 000 from a high of about 1 million during its Imperial glory. The chaotic city had been over run by criminals and tumbled into disrepute.
But all that changed with the arrival of Sixtus V who ushered in a Roman renaissance - ironic given his cultural ignorance - giving way to the Baroque period. Rome had revived itself and rebounded by the 17th century.
Although I'm not sure Detroit needs a tyrannical character quite like Sixtus V who was all too happy to execute people to set Rome on a proper course.
But all that changed with the arrival of Sixtus V who ushered in a Roman renaissance - ironic given his cultural ignorance - giving way to the Baroque period. Rome had revived itself and rebounded by the 17th century.
Although I'm not sure Detroit needs a tyrannical character quite like Sixtus V who was all too happy to execute people to set Rome on a proper course.
Pandora's Box Is Open
Something tells me this IRS thing goes deep.
What a rat and a weasel Harry Reid is.
I bet that he has more shady business deals in his closet than Romney ever had.
What a rat and a weasel Harry Reid is.
I bet that he has more shady business deals in his closet than Romney ever had.
Question
Are the scandals hanging over the Obama administration worse than Watergate?
Watergate became what it did because, I think, it was a first where one party broke into an office of its opponent. It was a double victory for the left because the Democrats were the victims. The story was broken by the Washington Post and made into a movie (naturally, Robert Redford playing a part) in which 'Deep throat' was made famous for other than sucking.
The rest is history.
Watergate is tattooed into the mindset of the American (and international) public.
Lots of scandals have broken since then and I wonder, is Watergate still as big a deal as some of the ones we've seen?
For our sake here, it seems to me Obama's administration has been wracked by serious problems - worse than Bush even - as I've highlighted in previous posts (I forgot to mention his totalitarian behavior towards privacy issues including with the press and whistleblowers).
Ok, let's say Fast and Furious is like Iran-Contra. Even. Let's say his continuation of the war machine (including the opening of Guantanamo - remember that?) and attack of Libya without Congressional approval and drone strikes killing innocents. Perhaps not quite even with Bush's invasion of Iraq but really, not that far since he was not supposed to be a "violent" President. Katrina? By all accounts, Sandy wasn't handled any better and the same bureaucratic wrinkles that were present in 2005 were still around in 2012.
Benghazi? Plenty of embassy attacks took place under Bush - 13 I think. The problem is that, to our knowledge, none of those were blamed on a video to which a man was put in jail and stand down orders were given perhaps resulting in the deaths of American citizens. Benghazi is precisely disturbing for the attempted and original narrative, its apparent incompetence and subsequent refusal to set the record straight.
Pretty serious given America's standing is at stake.
Contrary to Hilary, it matters a whole lot. It should give pause to those who believe she's Presidential material given her "what difference does it make?" quip when the administration still hadn't come clean.
There are a bunch of little issues and then came the IRS.
This is a biggie. A major one. A scandal that points directly to the "tone" set by the president himself.
This was an assault on free citizens.
To the left, both are case closed. But they're choosing to be naive here.
Investigators are still interviewing employees of the Cincinnati branch so how can it be closed?
Yes, it's all political stone throwing on the part of the GOP. Believe that, and you've abandoned your duty as a private citizen to seek the truth from your own government.
Apathy drawn along political lines is a sad thing.
I know. Canada does that well.
Watergate became what it did because, I think, it was a first where one party broke into an office of its opponent. It was a double victory for the left because the Democrats were the victims. The story was broken by the Washington Post and made into a movie (naturally, Robert Redford playing a part) in which 'Deep throat' was made famous for other than sucking.
The rest is history.
Watergate is tattooed into the mindset of the American (and international) public.
Lots of scandals have broken since then and I wonder, is Watergate still as big a deal as some of the ones we've seen?
For our sake here, it seems to me Obama's administration has been wracked by serious problems - worse than Bush even - as I've highlighted in previous posts (I forgot to mention his totalitarian behavior towards privacy issues including with the press and whistleblowers).
Ok, let's say Fast and Furious is like Iran-Contra. Even. Let's say his continuation of the war machine (including the opening of Guantanamo - remember that?) and attack of Libya without Congressional approval and drone strikes killing innocents. Perhaps not quite even with Bush's invasion of Iraq but really, not that far since he was not supposed to be a "violent" President. Katrina? By all accounts, Sandy wasn't handled any better and the same bureaucratic wrinkles that were present in 2005 were still around in 2012.
Benghazi? Plenty of embassy attacks took place under Bush - 13 I think. The problem is that, to our knowledge, none of those were blamed on a video to which a man was put in jail and stand down orders were given perhaps resulting in the deaths of American citizens. Benghazi is precisely disturbing for the attempted and original narrative, its apparent incompetence and subsequent refusal to set the record straight.
Pretty serious given America's standing is at stake.
Contrary to Hilary, it matters a whole lot. It should give pause to those who believe she's Presidential material given her "what difference does it make?" quip when the administration still hadn't come clean.
There are a bunch of little issues and then came the IRS.
This is a biggie. A major one. A scandal that points directly to the "tone" set by the president himself.
This was an assault on free citizens.
To the left, both are case closed. But they're choosing to be naive here.
Investigators are still interviewing employees of the Cincinnati branch so how can it be closed?
Yes, it's all political stone throwing on the part of the GOP. Believe that, and you've abandoned your duty as a private citizen to seek the truth from your own government.
Apathy drawn along political lines is a sad thing.
I know. Canada does that well.
2013-05-17
Quotes Of The Day
"I think it's because liberals (especially the very liberal)
don't understand conservatives, and as a result attribute evil
motives to them (given the incomplete and often wrong vision in
their heads, this is the only reason that makes sense to them).
And when you're fighting against evil, it's better to have a corrupt Democrat in office than an evil Republican. So lying and cheating are OK with liberals in their fight against "evil". The ends are more important than the means when fighting evil."
Who's irrational now?
"Barack Obama's "intelligence" is a similar phenomenon to George W. Bush's "stupidity."
Pretty much.
If you're an astute student of history it's Obama's mundane mediocrity is abundantly clear.
A leopard can't change his spots. His from the Chicago political machine and that's how he rolls.
And when you're fighting against evil, it's better to have a corrupt Democrat in office than an evil Republican. So lying and cheating are OK with liberals in their fight against "evil". The ends are more important than the means when fighting evil."
Who's irrational now?
"Barack Obama's "intelligence" is a similar phenomenon to George W. Bush's "stupidity."
Pretty much.
If you're an astute student of history it's Obama's mundane mediocrity is abundantly clear.
A leopard can't change his spots. His from the Chicago political machine and that's how he rolls.
Black Confederate Soldiers
"It has been estimated that over 65,000 Southern blacks were in
the Confederate ranks. Over 13,000 of these, "saw the elephant" also known as
meeting the enemy in combat. These Black Confederates included both slave and
free. The Confederate Congress did not approve blacks to be officially enlisted
as soldiers (except as musicians), until late in the war. But in the ranks it
was a different story. Many Confederate officers did not obey the mandates of
politicians, they frequently enlisted blacks with the simple criteria, "Will you
fight?" Historian Ervin Jordan, explains that "biracial units" were frequently
organized "by local Confederate and State militia Commanders in response to
immediate threats in the form of Union raids". Dr. Leonard Haynes, an
African-American professor at Southern University, stated, "When you eliminate
the black Confederate soldier, you've eliminated the a part of the history of
the South."
You know. We really do rob people of history.
You know. We really do rob people of history.
Taxes And Civilization
A popular claim by progressives these days is the quote by Oliver Wendell Holmes 'taxes is the price we pay fir civilization.' Yes, they do. Until they become oppressive and inefficient. Then they tend to destroy civilizations.
For leftists, taxes are a means to an end. They've convinced themselves there would be no civilization without a powerful (and intrusive) state and the taxes itcollects coerces from people.
They speak about how past documents like the Constitution, as an example, must be updated (to meet their ideals of course) but have little qualms about clinging on to progressive programs increasingly under duress.
Progressives, in this way, become reactionary protecting the ideal and not the results or the practicality of that ideal.
But being a guy wracked with self-doubt, I wondered if there's some truth to what they say. Possibly. But can we honestly say we wouldn't have roads or education without taxes? What they mean is public stuff. Taxes are just moneystaken confiscated from private individuals who create it.
Creation of wealth is something progressives simply can't seem to grasp. They think it's one guy raping another.
So I decided it's time to get into the story of taxes. To me, taxes are the most important, under appreciated aspect of civil society. To me, it's taxes that threaten us more than climate change or gun control.
I started with 'For good and evil: The impact of taxes on the course of civilization' by Charles Adams.
I'm sure I'll be quoting from it soon enough.
For leftists, taxes are a means to an end. They've convinced themselves there would be no civilization without a powerful (and intrusive) state and the taxes it
They speak about how past documents like the Constitution, as an example, must be updated (to meet their ideals of course) but have little qualms about clinging on to progressive programs increasingly under duress.
Progressives, in this way, become reactionary protecting the ideal and not the results or the practicality of that ideal.
But being a guy wracked with self-doubt, I wondered if there's some truth to what they say. Possibly. But can we honestly say we wouldn't have roads or education without taxes? What they mean is public stuff. Taxes are just moneys
Creation of wealth is something progressives simply can't seem to grasp. They think it's one guy raping another.
So I decided it's time to get into the story of taxes. To me, taxes are the most important, under appreciated aspect of civil society. To me, it's taxes that threaten us more than climate change or gun control.
I started with 'For good and evil: The impact of taxes on the course of civilization' by Charles Adams.
I'm sure I'll be quoting from it soon enough.
Quote Of The Day
About Obama's week: "We owe Nixon and Bush an apology."
One for the road:
He found out about the IRS scandal by reading the newspaper?
Wtf?
One for the road:
"I don't recall GWB's admin being corrupt. One could say they
were mistaken, but not mired in scandals. More than half of Obama's
first choices to fill major cabinet positions could not do so
because they were under investigation. He didn't even start
clean."
He found out about the IRS scandal by reading the newspaper?
Wtf?
Of Tyranny And Liberty: The Cynicism And Lies Of The Parti Quebecois.
It was hard finding a title for this post. There were so many that popped into my head that I ended up taking the easy option by simply incorporating them into the body of this message.
The Parti Quebecois, let me start, are something else. And I mean that in the most insulting way.
This open letter to "les autres" is so cynical, insulting and flat out sophomoric it should lay to rest the decadent intellectualism that festers within the halls of the PQ and its pathetic party.
I thought about breaking it down and started to but soon realized I was debating with childish quackery.
It's a fucking national disgrace to have among us such cynical politicians who lie and insult us while using doublespeak and pseudo-Machiavellian overtones wrapped up in vapid rhetoric.
Tell you what. Should it ever present itself, I would never speak to a PQ minister in French. Ever. The beg like whores to be respected but I can't respect an entity that has no respect for its citizens.
Businesses need to step up and engage in civil disobedience. DON'T COMPLY.
You can't be an intelligent, upstanding individual and buy into this shit. That's what it is. Shit. Vomit intellectualism. It's an embarrassment.
Dirt bags. Go SOLVE SOME REAL PROBLEMS and STOP DIVIDING US.
The Parti Quebecois, let me start, are something else. And I mean that in the most insulting way.
This open letter to "les autres" is so cynical, insulting and flat out sophomoric it should lay to rest the decadent intellectualism that festers within the halls of the PQ and its pathetic party.
I thought about breaking it down and started to but soon realized I was debating with childish quackery.
It's a fucking national disgrace to have among us such cynical politicians who lie and insult us while using doublespeak and pseudo-Machiavellian overtones wrapped up in vapid rhetoric.
Tell you what. Should it ever present itself, I would never speak to a PQ minister in French. Ever. The beg like whores to be respected but I can't respect an entity that has no respect for its citizens.
Businesses need to step up and engage in civil disobedience. DON'T COMPLY.
You can't be an intelligent, upstanding individual and buy into this shit. That's what it is. Shit. Vomit intellectualism. It's an embarrassment.
Dirt bags. Go SOLVE SOME REAL PROBLEMS and STOP DIVIDING US.
Who Are Libertarians?
Libertarians are just guys that have been around the block a few times and who got fed up of the fake scenery.
Captain Awesome Unappreciated
From CNS News:
"House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Thursday that Republicans are using scandals coming out of the White House to undermine President Barack Obama out of "fear," because he is “such a great president.”
“They make so much of these issues, because this president is such a great president,” Pelosi said during a press conference on Capitol Hill, ending a week filled with new revelations about scandals involving the terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) targeting conservative groups, and the Justice Department seizing phone records of reporters at the Associated Press.
“He’s a visionary—you’ve heard me say this so many times,” Pelosi said of Obama.
This. This is priceless.
This is pure classic.
You're all just jealous and too stupid to see how awesome Captain Awesome is. He's the most awesomest awesoming individual to ever be awesome on this less awesome country!
Reminds me of these folks.
***
How cool and awesome is the President? Try this.
Bah.
I just linked to two conservative papers. /faints.
It's all a vast, VAST right-wing conspiracy funded by the Koch brothers.
You're just jealous.
"House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Thursday that Republicans are using scandals coming out of the White House to undermine President Barack Obama out of "fear," because he is “such a great president.”
“They make so much of these issues, because this president is such a great president,” Pelosi said during a press conference on Capitol Hill, ending a week filled with new revelations about scandals involving the terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) targeting conservative groups, and the Justice Department seizing phone records of reporters at the Associated Press.
“He’s a visionary—you’ve heard me say this so many times,” Pelosi said of Obama.
This. This is priceless.
This is pure classic.
You're all just jealous and too stupid to see how awesome Captain Awesome is. He's the most awesomest awesoming individual to ever be awesome on this less awesome country!
Reminds me of these folks.
***
How cool and awesome is the President? Try this.
Bah.
I just linked to two conservative papers. /faints.
It's all a vast, VAST right-wing conspiracy funded by the Koch brothers.
You're just jealous.
Horrible Week, Month, Year For The President
It's been a rough year thus far for the most powerful man on the planet. His cape is riddled with holes and if he is indeed human, it must be showing on his face behind closed doors.
Now the Federal Courts deemed his use of Recess Appointment Power as unconstitutional.
This is unacceptable, I would think, from a man who lectured on the constitution.
I'm getting the feeling the president is shutting down and not listening to anyone as he begins an attempt to rule as oppose to govern. If he doesn't get his way, he just blames partisan politics and (where necessary) Bush. Simple.
Sycophant liberal academic: Unconstitutional, eh? Abusing the constitution, eh? Simpson, eh? Well, time to overhaul the entire constitution to fit Obama's visions. He has the future in sight, the constitution is a dead piece of paper written by old men from a time yonder. It no longer applies. Let's create one giant Moses like amendment reflecting progressive ideals. There. Fixed.
Now the Federal Courts deemed his use of Recess Appointment Power as unconstitutional.
This is unacceptable, I would think, from a man who lectured on the constitution.
I'm getting the feeling the president is shutting down and not listening to anyone as he begins an attempt to rule as oppose to govern. If he doesn't get his way, he just blames partisan politics and (where necessary) Bush. Simple.
Sycophant liberal academic: Unconstitutional, eh? Abusing the constitution, eh? Simpson, eh? Well, time to overhaul the entire constitution to fit Obama's visions. He has the future in sight, the constitution is a dead piece of paper written by old men from a time yonder. It no longer applies. Let's create one giant Moses like amendment reflecting progressive ideals. There. Fixed.
A Rudderless Nation: Obama Under Major Fire
Chris Matthews has said a lot of sycophantic and juvenile things in defense of the Obama administration but he deserves credit for this.
He called for professionals to take over from sycophants. Suggesting, I guess, amateurs ran the asylum. And it showed. It showed on Benghazi, it shows on the economy, it shows on domestic issues.
This is sober and mature conversation among liberals here.
They are absolutely correct (though they continue to underplay Benghazi) and pretty much echos what libertarians/conservatives are arguing. Obama achieved unity alright; just not the way he intended. He managed to unite the angst and alienate his 'allies" in the press.
Impressive.
No wonder whistle-blowers are stepping up.
In other clip Matthews asked:
"what part of the Presidency does Obama like? He doesn't like dealing with other politicians; that means his own cabinet, members of Congress of either party, he doesn't like dealing with the press....he doesn't like lobbying for the bills he cares about, he doesn't like selling to the press...he doesn't seem to like to be an executive."
This is not the first I hear of this. It's out there and have heard it from numerous insiders who are frank with the fact he's indifferent, cold and aloof with people. Eleonore Clift, another liberal sycophant in the press, admitted as much on the McLaughlin Group a couple of months back - that he didn't like "politicking." To which I wondered, why did he run for office then? It might explain his penchant for blaming others for his troubles; he's plain to aloof or lazy to seize the god damn strings and lead.
The irony is, for all his calls to stop playing cynical political games, that's exactly what he excels at it seems.
I'm afraid they're screwed. Obama is simply not a leader. He's no Reagan - a President he often references and quotes.
Not good. Worse than Bush.
He's lost the plot.
Finally, people on his side are questioning authority. This is healthy. And no cries of racism to boot!
***
Krugman, for his part, needs to man up and quit defending failed economic policies. As if!
On the other hand, Lawrence O'Donnell is choosing instead to spin and pretend.
Seriously, buddy. It's over. Give it up or become irrelevant.
/face palm. Loses eye sight.
He called for professionals to take over from sycophants. Suggesting, I guess, amateurs ran the asylum. And it showed. It showed on Benghazi, it shows on the economy, it shows on domestic issues.
This is sober and mature conversation among liberals here.
They are absolutely correct (though they continue to underplay Benghazi) and pretty much echos what libertarians/conservatives are arguing. Obama achieved unity alright; just not the way he intended. He managed to unite the angst and alienate his 'allies" in the press.
Impressive.
No wonder whistle-blowers are stepping up.
In other clip Matthews asked:
"what part of the Presidency does Obama like? He doesn't like dealing with other politicians; that means his own cabinet, members of Congress of either party, he doesn't like dealing with the press....he doesn't like lobbying for the bills he cares about, he doesn't like selling to the press...he doesn't seem to like to be an executive."
This is not the first I hear of this. It's out there and have heard it from numerous insiders who are frank with the fact he's indifferent, cold and aloof with people. Eleonore Clift, another liberal sycophant in the press, admitted as much on the McLaughlin Group a couple of months back - that he didn't like "politicking." To which I wondered, why did he run for office then? It might explain his penchant for blaming others for his troubles; he's plain to aloof or lazy to seize the god damn strings and lead.
The irony is, for all his calls to stop playing cynical political games, that's exactly what he excels at it seems.
I'm afraid they're screwed. Obama is simply not a leader. He's no Reagan - a President he often references and quotes.
Not good. Worse than Bush.
He's lost the plot.
Finally, people on his side are questioning authority. This is healthy. And no cries of racism to boot!
***
Krugman, for his part, needs to man up and quit defending failed economic policies. As if!
On the other hand, Lawrence O'Donnell is choosing instead to spin and pretend.
Seriously, buddy. It's over. Give it up or become irrelevant.
/face palm. Loses eye sight.
2013-05-16
Rand Paul For 2016
Rand Paul (R)-KY was on Howie Carr today.
A must listen.
***
16 000 IRS agents takes over Obamacare.
Not. Good.
***
The liberal record on:
Benghazi: An insensitive and disgusting video.
Boston: White militiaman tea-partier angry on tax day.
Arizona: A right-winger.
IRS scandal: Tea party deserved it. Heads rolled; end of story.
Fast and Furious: What's that?
All. Wrong.
***
The ends justifies the means.
A must listen.
***
16 000 IRS agents takes over Obamacare.
Not. Good.
***
The liberal record on:
Benghazi: An insensitive and disgusting video.
Boston: White militiaman tea-partier angry on tax day.
Arizona: A right-winger.
IRS scandal: Tea party deserved it. Heads rolled; end of story.
Fast and Furious: What's that?
All. Wrong.
***
The ends justifies the means.
Money Doesn't Come With Class
We often apply, or at least imply, the term 'sense of entitlement' to a certain previous generation, the lazy or those on welfare.
Best to remember, though, it can most certainly be applied to the wealthy.
Money can't buy class.
Best to remember, though, it can most certainly be applied to the wealthy.
Money can't buy class.
Piece Of Advice
If you plan to ever lend or loan money to a friend or family member be prepared to accept potentially becoming a villain if you ever ask for the money back.
Money makes people of low character coo-coo. They suspend all proper and decent judgment when it gets in their veins; especially if they somehow feel entitled to it or justified in their little brains they don't owe it back. A debtor that tries to make good is not the issue here. A debtor that squelches is.
Get it in writing that way it proves they were expected to pay it back - legally and morally.
Those people you should cut out of your life immediately. You don't want the headaches or shit like that around.
Surround yourself with upstanding individuals.
It's not that hard if you try.
Money makes people of low character coo-coo. They suspend all proper and decent judgment when it gets in their veins; especially if they somehow feel entitled to it or justified in their little brains they don't owe it back. A debtor that tries to make good is not the issue here. A debtor that squelches is.
Get it in writing that way it proves they were expected to pay it back - legally and morally.
Those people you should cut out of your life immediately. You don't want the headaches or shit like that around.
Surround yourself with upstanding individuals.
It's not that hard if you try.
Blaming The Victims In The IRS Scandal
Ga'head.
Try and tell me liberalism in its current form is not dead. That's not infested by piece of crap and amoral logic. The New Republic used to be a strong voice for liberalism. Now? Well read for yourself with some guy calling the IRS scandal "trumped up." The usual "they're paranoid" drivel follows. But above all, what I find most outrageous is the fact he blames the victims for - get this - FOLLOWING THE LAW. They brought it upon themselves!
Yeah, you next time don't wear provocative clothing and no one will rape you!
Jesus Christ, this new breed of liberal "thinkers" are just terrible. Awful. They stand for nothing but big government. The reasoning used to defend, for example, the IRS is staggering.
Can't anyone just stand up and side by their fellow citizens anymore and just say, "hey man, it's not right."
After all, it could happen to ANYONE.
The President himself described the actions revealed in the IG report as "unacceptable." Which probably means it's really, really fucking disturbing.
This is an example of a branch of the government singling out one set of people. Not right. Wrong. Unethical.
What can't liberals see in this?
All I read is a bunch of bull shit tu quoque musings, justifications for 'two wrongs make a right' and all sorts of idiotic arguments that make no sense.
Try and tell me liberalism in its current form is not dead. That's not infested by piece of crap and amoral logic. The New Republic used to be a strong voice for liberalism. Now? Well read for yourself with some guy calling the IRS scandal "trumped up." The usual "they're paranoid" drivel follows. But above all, what I find most outrageous is the fact he blames the victims for - get this - FOLLOWING THE LAW. They brought it upon themselves!
Yeah, you next time don't wear provocative clothing and no one will rape you!
Jesus Christ, this new breed of liberal "thinkers" are just terrible. Awful. They stand for nothing but big government. The reasoning used to defend, for example, the IRS is staggering.
Can't anyone just stand up and side by their fellow citizens anymore and just say, "hey man, it's not right."
After all, it could happen to ANYONE.
The President himself described the actions revealed in the IG report as "unacceptable." Which probably means it's really, really fucking disturbing.
This is an example of a branch of the government singling out one set of people. Not right. Wrong. Unethical.
What can't liberals see in this?
All I read is a bunch of bull shit tu quoque musings, justifications for 'two wrongs make a right' and all sorts of idiotic arguments that make no sense.
Pissing On The IRS
Man, the spinning has already begun and apologists are in full force. Why can't people just fucking say together, "that ain't right!"
After all, it can happen to YOU.
Mathis mock-pissing on the IRS sign of course is reminiscent of the cover of Who's Next by The Who.
Incidentally an album that would likely be in my personal top 10 thank you very much. Awesome. Quadrophenia too.
2013-05-15
Libertarians Moving To New Hampshire
Free State Project.
They apparently are having an impact. They may get a tad passionate but, hey, when you have to fight off creeping tyranny you tend to get vocal I reckon. If the inroads being made continue, we may finally have a libertarian state in play and with it some examples of what can and can't work in such a political and social structure. Flush out those Massachusetts liberals!
Just as a point of interest, while state, local and sales taxes are the lowest in the Union, property taxes are sky high from what I've been told.
They apparently are having an impact. They may get a tad passionate but, hey, when you have to fight off creeping tyranny you tend to get vocal I reckon. If the inroads being made continue, we may finally have a libertarian state in play and with it some examples of what can and can't work in such a political and social structure. Flush out those Massachusetts liberals!
Just as a point of interest, while state, local and sales taxes are the lowest in the Union, property taxes are sky high from what I've been told.
No Zoning Laws Here
Oh I've had my run-ins with bureaucratic urban planners. Whatever would we do without them?
Cough.
Houston does fine apparently with no zoning laws.
As Staley explains, that all changed with the ascendancy of the Progressive movement in the early years of the last century. Progressives argued that the common-law approach to nuisance was too expensive, time-consuming, and complicated, making it a difficult avenue for the less fortunate members of society to use. Zoning would be more efficient and fair, they claimed. Yet whatever the good intentions behind it, its effect, writes Staley, “was to fully politicize land-use decisions,” often in favour of the politically powerful.
Houstonians, unique among the residents of large American cities, rejected zoning in popular referendums on three separate occasions: in 1948, in 1962, and again in 1993. Despite pleas before the 1993 vote from the Houston Homeowner’s Association about the need “to stop the cancerous erosion of the quality of life in many of our neighborhoods,” the city’s registered voters did not seem overly concerned about their quality of life, as few of them even bothered to come out for the vote.
Notice progressives lost three times but clearly the will of Houstonians means little to them. Naturally. They don't agree with the coercive mindset of a progressive and that's not good for the children.
Cough.
Houston does fine apparently with no zoning laws.
As Staley explains, that all changed with the ascendancy of the Progressive movement in the early years of the last century. Progressives argued that the common-law approach to nuisance was too expensive, time-consuming, and complicated, making it a difficult avenue for the less fortunate members of society to use. Zoning would be more efficient and fair, they claimed. Yet whatever the good intentions behind it, its effect, writes Staley, “was to fully politicize land-use decisions,” often in favour of the politically powerful.
Houstonians, unique among the residents of large American cities, rejected zoning in popular referendums on three separate occasions: in 1948, in 1962, and again in 1993. Despite pleas before the 1993 vote from the Houston Homeowner’s Association about the need “to stop the cancerous erosion of the quality of life in many of our neighborhoods,” the city’s registered voters did not seem overly concerned about their quality of life, as few of them even bothered to come out for the vote.
Notice progressives lost three times but clearly the will of Houstonians means little to them. Naturally. They don't agree with the coercive mindset of a progressive and that's not good for the children.
More Ramifications On Obamacare: Native Americans
Ah, the paternalism of it all.
I thought we were not supposed to repeat history with faulty premises, yet, there we are continuing to repeat the same paternalistic bull shit in the name of the "collective."
Well, the bill has past. Now people are finding out what's in it. Politicians are trying to find ways to exempt themselves, businesses are bolting, low income families will be pinched, people who were happy with their plans are screwed and now Native Americans will have to prove their 'Indianess.'
It manages to piss off a lot of people it seems.
I thought we were not supposed to repeat history with faulty premises, yet, there we are continuing to repeat the same paternalistic bull shit in the name of the "collective."
Well, the bill has past. Now people are finding out what's in it. Politicians are trying to find ways to exempt themselves, businesses are bolting, low income families will be pinched, people who were happy with their plans are screwed and now Native Americans will have to prove their 'Indianess.'
It manages to piss off a lot of people it seems.
Sirius: Worth The Money For Now
It's been about two months since I've signed on to Sirius satellite radio. A friend asked me if it was worth it.
I think it is. I love the fact the flow of an interview is not interrupted by commercials. Moreover, the interviews aren't forced. It's annoying to have to listen to an interviewer treat a guess like they're on a an assembly line. It's stressful and I rarely feel gratified afterwards.
For example, Howard Stern was on fire this week after a two week hiatus. Guests included ZZ Top, Rod Stewart, Jimmy Kimmel, JJ Abrams and Roger Daltry.
How many 'shock disc jockey's' get that many quality guests in just three days, eh?
It was riveting stuff.
Above all there's a certain believability factor with the interviews. It doesn't feel superficial and the mutual respect between the interviewer and guest is often clear.
Stern is a very good interviewer and it's amazing that guests are usually candid with him. It's the secret genius of it all.
There's nothing like it on TV or radio largely because everything is so god damn regulated on the mainstream airwaves all you have are safe interviews that come off as formulaic and lame.
On that front alone it's worth the $15 a month. I know there are other considerations but that's a huge plus. In a 15 minute car ride it's not uncommon to be listening to seven or eight minutes of commercials on traditional radio. Half my time is spent changing channels desperately trying to find something of interest to listen to. I avoid all that on Sirius.
Funny that Stern is so hated by so many. I find it hilarious. Half those people doing the attacking only wish they have his pull.
****
Stern's been lamenting lately a lot arguing that the music of today is nothing like it was during the golden age. In many ways he's right but as Stewart mentioned it was rock'n roll "all new" back then. The death of the album doesn't help either I reckon.
There is good music been made today but it doesn't encapsulate an entire generation like it did. It's far more fragmented now.
It's stuff I think about too. Why is it Led Zeppelin, The Who, The Beatles and The Rolling Stones, to use obvious examples, continue to captivate audiences while today's bands can only dream of attaining such a legendary status?
On the way back from work 'I love rock'n roll' by Joan Jett and the Blackhearts was playing. And it brought me back to the 3rd or 4th grade (I was maybe 10 years old - I believe the song was recorded in 1982) where it was popular among the kids.
Imagine. A Joan Jett song was what we were listening to. There were no 'boy bands' or 'Disney channels' while manufactured songs were still a decade away. I believe Menudo was the first of its kind.
Today, the kids listen to garbage I feel. Don't mean to be the old crank waving his fist but when I was 10 or 11 I began my journey into the music masters. Be it Muddy Waters, Bruce Springsteen or the first artist I bought a 45 single from, John Cougar.
The access and exposure to the great musicians was a lot closer to us. Now they feel like a distant galaxy away. It's why I try to complement my daughter's love of One Direction with, say, Lou Reed. It seems to work because sometimes she asks to listen to classic bands and singers in the car.
I think it is. I love the fact the flow of an interview is not interrupted by commercials. Moreover, the interviews aren't forced. It's annoying to have to listen to an interviewer treat a guess like they're on a an assembly line. It's stressful and I rarely feel gratified afterwards.
For example, Howard Stern was on fire this week after a two week hiatus. Guests included ZZ Top, Rod Stewart, Jimmy Kimmel, JJ Abrams and Roger Daltry.
How many 'shock disc jockey's' get that many quality guests in just three days, eh?
It was riveting stuff.
Above all there's a certain believability factor with the interviews. It doesn't feel superficial and the mutual respect between the interviewer and guest is often clear.
Stern is a very good interviewer and it's amazing that guests are usually candid with him. It's the secret genius of it all.
There's nothing like it on TV or radio largely because everything is so god damn regulated on the mainstream airwaves all you have are safe interviews that come off as formulaic and lame.
On that front alone it's worth the $15 a month. I know there are other considerations but that's a huge plus. In a 15 minute car ride it's not uncommon to be listening to seven or eight minutes of commercials on traditional radio. Half my time is spent changing channels desperately trying to find something of interest to listen to. I avoid all that on Sirius.
Funny that Stern is so hated by so many. I find it hilarious. Half those people doing the attacking only wish they have his pull.
****
Stern's been lamenting lately a lot arguing that the music of today is nothing like it was during the golden age. In many ways he's right but as Stewart mentioned it was rock'n roll "all new" back then. The death of the album doesn't help either I reckon.
There is good music been made today but it doesn't encapsulate an entire generation like it did. It's far more fragmented now.
It's stuff I think about too. Why is it Led Zeppelin, The Who, The Beatles and The Rolling Stones, to use obvious examples, continue to captivate audiences while today's bands can only dream of attaining such a legendary status?
On the way back from work 'I love rock'n roll' by Joan Jett and the Blackhearts was playing. And it brought me back to the 3rd or 4th grade (I was maybe 10 years old - I believe the song was recorded in 1982) where it was popular among the kids.
Imagine. A Joan Jett song was what we were listening to. There were no 'boy bands' or 'Disney channels' while manufactured songs were still a decade away. I believe Menudo was the first of its kind.
Today, the kids listen to garbage I feel. Don't mean to be the old crank waving his fist but when I was 10 or 11 I began my journey into the music masters. Be it Muddy Waters, Bruce Springsteen or the first artist I bought a 45 single from, John Cougar.
The access and exposure to the great musicians was a lot closer to us. Now they feel like a distant galaxy away. It's why I try to complement my daughter's love of One Direction with, say, Lou Reed. It seems to work because sometimes she asks to listen to classic bands and singers in the car.
Nation IQ Rankings
Ah. Interesting.
Two things. Italy is the highest ranking European country and Canada is 1 point above the USA. Which basically confirms what I thought all along: We share a brain.
For details on this topic read an essay from Harvard.
Two things. Italy is the highest ranking European country and Canada is 1 point above the USA. Which basically confirms what I thought all along: We share a brain.
For details on this topic read an essay from Harvard.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)