Thursday, November 3, 2011
This is where traditional American, old school liberalism needs to reassert itself. American liberalism was not anti-industrial. As a matter of fact, they cringed at radical environmentalist proposals in the 1960s that feel far short of the Lisa Jackson EPA. They understood that labor needed industry in a basic way, but also needed help. Labor needed prosperous industry to employ workers and pay for pension and social programs.
At some point, liberals joined with leftists and therein lies the current problems.
Liberals understand that business needs to profit so that it can grow, employ more people, and pay its taxes. The Left sees business as a milk cow to be squeezed as much as possible, then whipped when it can provide no more milk.
The fact is that, given the knowledge that the United States can lead the world in energy production, including oil, we can pay for our social welfare system. We need to make tough decisions about federal spending on such things as education and we definitely need to cut waste. But, in reality, if we unleash American energy and manufacturing from its regulatory shackles, the resulting economic growth can pay for social welfare IF we do not start tacking on a whole bunch of new programs.
I don't mean gutting all environmental and labor laws. But we need to recognize that a balance must exist. We must stop discouraging development and begin encouraging growth.
To do so, the liberals need to reject the left and support energy and manufacturing growth. They need to stop bashing the productive simply because they exist and realize that if they are doing better, so is labor and so are the tax revenues that fund the programs that liberals love.
In other words, you cannot have it both ways. We cannot expand social benefits and discourage manufacturing and energy production at the same time.
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Unless the accusers have something more than inappropriate talk, Cain ain't going anywhere.
And now Greece.
2,400 years ago, Greece stood at the center of civilization. Persia's slow decline coupled with regional desire for olive oil and wine made the Greek cities wealthy. They traded their own, and other countries' products. However, their own tragic flaw lay in their inability to unify on anything. Their fratricidal wars left them vulnerable to the expansion of Rome.
Today, Greece stands at the abyss. Most of their country wants to stick its head in a hole and pretend that a welfare state is viable. Their debt is 120% of their GDP (ours is 101%, so we are not far behind) and they must pare away much of their welfare state and bureaucracy to qualify for a loan that will only pay their bills until the end of the year. An agreement was made, then rescinded as their prime minister agreed to put it to a national referendum, which is allowed under their legal system.
Where will Greece go from here? No one knows. The agreement will fail to win the vote, according to polls and observers. Had the prime minister gone ahead with the deal with the European Union, he risked civil war. If the country votes the plan down, there will still be massive social unrest, but the people can only blame themselves for that. However, if the vote passes, then it will give their government a mandate to make the reforms that they desperately need.
Greece's prime minister has gotten pummeled by the international press. But the spoiled brat populace of Greece gives him little choice
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Recent Press Releases
November 1, 2011WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina) made the following statement after the Senate voted 44-54against his amendment that would have stopped the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) ban on over-the-counter (OTC) epinephrine asthma inhalers. The amendment would have disallowed the use of taxpayer funds to enforce the ban on OTC inhalers. The ban is set to take effect in Jan. 1, 2012 and puts environmental concerns ahead of concerns for the estimated 3 million American asthma sufferers who use these inhalers.
“Fifty-four Senators voted to appease extreme environmentalists by banning inhalers that millions of Americans that depend on to breathe,” said Senator DeMint. “This ban won’t do anything serious to help the environment but it will force asthma suffers to spend two to three times more on prescription inhalers, leading many low-income Americans to seek less effective remedies. Even the EPA and FDA admit that banning OTC inhalers will do little to nothing to affect the ozone, but it could lead to hundreds of thousands of new asthma related hospital visits and hundreds of millions in new health costs.”
“This is exactly the kind of ridiculous regulation that shows why Americans are so fed up with the federal government’s nanny-state mentality. Once again, Washington is willing to put Americans at risk in the hopes of appeasing special interests.”
The FDA estimated that the inhaler ban may result in asthma sufferers self-medicating with less effective remedies, and could lead to an increase in annual health expenditures from $180 million to $1.1 billion and hospital ER visits for asthma could increase by anywhere from 0 to 444,000. (source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/E8-27436.htm)
The ban is an attempt to reduce chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) emissions, yet even the FDA admits that “The reduction of CFC emissions associated with removing OTC epinephrine CFC MDIs [Metered-Dose Inhalers] from the U.S. market represents only a fraction of 1 percent of total global CFC emissions. Current allocations of CFCs for OTC epinephrine MDIs account for less than 0.1 percent of the total 1986 global production of CFCs.” (source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/E8-27436.htm)