Right Opposition

Harry Reid is a walking, talking example of what is wrong with Congress. The Nevada Senator is more interested in scoring points politically than in putting Americans to work. This piece from CNBC details efforts to reach a compromise on the Bush era tax breaks that will soon expire. Reid wants a vote on a partial package of reforms that will almost certainly not pass just so he can do damage to the Republicans.

Hey Harry! Get a clue. Voters want solutions not retread Senators more interested in politics than jobs.

“Alabama” and “socialism” don’t seem to belong in the same sentence. But a blog over at CNBC suggests that Alabama is the third most socialist state in the union. TheStreet blog lists The Most Socialist States in America. The top 10 are surprising along with who is not in the list, there’s no mention of Massachusetts or California. But Alabama sits in the third spot. Alabama is the third most socialist state in the nation, topped only by Alaska and West Virginia!

The methodology is in the numbers themselves. Since socialism is concisely defined as state ownership of the means of production, none of these states are actually socialist. They do all share confiscatory tax policies however. In the case of Alabama, state budget spending exceeds 27.4% of Alabama’s GDP. It’s that number that causes Alabama to rank so high. Mississippi and Arkansas join Alabama on the list at 6 and 8 respectively.

It points out that people like their government services regardless of what it takes to get them. For most people in Alabama we hold to two of the three triads of conservatism: Social issues and Military strength. Conservative economic issues are often overlooked. Remember, it was a Republican governor, Bob Riley, who proposed the single biggest tax hike in state history in 2003. It would have been a whooping $1.2 billion bonanza for state coffers. Alabama is also largely union controlled through efforts of the teachers union, AEA and what could be called the farmers union, ALFA. Fortunately for Alabama the two groups often work at cross purposes or else there would be trouble.

Given Alabama’s often low ranking on various measures, one wonders where the state would rank if all of the inefficiencies were removed. That would mean cutting waste, dropping taxes,slicing programs and letting people rediscover the art of self-sufficiency. Just my thoughts. Yours?

Deficit government spending is front and center now. Supporters of the Obama stimulus argue that deficit spending is needed to restore the strength of the economy. Opponents disagree. They say the deficits are staggering and crippling the economy. But at the same time those who oppose Obama are themselves arguing for deficits. They want an extension of the so-called Bush tax cuts. Obviously more money in would mean a smaller deficit.

Obama supporters argue that either way you have deficits. They are correct but incomplete in their analysis.

Some deficits are better than others.

Money that flows to Washington in the form of taxes represents a leakage from the economy. Even though the government will spend that money it will do so inefficiently and that’s the rub. Money spent by business is far more efficient than tax money doled out by Uncle Sam. Money can be spent on needed resources which directly impact the local business owner. This fully decentralized stimulus avoids politics, avoids unneeded handouts, avoids administrative overhead and places the money where it will do the most good.

And that deficit? It will rapidly disappear as revenues and incomes rise. It will also allow businesses to hire the unemployed and underemployed.

So why does the government seem so fixated on taking your money and spending it for you? It’s all about power and politics. Power over your labor and your money and gaining political goodwill by spending money where it buys the most votes.

For a thinking person devoid of political desires, the only answer is to extend the Bush tax cuts.