Tuesday, August 12, 2008 |
|
Unionizing Our Way to Greater Taxes |
|
Posted by:
Michele Bachmann at
4:50 PM |
The nonpartisan Tax Foundation has made a pretty interesting case that those states with a forced employee/union system not only pay higher taxes than those states with Right to Work laws which protect employees from being fired for refusing to join or pay dues or fees to a union, but household incomes in Right to Work states are also higher.
This year, Americans celebrated their "Tax Freedom Day" on April 23. This is the day when Americans have earned enough money to cover their total federal, state, and local tax bill for the year, on average.
The Tax Foundation and U.S. Census Bureau data have found that in 2008, the average Tax Freedom Day in the 22 states with Right to Work laws was April 18, five days earlier than the national average. For the 28 non-Right to Work states as a group, their Tax Freedom Day came nine days later than the average in Right to Work states.

In addition to a higher tax burden, forced-union states’ cost of living is higher as well. Economist Barry Poulson from the University of Colorado figured that living costs average nearly 18% higher in metro areas in non-Right to Work states than in Right to Work states.
Why?
The National Right to Work Committee says that "where forced dues are legal, union officials use their power to disrupt labor markets, jack up costs, and bankroll regulation-happy, Tax-and-Spend state legislators and governors."
Hopefully the Minnesota state legislature will come to understand the benefits of a Right-to-Work state and come on board for the sake of all Minnesotans.
For more information on the report, click here.
|
|
|
Monday, July 21, 2008 |
|
Cruises, Second Homes and "The Vanishing Middle Class" |
|
Posted by:
Michael Medved at
1:54 PM |
|
Economists and statisticians may argue over whether the American middle class is, in fact, shrinking, but if it is, there’s little doubt as to why: more middle income people become more comfortable and prosperous, not impoverished. In fact, the official poverty rate has declined dramatically since the 1950’s (remembered as a the “golden age” of Middle America) with the percentage dwelling in poverty declining from 22.4% to well below 13% in recent years.
Meanwhile, two other news items provided important perspective on the status and future of middle income Americans---
-In 2007, a total of 9.57 million Americans took cruise vacations. In a 2008 national survey for the Cruise Lines International Association, 34 million of our fellow citizens say they plan a cruise vacation within the next three years.
-With the foreclosure crisis sweeping the country, numerous news reports noted second homes were disproportionately hard hit—that’s the bad news. But the good news from the Federal Reserve is that a stunning 12.5% of all households still own a second home. Among families between ages 55-75, that figure rises to 20%.
These numbers provide re-enforcement for the idea that when Americans no longer qualify as middle class, they usually leave that designation for the world of vacation homes and luxury cruises, not hunger and homelessness.
|
|
|
Wednesday, July 16, 2008 |
|
Take a Breath, Relax, and Let's Get the Facts |
|
Posted by:
Michele Bachmann at
11:20 AM |
Today, as a Member of the House Financial Services Committee, I'm hearing testimony from the Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson regarding the U.S. economy and the potential government bail-out of mortgage lenders Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
While the mortgage market is already precariously balanced and this added instability is cause for concern, it is imperative that Congress wait and examine all the facts before jumping in to assist Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Far too often, the government over-reacts and involves itself in market matters, preventing the free market from correcting itself and making things much worse.
It is important that before legislation is considered, Washington carefully looks into the financial situation of Fannie and Freddie. We must ensure that our nation’s taxpayers, who are already struggling because of skyrocketing food and gas costs, are not left shouldering an increased burden due to a massive bail-out bill. We must balance that with care that these taxpayers are protected in case this situation leads our economy to take a tumble for the worst.
|
|
|
Tuesday, July 08, 2008 |
|
"What He Did to Get That Money" |
|
Posted by:
Michael Medved at
10:48 AM |
|
“WHAT HE DID TO GET THAT MONEY” Andrew Carnegie (1835-1919) earned universal praise with his prodigious philanthropy – building more than 3,000 public libraries in 47 states (and nations around the world), founding Carnegie-Mellon University and the Carnegie Institute of Technology (C.I.T.), establishing Carnegie Hall in New York, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and much more. Anti-business bias, however, leads many observers to speculate that he turned to charity in order to assuage his guilt over his success as a Captain of Industry. For a 1999 PBS “American Experience” program about the impoverished Scottish immigrant who became “The Richest Man in the World,” his biographer, Joseph Frazier Wall suggested: “Maybe with the giving away of his money, he would justify what he had done to get that money.” And what had he done, exactly? When Carnegie retired at age 66 (and sold his business to J.P. Morgan and associates to create the vast new company “U.S. Steel”) he employed 31,162 full-time workers at three major mills. His organizational genius helped create the steel business that played a crucial role in American industrialization and prosperity. However laudable his charitable endeavors (he managed to give away nearly all his money before he died at 83), the creation of jobs and wealth in his business career benefited his countrymen even more.
|
|
|
Friday, June 20, 2008 |
|
Operation Malicious Mortgage |
|
Posted by:
Michele Bachmann at
11:58 AM |
|
You have to give credit where credit is due, and the FBI and the Department of Justice deserve to be recognized for their effort to crack down on mortgage fraud schemes. From March 1 to June 18, 2008, more than 400 defendants were charged for roles in mortgage fraud schemes as part of operation "Malicious Mortgage." The FBI estimates that approximately $1 billion in losses were inflicted by the mortgage fraud schemes employed in these cases. Most recently, two senior managers of failed Bear Stearns Hedge Funds were indicted yesterday in separate mortgage-related security fraud cases. Since July 2002, the DOJ has made almost 1,300 corporate fraud convictions, including the convictions of more than 200 chief executive offices and corporate presidents, more than 12 corporate vice presidents, and more than 50 chief financial officers. These efforts are crucial for the benefit of American homeowners and taxpayers and the housing market. All the agencies involved deserve a great deal of respect for their efforts. On Wednesday, I appeared on the O'Reilly Factor to discuss the Countrywide Mortgage Scandal involving “VIPs” Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) and Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND). Take a look.
|
|
|
Monday, June 16, 2008 |
|
Do the Rich "Capture" More Than Their Share? |
|
Posted by:
Michael Medved at
9:00 PM |
A front page story in USA TODAY highlighted the alleged collapse of “The American Dream” while revealing the twisted thinking behind contemporary liberalism. While acknowledging that “living standards have improved dramatically” and that “on the stuff front people are doing better than ever,” reporter David Lynch focused on national anger over the disproportionate prosperity of the super rich. He wrote that “from 1993 to 2006, those families captured about half the nation’s overall growth.” His language is revealing – speaking about wealthy people “capturing” their share of growth, or elsewhere, saying they “received” their portion of “total growth.” He seems to suggest that growth is the abstract product of society at large, rather than the result of millions of individuals. Successful Americans didn’t “capture” their share of growth, they created that share of growth –and using government to give the benefits of that wealth creation to others remains the core desire of redistributionist Democrats. It’s destructive to moan about your own success just because someone else is doing even better—especially when that someone else contributes entrepreneurial energy and business building to all participants in the economy at large.
|
|
|
Friday, June 13, 2008 |
|
Bad News: It's Not All Bad |
|
Posted by:
Carol Platt Liebau at
11:58 AM |
Obviously, when the press is in love with the candidate talking about "change" -- and in the wake of eight years of a Republican presidency -- it's to the Democrats' advantage for it to seem as though life in America is falling apart. And only one man (Barack Obama!) can fix it.
In today's Wall Street Journal, Gregg Easterbrook notes the newest form of political incorrectness: Being willing to admit that things aren't, well, all that bad. Here's his proof:
Unemployment is 5.5%, low by historical standards; income is rising slightly ahead of inflation; housing prices are down, but the typical house is still worth a third more than in 2000; 94% of Americans do not have threatened mortgages, and of those who do, most will keep their homes.
Inflation was up in 2007, but this stands out because the 16 previous years were close to inflation-free; living standards are the highest they have ever been, including living standards for the middle class and for the poor.
All forms of pollution other than greenhouse gases are in decline; cancer, heart disease and stroke incidence are declining; crime is in a long-term cycle of significant decline; education levels are at all-time highs.
Apparently, John McCain can't say that not everything is terrible, lest he be nailed again by the DNC -- and seem terminally out of step with the hysterical zeitgeist being promoted by the press. But facts are facts, and they are worth knowing.
|
|
|
Thursday, June 12, 2008 |
|
More Money for Doing Much Less |
|
Posted by:
Michele Bachmann at
11:01 AM |
Having fallen short yesterday, the Democrats have brought H.R. 5749, the so-called "Emergency Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 2008" back to the floor for a vote. Under their parliamentary maneuver yesterday, the Democrats needed a two-thirds majority to pass the bill yesterday -- it fell 3 votes short. The Democrats are pretty much assured to succeed the second time around using a floor procedure that requires only a simple majority for passage. However, the shortfall yesterday doesn't look good against the looming veto threat from the White House.
This bill is another example of how Democrats take a decent idea that could help desperate Americans who need it the most, and in the process of hijacking it for political gain they ruin it.
Clearly, some states are feeling the unemployment crunch more than others, but this legislation makes no distinction for that. Even states with low unemployment rates would receive the 13-week extension. The White House and Republicans are willing to accept a targeted exception, but the bill as it is now is simply irresponsible.
Furthermore, this bill allows someone with as little as two weeks of work to qualify for up to 52 weeks of unemployment benefits -- a dramatic cut from the 20 weeks currently required by law. H.R. 5749 would increase entitlement spending by $12.8 billion over five years and increase the deficit by $12.2 billion. However, the bill contains no spending cuts to offset this new spending.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Your Blog Postings:
|
|
Last updated 1 Minutes 24 Seconds Ago
|
|
Last updated 14 Minutes 55 Seconds Ago
|
|
Last updated 19 Minutes 32 Seconds Ago
|
|
Last updated 35 Minutes 59 Seconds Ago
|
|
Last updated 36 Minutes 35 Seconds Ago
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Archives Archives
|
|
| | | |