Socialism cannot compete!

The Real Job Loss Story: Death of Small Business

Where's the incentive to work harder??? I have ZERO incentive to start a new company right now...only to see my profits taxed away to pay for someone else's healthcare!!! Or to have a massive Cap & Tax bill shoved down my throat and throttle my ability to keep afloat. Forget it.

Instead of growing government, stripping our freedoms, and jacking up taxes...some drastic downsizing of government, coupled with REAL TAX CUTS would have this economic ship righted in no time!!!

A New Economic Indicator?

Confucius? Confucius say "you stupid!". Your post is simply speculation as well as selective choosing of the persons that seem to fit your weak social perspective. Problem is, you've incorrectly stated both the overall situation, and also some of the individuals you list. For example, you've left off any mention of our Founding Fathers, who were UNANIMOUS in the assertion that the individual Right to Bear Arms is essential to Liberty. Note that they did not advocate the willy-nilly use of arms -- but the notion that they are both a deterrent and also a right if *need be*. Thomas Jefferson said "No free man shall be debarred the use of arms." Moses? Moses fought battles when necessary. Jesus said "turn the other cheek", yet also overthrew the tables of the money-changers in the Temple.


On Nov 05 11:48 AM Witchy wrote:

> Two lists.
>
> A few people, in mostly random order, who in the past contributed
> much to how we are, who we are, some of our best and brightest, all-time
> most-interesting: Thales, Sophocles, Socrates, Moses, Buddha, Confucius,
> Jesus, Leonardo, Michelangelo, Shakespeare, Copernicus, Galileo,
> Edw. Jenner, Darwin, Dostoevsky, Einstein, Heisenberg, T. Edison,
> Rachel Carson, Roberto Bolano ...
>
> A few people, in mostly random order, currently active and important
> to how we are, who we are, among our best and brightest, most interesting:
> E. O. Wilson, J. Lovelock, Obama, Bernanke, Gore, Jobs, Gates (both),
> Buffett, Branson, Soros, P. Roth, J. Gray, and many more ...
>
> Question: are, were, would any of them be, gun-obsessed?
>
> The gun-nuts are among the lowest of us, those who have the least
> to contribute ... Our Neanderthals ...

Dow Theory Sell Signal?

Buffett has given us a sell opportunity -- the DJTA was ready to tank until this buy. Take the opportunity to get out before the plummet, with a nice bump today. One man's opinion.

Markets Cheer the Buffett Buy

BNI does lots of biz transporting coal. I fail to see how this is a smart buy given the current Admarxistration's extreme dislike of coal. Cap & Tax will kill BNI, if the Dems get it passed.

Buffett's Big Rail Buy: What It Means for Berkshire Shareholders

Only problem with this "energy play" -- the coal pipeline -- is that this Admarxistration does *not* like coal. Should be buying nuclear or something else instead. Unless...Buffett is doing this to create anti-Cap & Tax leverage against the neo-Coms??? Now *that* would be interesting!!! Last I checked, Warren was pretty liberal. Wonder if he's changing stripes...perhaps his capitalist self has woken to the realization that the liberals and their socialist policies are anti-freedom and anti-capitalism??? Things are getting very interesting indeed.

5 Questions and Compliments for the U.S. Treasury

Solutions are simple:

1) Let failure happen and let the free market do the resolving. No, I do *not* believe in a special chapter in bankruptcy law for "too large to fail" banks (or other such companies). The last thing we need is more power and control given to government. They caused this mess with a socialist housing push...and their "solutions" have all involved further curtailing of capitalism...the pillaging of the people and of businesses that were not picked winners.

2) Tax cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts. Let the producers keep more of what is theirs. This will boost employment and allow businesses to shore up balance sheets without bailout money. The "downside"...in order to afford it, big cuts to government will be necessary. Darn.

Homebuyer Tax Credit: Update

Somewhat about the banks. But there's more: it's also about taxation...propping up home prices to keep property taxes from dropping too much; and it's about buying votes with handouts...making fewer people feel ticked off about bank bailouts by they themselves having received a little something. It's ALL wrong to have done in the end.


On Oct 28 12:35 PM MyrEnforker wrote:

> Sure, they care about homeowners, but that's not the prime reason.
> It gives the banks more time to repair their balance sheets.
>
> This is STILL ultimately all about the banks.

Contrarians Denninger, Dent, Faber and Hoye Looking for Dollar Rebound

"Record amount of U.S. debt ever sold in a week"

seekingalpha.com/artic...

Yet, we're supposed to be dollar bullish? Even short-term? I don't think so!!!

Wall Street Breakfast: Must-Know News

"GMAC needs third lifeline." -- LET IT FAIL!

"Consumer confidence dips." -- Why would that be? The prospect of hugely higher taxes? Watching government take over everything?

"Easing Hilton's towering debt load." -- Will Paris soon be supporting her daddy? Talk about role reversal!

"Tackling too-big-to-fail." -- Funny, I thought free markets that allowed failure already had this accounted for!

"That's a good czar." -- There ARE no good czars!!

"Mortgage apps drop for second straight week." -- Hmmm. Maybe that Keynesian Big Government stuff just doesn't work?!

Economic Crisis 2008-9: Ignore Friedman's Lessons at Your Peril

Hardly innocuous! You acknowledge that yourself by stating that F&F pervert the markets. Socialist interference in housing was at the core of this economic meltdown, and F&F were key players in that socialist agenda.

> It starts with a perversion of the market through strange but completely
> innoculous programs like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

Homebuyer Tax Credit: The Moneypit Is Alive and Well

No capital at the capitol? ;)

I *totally* agree that we need the wheels to come completely off the wagon in order for the treasonous, unconstitutional Big Government "tax and spend" era to end in this country. How we ever got to the point of anyone being taxed more than 10% of their income is beyond me. Traditionally, the concept of tithing is to give 1/10. That concept is used by many churches, and the biblical words of "render to God what is God's, but rend to Caesar what is Caesar's" cause me to ask why Caesar should be able to ask for a larger portion of my fruits than God??? I would suggest it seems reasonable to enforce limited government by limiting taxation to 10%. To go one step further towards securing Liberty and property rights, it would be best if taxation was consumptive, so that the earner/owner of the funds can decide if he can afford to pay the tax, and when to do so.

fairtax.org

Nouriel Roubini Agrees with Jeff Gundlach

I already addressed Mr. Roubini's mistakes a couple days ago. Suffice it to say, his current view on money supply, debt, and inflation is off. I'll stick with the likes of Jim Rogers and Peter Schiff for the time being -- those guys are seeing not only the forest, but the entire economic ecosystem.

The Intrinsic Value of Nothing, Part 1

Mr. Lounsbury - thanks for stating well what I was thinking of responding to regarding instrinsic value. I was afraid that I would be issuing a nitpick, with the author's thoughts perhaps implicitly constrained to economic exchange, rather than the broader philosophical notion of value. It is worth our while to ponder this concept in broader terms, if only to reevaluate how well our personal assignment of values in action corresponds to our philosophical understanding of such. This speaks to our personal interpretation of "what is the meaning of life?" and how well we follow through on it.

Wall Street Breakfast: Must-Know News

Do you think that what you wrote even sounds logical?? Ask everyone to pay their share under the law, no matter how flawed it may be? Think about that from a theoretical standpoint -- is it really their "share" if the law is flawed? And the more flawed the tax code becomes, the more unjust the designated "share" would be?! Yet you would say those who have the most unjust share should still pay it? Is there no point at which they are justified in either not paying or in paying some but not all of it? If there is a point, where is that point? These are very real questions that we all need to be asking. Particularly with the way our tax money is being used!!

IMO, I would submit that it is not only the wealthy who are unjustly treated by the current income tax law...but almost everyone who actually pays in!! When you consider the nature of confiscatory taxation, $1 is too much. But when it has become 20...30...40% of gross incomes...how have we not revolted yet???


On Oct 27 10:37 AM TommyG wrote:

> Doubleguns: Yes a revamped tax structure would fix a lot of ills
> but the scum in both houses won't let the their special interests
> get hurt. Meanwhile; is it too much to ask that everybody pays their
> share under the law, however flawed it may be.

Wall Street Breakfast: Must-Know News

Nooooooo!!! They can't have our Kudlow! We need him here!!


On Oct 27 09:34 AM doubleguns wrote:

> Old Trader the translation would be "Me" pronounced with a short
> e like the Canadian eh.
>
> I think they don't have a Kudlow over there is the problem. They
> are much more realistic.:-)
>
> Maybe we could send them our Kudlow for a couple of years.