Posted by
Dave on Wednesday, June 06, 2007 9:34:05 PM
Random thoughts, commentary, and opinions on the world today…
In
what was billed as a "major policy speech" last week, Hillary Clinton
denounced what she claimed has become an "on your own" society, a
wordplay slap at President Bush's so-called "ownership society". In place of individualism, Clinton laid out a vision of a more collectivist thinking. Of
course, such thinking includes higher taxes on "the rich" – basically
taking more from one person to provide benefits to someone else.
Personally, I like
individuals looking out for themselves and trying to succeed, as long
as, of course, they aren't trying to impede the progress of someone
else in the process (particularly me). But the
grocery store at which I shop isn't providing the food I need out of
some nebulous vision of "it takes a village"; rather, the company
providing the groceries is doing so out of a desire to make money – out
of individual gain. Further down the "food
chain" as it were, the ranchers providing steaks to the grocery store
are also acting out of self-interest rather than a collectivist spirit. In the end, I benefit, the grocery store benefits, and the rancher benefits – each of us looking out for ourselves. That's the foundation of free market capitalism, and I think we need fewer obstacles in the way, not more. The government's role is to enforce contracts, protect private property rights, and prevent fraud and coercion.
Along the way, Senator Clinton also claimed that corporations and "the rich" were not paying their "fair share" in taxes. Apparently her advisors need to brief her better on the facts of this economy. Since the tax rates
have been cut in each tax bracket (including the highest tax bracket
and the corporate rate), the corporate share of the overall tax burden
has increased, not decreased; in fact, it is higher than it was during any year of the first (Bill) Clinton Administration. This is due to higher corporate profits. Also, the share of the overall personal income tax burden paid by those in the top brackets has increased, not decreased.
So let's get this straight: corporations are paying a higher share now than they were under the Clinton Administration, but they still aren't paying enough. "The rich" are paying a higher share now than they were before the tax cuts, but they still aren't paying enough. So, let's punish the corporations and "the rich" for being successful…
One
of the things I found noteworthy in the Democratic candidates debate
the other night was Barack Obama's slapdown of John Edwards. Edwards, a one-term senator of little accomplishment during his tenure who voted for
the Iraq war resolution, attempted to take the moral high ground by
chastising Sens. Clinton and Obama for not showing more "leadership" in
killing funding for the Iraq War and Pres. Bush's "surge" plan. Obama
reminded Edwards that while Obama was against the war from the start –
approximately four and a half years before Edwards finally "admitted"
his "mistake" in supporting the war. Not exactly "leadership" on the part of Edwards.
I
thought it was a great shot for Obama; it pointed out the smallness of
Edwards's argument, and showed Obama as being tough and scrappy. And, it was quite a good point at that.
Speaking of corporate tax rates, our top corporate tax rate is nearly 3 times higher than it is in Ireland. If you were starting a new business, where would you start it?
I saw some Ron Paul for President supporters out this past weekend holding signs saying "Who is Ron Paul?" I wonder how many of the passing traffickers got the Atlas Shrugged reference, but I thought it was very clever given that Paul is clearly the most Rand-ian of the candidates for president.
Back in the early 80s, I saw a video for Fleetwood Mac's song "Gypsy", and developed a crush on Stevie Nicks. I finally got a chance to see her in concert last weekend, and I think she rekindled it. Looking great (she's nearly 60!) and sounding even better, she went through a tour-de-force
of her best songs from her solo and Fleetwood Mac career – from
"Rhiannon" and "Dreams" and "Gold Dust Woman" to "Stand Back" and "Edge
of 17". She didn't play "Gypsy", which was by
far the only disappointment of the evening, and it is certainly hard to
complain after a performance like that.
In
his role as the opening act, Chris Isaak put in his typical strong
performance, wading out into the crowd and even tearing the pants of
his bright pink suit. A consummate performer who
seemingly also hasn't aged in years (somewhere I think there's one ugly
portrait), Isaak is the Roy Orbison of his generation.
Anyone know a good mechanic for early 1970s imports in the Houston area? If so, let me know, because the convertible is acting up…
It looks like the immigration "grand compromise" bill is going down in flames. While
I like the concept of the bill – we simply must have immigration policy
that more realistically reflects the labor market – there was so much
trash hidden in the bill that it deserves its fate. Perhaps
they can start passing some of the better provisions on a piecemeal
basis, such as increasing the number of scientists, engineers, and
programmers who can immigrate here legally. Before
we are going to be able to reliably, efficiently, and effectively
police the border, we are going to have to have some sort of guest
worker program, and we're going to have to figure out something to do with the estimated 10-20 million illegal immigrants already in the country. Sorry,
but the fence is a political prop, and there is simply no excuse for
pouring good money after bad to enforce what is bad policy.
Dennis Miller was a lot funnier when he was a liberal.
I know I've said it before but it is worth saying each week that some politician bloviates about "price gouging" and gasoline: the government makes more "profit" off of each gallon of gasoline than any oil company, distributor, or gas station owner.