Tag Archives: Socialism

THE FAR-LEFT (SOCIALIST) WING OF THE DEMOCRAT PARTY DOES NOT UNDERSTAND THE AMERICAN ECONOMY

Posted on by

My book, “Proud to be American,” is on sale at Amazon and also can be ordered at any bookstore for $17.95. It’s a 330-page paperback book with 70 articles in nine categories, and has a provocative introduction and conclusion. “Proud to be American” focuses on the abuses of the Main Stream Media and the far-left of the Democrat Party.  It analyzes domestic, national and international issues, something that the Media does not and cannot do and it does this using easy-to-understand language. #  #  #  #

The National Democrat Party not understanding how the U.S. economy works is not new. It’s been that way for some time but is far worse today with the radical far left taking over the Party with its Socialist policies (DSA, Democratic Socialists of America). The Democrat and Republican parties have opposite ideas and policies on growing the economy and creating jobs, but it’s difficult to understand how this can be.  No longer simply theory, but proven time-and-time again to work, cutting tax-rates and cutting regulations stimulate the economy and creates jobs to the extent that the additional tax revenues generated from the rate-cuts exceeds the cost of those rate-cuts. This is exactly what happened with Trump’s Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 to the extent that even after the Covid pandemic locked down the economy, once it opened back up (when Joe Biden was President), jobs snapped back (and these tax-rate cuts became permanent in the recent “One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025,” Public Law 119-21).

President Kennedy cut tax rates, as well as President Reagan.  Why doesn’t the Democrat Party understand this, but instead sticks with Keynesian economics which doubled the duration of the Great Depression in the 1930s?  Also, many Democrat Senators and Congressmen are embracing Socialism, an economic theory that has destroyed every economy that has fully embraced it. Understanding the economics of it is so simple that I can only conclude that the Democrat Party doesn’t want to understand it, but why not? (see Marco Rubio’s book, American Dreams; and Arthur Laffer and Stephen Moore’s book, Trumponomics)

One of the constituencies that the Democrat Party claims is the poor.  The Democrat Party’s policies, however, keep the poor being poor (see Jason Riley’s book, “Please Stop Helping Us”, and William Voegeli’s book, “The Pity Party”).  On the other hand, “Supply-side” economics (see Milton Friedman’s book, Free to Choose) pulls up many of the poor into the working class, middle class, and some will even become wealthy.  When this happens, they frequently no longer vote Democrat.  It’s therefore in the Party’s self-interest to keep people poor, keep them victims, keep them envious and vengeful, have them believe they’re the victims of racism, discrimination, etc.

Another reason I believe that the far left of the Democrat Party wants everyone (except themselves) to be poor is that it strongly encourages equality of results or outcomes (called equity, not equality) and with their preferred economic system (Socialism), everyone except government and political officials, will eventually be equal but equally poor.

The evidence that this is so is the relentless attacks against the huge Trump and Republican tax-rate cuts during Trump’s first term, using the phony pretext that the cuts only benefited the wealthy.  Since the wealthiest 1% of the population pay about 37% of Federal income taxes and the top 10% pay about 70%, they receive the largest reductions in taxes, though they are just a small amount of the population.  In addition, lowering the corporate tax rate from the very highest in the world, 35%, to a much lower and more competitive rate, 21%, benefited not only the stockholders of corporations but all of the people that corporations employed and everyone that purchased the products it sold.

It’s far past the time that the Democrat Party changes its posture on stimulating the economy and creating jobs based on the evidence.  Actual great results have been achieved every time by reducing tax-rates and regulations and they usually pay for themselves by generating greater tax revenues.  However, the far left of the Party would never allow this unless the Party loses elections because of its economic policies…and this is probably what will happen, but hopefully the Party will eventually return to its former renown.

All Services

IS CAPITALISM ETHICAL? DOES SOCIALISM WORK?

Posted on by

My book, “Proud to be American,” is on sale at Amazon and also can be ordered from any bookstore for $17.95.  It’s a 330-page paperback book with 70 articles in nine categories and with 70 pictures. The book analyzes national, international, and domestic issues and also critiques main stream media and the far-left of the Democrat Party. Finally, it contains a provocative introduction and conclusion.
#         #          #         #

Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren and many other politicians, as. well as academia, advocate Socialism.

Let’s take a close look, first with very brief definitions of Capitalism and Socialism so we’re clear as to what we’re talking about.  From the book, ‘isms and ‘ologies by Arthur Goldwag, Capitalism is the “free exchange of goods in a competitive marketplace.”  Also, in that book, “Socialism” is defined as the opposite of “Capitalism.”  Further, “In socialist economies, the means of production are either controlled by or directly owned by the state…” European and Nordic countries are not socialist, but simply are capitalist countries with many welfare benefits, free healthcare, and very high taxes.

Capitalism is fueled by a motive to make profits and it does this by providing goods and services that consumers want and at a price that can beat competitors’ prices who also provide similar goods and services.  This forces capitalists to constantly improve quality and undercut competitors’ prices.   Socialism eliminates the profit motive and therefore satisfies some people’s altruistic side and also attempts to redistribute wealth from the “haves” to the “have-nots,” satisfying some people’s idea of fairness.  Because in Socialism there is no continuous need to improve efficiency and effectiveness, there usually is significant waste and inefficiencies.  Capitalists would argue that they earn their profits, attending college for many years and then working 70-80-hour workweeks… and it’s their taxed profits that enables government to have the money to help others.

Capitalism creates wealth,  which then is taxed and used to help the poor and needy.  Socialism makes equality of outcomes most important, consequently leading to everyone being equally poor with no large sums of funds available for government and charities to help those in need.  Socialism takes away the incentive for people to work hard and excel to provide for themselves and their families.  In 2019, the top 50% of taxpayers paid 96% of all Federal taxes.  The bottom 50% of taxpayers paid 3.6% of Federal income taxes.

Government is usually the culprit behind much fraud, unemployment, and economic downturns and  was responsible for our recent past economic woes.  Loans to people unable to repay them was the precipitating event that caused the 2007-8 economic downturn.  Quasi-government Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac forced banks, with threats of lawsuits, to make those bad loans.  Therefore, to have the government fully control the economy is insanity.  Most government officials usually do not understand business, do not understand how jobs are created, do not realize how the unintended consequences of many of its regulations seriously hurt people and the economy.

The Dodd-Frank Bill, proposed by and named after two of the most significant initiators of the 2008 economic downturn (Congressman Barney Frank and Senator Chris Dodd), was absurd.  For all of its harm to small banks and to the economy, it didn’t even address the cause of the downturn, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

So, let’s answer our two basic questions, “Is Capitalism Ethical”, “Does Socialism Work?”  Capitalism is a huge engine for job creation and wealth to the extent that the Pacific Rim countries have embraced it, as well as China (and they are all becoming wealthy fast)…and there’s nothing unethical about making a reasonable profit for providing goods or services.   Socialism, on the other hand,  has never successfully worked though it could be forced to work, but at the cost of civil liberties, prosperity, unemployment, and political interference in all aspects of our lives.

Finally, what about some people becoming billionaires?  Is it ethical for anyone becoming that wealthy?  Huge wealth is certainly a possibility and a reality under Capitalism.  However, the top ten percent of the wealthiest people pay over 71 percent of Federal taxes and also eventually give away much of their wealth, after providing for their families and to charities, which use it much more wisely than the government ever will. Finally, if you still have a problem with Capitalism, then call it “free enterprise” which means the same thing but is more descriptive and uncontroversial.  And if you’re still unconvinced if socialism works or has ever worked, just check out what’s happening in Cuba and has happened until recently in Venezuela; and if you still think Socialism is great, then continue to vote for National Democrats (who are quickly becoming socialists) and be prepared for the decline of the United States. Margaret Thatcher said it best, “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.”

 

 

All Services

IS INCOME INEQUALITY ETHICAL?

Posted on by

for more information…

My book, “Proud to be American,” is on sale at Amazon for $16.95 and can also be ordered from most book stores in the United States. It’s a 300-page paperback book containing 68 articles organized into nine categories and with 70 pictures.  My book analyzes complex national, international, and domestic issues and also critiques main stream media and the far-left of the Democrat Party.

A hot political issue is income inequality.  The heart of the debate is that it doesn’t seem fair for some people to make millions while others are living close to or in poverty.  The government already redistributes wealth through taxes and a variety of welfare programs including food stamps, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, etc., but advocates want to see a lot more.  Is this fair?  Is it feasible? Are there unintended consequences for even more income redistribution?  Let’s check it out by first reviewing the scope of the problem:  According to the latest data, the wealthiest 1% of taxpayers pay about 40% of all individual Federal income taxes and the wealthiest 10% pay about 70%.  However, the bottom 50% of taxpayers only pay about 3% of all Federal income taxes.

The United States’ economy is fueled by free enterprise, also known as Capitalism. Being able to make a better life for yourself and your family motivates people to devote the time, energy and work necessary to become financially successful.  This system, however, does result in some being very rich and some being poor.  Free enterprise, as practiced in the United States, contains economic safety nets to help ensure that no one is destitute.  Even so, some will still be bad off.  Here’s where charities play a large roll, as well as simple government policies, such as those that require that hospitals treat everyone, even when they can’t pay.

For average-income Americans, the Social Security Administration has reported that in 2020, the medium household income was $34,612.  This poor record was the fault of the Federal government in over-regulating businesses, until President Trump’s first term tax cuts reduced the absurdly high (35%) corporate income tax rate that forced U.S. companies to relocate overseas where rates were much lower.  All of these high-tax policies are still advocated  by the Democrat Party, who, in the same breath, say they’re for the “little guy” and for the poor.

Free enterprise is not perfect but has moved billions of people out of poverty in India, China and many other countries. Winston Churchill said that, “the inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent vice of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.”  Venezuela is the best recent example of how a wealthy capitalist country becomes impoverished when it converts to socialism.  Income inequality naturally occurs under free enterprise but can be somewhat mitigated through the tax system.  I believe that it should therefore be tolerated but great effort made by government and businesses to naturally raise lower incomes to higher incomes. 

Finally, I never got a job from someone poor.  However, when I became relatively well-off, I was able to give temporary, part-time employment to others needing jobs.  Most wealthy people want to help others in this way.  And billionaires eventually give their money away to charities, their families, etc.  However, if the government took away most of the wealthy’s money, it would surely waste it.

 

All Services