A lot of media outlets are crying over the increased deficit caused by the GOP’s tax bill. Here’s what the Texas Tribune says:
The bill is expected to deliver a tax cut to most Americans. But the majority of economists also expect it to widen the national deficit by at least $1 trillion over the next decade.
The truth though is that the level of tax revenue by itself doesn’t determine deficits; it is the combination of spending and revenue that determines the size of the deficit-or surplus.
However, it doesn’t seem to occur to the media or other liberals that we could actually spend less money over the next decade and actually have a smaller deficit!
Now I admit, we haven’t seen much willingness by Congress to control spending. But at least it’s possible.
An 1883 article in Scientific American noted that one of the main problems with wind power is “gathering it at the time we do not need it and preserving it till we do.” In other words, there was no way to economically and reliably store the electricity generated from windmills.
Today, 134 years later, after having moved from windmills to wind turbines and after billions of dollars of investments–much of which has been forcibly extracted from taxpayers (through subsidies) and consumers (through mandates), we are still in the same position.
Everyone promises that the battery or other technology we need to economically store electricity in order to correct for wind’s intermittency is just around the corner. However, we’ve been turning the same corner for centuries, and we don’t seem to be getting any closer to overcoming wind’s inability to reliably provide affordable electricity.
Filmmakers and government economic development types are bemoaning the fact that Texas doesn’t offer as much as other states when it comes to film subsidies.
“Texas is losing jobs because we cannot compete,” said Janis Burklund, director of the Dallas Film Commission.
It may, or may not, be the case that Texas is losing jobs in the film industry. But even if that is true, what is missing from that equation is what Texans would be doing in the private sector if the money for subsidies had not been taken from them.
My bet is that George Mitchell and Glenn McCarthy, Gerald Hines and Trammell Crow, Michael Dell and Bob Rowling, etc., could do a lot more for the Texas economy with that money in their pockets than a Hollywood filmmaker. Especially when we consider the cut taken by the state to run the Division of Film Subsidies and the rest of the Texas State Office for Government-created Economic Development, or whatever they are called.
A recent program in the Defense Department for the purpose of understanding “unidentified aerial phenomena” cost taxpayers at least $20 million.
The program was initiated by Harry Reid, at the behest of a campaign contributor, when he was still Senate majority leader. Politico reports:
Reid initiated the program, which ultimately spent more than $20 million, through an earmark after he was persuaded in part by aerospace titan and hotel chain founder Bob Bigelow, a friend and fellow Nevadan who owns Bigelow Aerospace, a space technology company and government contractor. Bigelow, whose company received some of the research contracts, was also a regular contributor to Reid’s re-election campaigns, campaign finance records show, at least $10,000 between 1998 and 2008.
Corporate cronyism takes many forms today, much of it driven by liberals who are supposed to be for the little people. However, this has to be one of the craziest.
Corporate welfare, the use of government to enrich corporate executives and shareholders with profits they can’t earn in the market, is rampant today. Title insurers, alcoholic beverage distributors, and renewable energy companies are just a few who rake in ill-gotten profits at the expense of taxpayers and consumers.
Though cronyism today may be at its highest level in American history, it is nothing new. Here is Alexander Hamilton promoting it over 200 years ago in his 1791 Report on Manufactures:
Capital is wayward and timid in leading itself to new undertakings, and the state ought to excite the confidence of capitalists, who are ever cautious and sagacious, by aiding them to overcome the obstacles that lie in the way of all experiment.
There were a lot of big hits for the Astros throughout their run to becoming World Series champs this year. But here is the call for perhaps my favorite of them all:
He lifts it…
Down the line…
At the wall…
Do you know which of the Astros’ record setting 15 home runs this was? Did you have a favorite? If so, let us know in the comments.
FBI Agent Peter Strzok and Special Counsel Robert Mueller
“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office that there’s no way he gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.”
That’s what Peter Strzok, one of the FBI’s top Russian counterintelligence experts, texted to FBI lawyer Lisa Page. The conversation Strzok refers to apparently took place in the office of Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe.
So what we have, it seems, is three high-level FBI personnel conspiring to put in place an insurance policy just in case the unthinkable happens: the “loathsome human” Donald Trump becomes president of the United States.
At this point, it seems more than likely that the insurance policy was the FBI investigation into the Trump campaign’s activity that has morphed into the Mueller investigation, which every day is being more and more exposed for the treasonous, deep state attempt to undermine our democracy that it is.
The discussion of the role of women in the ministry of the church dominated much of the proceedings of the Presbyterian Church of America’s 2017 General Assembly. Despite numerous disputes over the findings and recommendations in the report from the GA’s committee on this issue, it was ultimately adopted. The details of these recommendations and the debate have been widely covered. Less attention, however, has been paid to the context of the debate.
The PCA’s debate over this issue comes in the midst of a cultural war, a war that has existed since the fall but has become highly visible of late in the United States. By focusing more on the details of the report rather than on the war setting in which the debate was taking place, the GA seems to have lost sight of the forest for the trees. Pondering issues like how to “affirm and include underprivileged and underrepresented women in the PCA” in the midst of the cultural and ecumenical collapse on sex and the distinctions between men and women places the PCA in a situation where it is unlikely to be able to discern the scriptural role of women in the ministry of the church, much less be able to speak prophetically into the world on this subject.
As Mark Steyn points out, Roy Moore didn’t lose because of the allegations against him, he lost because he had to run against both the Democrats and Republicans.
Mitch McConnell, Chuck Schumer, and their congressional friends aren’t alone in their opposition to anything that would help President Trump and flyover America from wresting control of the government. They are joined by the deepest of the deep state in the CIA and FBI.
David Stockman lists some of the culprits:
They include John Brennan, Jim Comey, Sally Yates, Peter Strzok and a passel of deep state operatives — all of whom baldly abused their offices. After Brennan had concocted the whole Russian election meddling meme to sully the Donald’s shocking election win, the latter three holdovers — functioning as a political fifth column in the new Administration — set a perjury trap designed to snare Mike Flynn as a first step in relitigating and reversing the voters’ verdict.
The smoking gun on their guilt is so flamingly obvious that the ability of the Trump-hating media to ignore it is itself a wonder to behold.
Click here to read the rest of Stockman’s article, Why the Deep State is at War with Trump.
Mark Steyn is one of the two best political commentators in the English speaking world today.
Here is an excerpt of his thoughts on the swamp’s victory in the Alabama Senate race yesterday:
Roy Moore was the nominee only because the smart guys over-invested in Luther Strange (just as in 2015 they over-invested in Jeb Bush). In the first round of primary voting, Mitch McConnell’s priority was to prop up Strange by taking out what he regarded as his principal threat, Mo Brooks. Congressman Brooks would have made an excellent senator, and would have been elected in a walk, and he can also claim more plausibly than Moore to be a populist conservative aligned with the Trump agenda. But McConnell didn’t want him in the Senate and, as he saw it, once Brooks was gone, Luther Strange would have no trouble walloping Moore in the run-off.