By Tina Grazier
The likely Republican Speaker of the House, should Republicans win big in November, is John Boehner and he is making a lot of sense. The end game is putting people back to work while making government smaller and more efficient to rid ourselves of debt and make America strong once again. Whew, that’s a mighty big task. The question will be whether the Republicans can get enough votes once empowered to implement those plans and then persuade the President to sign on the dotted line. As we have seen in the past two years getting something done in Congress is not easy, the founders wanted it that way, so we know going in that the opposition to Republican proposals will be fierce.
Larry Kudlow, reviewing a recent speech delivered by Boehner, quoted John F. Kennedy:
“An economy constrained by high tax rates will never produce enough revenue to balance the budget, just as it will never create enough jobs.”
Democrats don’t believe the words spoken by a man once considered their icon to be the truth. They chose to return to the Keynsian principle of spending to boost economies and now as the economy appears to be tanking again and joblessness remains high they are becoming desperate.
By nthe way, has there been an actual “recovery” or have we just been treated to wordy monotonous explanations followed by insincere media promotions in an attempt to prop up the hope and change we were promised? The average American has not experienced recovery. Instead we have witnessed exactly what was actually promised, government bent on spreading the wealth around and taking advantage of a crisis to pick winners and losers.
Given the likelihood of economic freefall heading into the elections, Democrats will likely propose letting the Bush tax cuts continue for a time. Remember now, these are the same tax cuts for “all Americans” that Democrats have said didn’t exist! Well, no matter, they may still be nutty enough to let tax cuts for “the rich” expire. If they do it will be a gianormous mistake. Money is power and “the rich” hold a lot of wealth building power. Power that when put at risk through investment would spawn new opportunities and jobs for everyone.
The Republican plan to get our economy growing again and put people back to work, as outlined by Boehner in his speech, wiould work because of three underlying ideals:
1. The American people, working, saving and investing, supply the innovation, power and drive that make our economy strong.
2. Government size and spending is out of control and must be significantly checked with government programs transformed and/or eliminated.
3. Our debt must be brought down significantly.
Thanks to the big government ideals that became popular over the last century, and with special thanks given to the “spread the wealth” plan of the Obama administration and his cohorts in the Democrat controlled congress, our already massive debt has exploded. We are currently experiencing an economic trap that will require a herculean effort over many years to escape. But if we can let freedom work, give power back to the people, and if the people are patient and vigilant, we will not only escape that trap but we will live to thrive once again. If Republicans do take power in November and are able to enact pro-citizen, pro-private sector plans we will see how real hope is made manifest. The rich, the middle class and the poor will begin to risk and invest again and that is exactly what is needed for business to flourish. The initial big payoff for the Americans people will be the abundance of jobs that follow.
The needs for more and more taxes are infinite, there will never be enough to satisfy every need. It’s a fools errand to even try, but that hasn’t stopped the liberals from trying. That’s my first thought and second, government doesn’t create jobs, they take from the private sector which does create jobs and sometimes they obstruct the creation of jobs by heavy taxation and regulation. Government’s primary concern when it comes to jobs should be to stay out of the way as much as possible and let the private sector prosper.
The great lie has been that the tax cuts were only for the rich. As a married father of 3 kids who is not rich, my family and I appreciated greatly the changes in the tax code that George W. Bush put in place. Obama threatens to take that all away from us so that he can give more money to Wall Street?
The other lie is that tax cuts are a giveaway. When someone is taking your money, having them take less from you doesn’t mean you’re receiving a giveaway, or being subsidized. Only democrats and the mob would look at it that way.
That said, I’m willing to have an honest debate with liberals about what the tax code should be, and all I want is for taxes to no longer be automatically be taken from our paychecks. Every taxpayer should have to physically write the check to the government so that they know just how much they are paying. Then if we could just move elections to April 15…..
Steve, why don’t you tell us what you do for a living? We’d be interested to know. Not one of those extravagantly subsidized rice growers, are you? Or some extravagantly subsidized other grower?
And you mustn’t think we necessarily object to subsidized growers (growing is a dicey business) … as long as you aren’t buying yer teenaged sons (or daughters) $30,000 pick-ups with our money.
So, tell us.
Libby why don’t you spend a few minutes explaining why Obummer is lying to the American people about the Bush tax cuts when he says they were tax cuts “for the rich”.
Go on, tell us!
California Jobs Initiative Another great article by Larry Naritelli
August 31, 2010…11:54 pm
Economic dangers of renewable energy
Jump to Comments
Recently school systems in California have begun a program to install solar energy panels on school campuses making the claim that this will reduce energy costs. Unfortunately it is just an example of our education administrators who believe in their own propaganda and jeopardize the entire education system by saddling us with generations of massive debt.
Inefficient energy instead of classrooms, teachers, and books.
An example of this is in North San Diego County where two local schools are now constructing solar energy panels above their parking lots. This project has been funded with $25 million in school construction bonds that carry a 2% interest rate. Not a bad deal. If this credit was made available for use in the private sector for low-interest rate mortgages more jobs would be created and fewer foreclosures would happen. However the leftist teaching that has permeated our educational systems is having an increasingly negative effect on everyone involved. The failure of administrators and politicians to understand basic economics and science is causing massive levels of unemployment and wealth destruction.
After the solar panels are in place the school will save $7.5 million in energy costs over 25 years. Thats right they are spending $25 million immediately to save $7.5 million over the next 25 years. So the electric energy will actually cost taxpayers $17.5 million more plus interest and the cost is all up front. This essentially increases the electric cost for the school by 233% not including the interest on the debt. It also does not include maintenance costs or the fact that todays solar technology will not last 25 years.
Taxpayers pay 3 times more for the energy and incur huge debts.
Now school administrators will justify their foolish policy by transferring the bond payments to the tax roles and not incorporating the energy cost into the general operating fund. So the illusion of savings occurs but the reality of economics prevails. Additionally it takes more energy to produce a solar panel than it will produce over its useful life. Government does not solve problems it subsidizes them.
Then to really poke the stick in the taxpayers eyes the school construction bonds are not being used to build more classrooms and the projected class size is in some cases 56 to 1. Funds that could have been used to reduce class size was diverted into expensive and inefficient electrical generation. This causes electric rates to necessarily skyrocket as government subsidies drive the prices higher and higher.
Fewer classrooms mean fewer teachers and fewer jobs. While the school runs into shortages of books, desks, and supplies, it pays 3 times more for the electrical energy with debt service.
So the students suffer, the teachers suffer, the taxpayers suffer, and we have just created a generation of debt for everyone who attends or works in these schools. Teachers salaries are cut or they are laid off, students get lower quality education, and local officials brag about how green they are while they are really driving the state very much into red.
This is what happens when our educational system is used to indoctrinate our youth into the economics of Marxism. These solar panels would never have been approved if the realities of the full economic effects were considered. But we have been blinded by false media claims of a Global Warming Fraud so that we adopt economically destructive policies designed to benefit foreign interests. By paying more for the energy than it is worth the market price of all conventional energy rises.
Politicians have sold out our future at the behest of radical environmentalists who care nothing about the financial effects of their hoaxes. It leads to total state control no matter how bad the economic philosophies are. Then they say capitalism doesnt work. The end result is higher electric prices for us all as low-cost energy is now replaced with high cost energy.
We cannot increase our energy efficiency by converting to inefficient energy systems.
“After the solar panels are in place the school will save $7.5 million in energy costs over 25 years. Thats right they are spending $25 million immediately to save $7.5 million over the next 25 years. So the electric energy will actually cost taxpayers $17.5 million more plus interest and the cost is all up front. This essentially increases the electric cost for the school by 233% not including the interest on the debt. It also does not include maintenance costs or the fact that todays solar technology will not last 25 years.”
Is this a testament to the failure of our educational system, and specifically math classes, or just an indication of single minded dedication and blind faith/reverance in the green godess?
I believe it’s both, but more so with the school boards who approved this unbelievable waste of badly needed funds. And it’s a gross example of what is going on not only at the federal level, but right in our own local communities.
We have too many incompentent individuals in charge who not only have no commen sense, they lack basic business experience and an understanding in economics.
Libby,
In your precious attempt at attacking the messenger, you have wrongly surmised that I am a rice farmer. That’s kind of funny. I do live in Biggs so I’m surrounded by rice, related to a few farmers, but no, I’m not a rice farmer and my kids aren’t old enough to drive. I am growing some mean tomatoes in my backyard this year though.
The reality is I’m just a middle class working stiff whose income increased nicely under George W. Bush. If the tax cuts are allowed to expire, it will hurt my family and lot of families like mine.
I still believe we should have an honest debate on what the tax rates should really be, without you accusing me of being evil because I’d still like to buy my kids school clothes each year rather than give it all to uncle sam.
Peggy,
Do you have the name of the school?
All I could find was Naritelli’s blog, and he provided no backup for his claims.
Thanks.
Mark,
Sorry I don’t. I copied it from the “Yes on 23 Jobs First” site on FaceBook. Also, went to his blog, but couldn’t find anything there either. The information is probably in local papers and TV station’s newscast.
We do have a local school that has just installed solar panels. Butte Community College has them up and running. Would be interesting to know the cost to see if it’s similar to the North San Diego Schools.
If anyone would care to inquire you can call Butte College 894-2484, this is the office of the President and he should have the original cost and the savings generated.
Peggy,
I ask because I think he made a simple mistake.
The standard way to describe such a system would be to describe the savings AFTER COSTS over 25 years because the manufacturer warranty is for 25 years. The panels themselves continue to produce power for much longer. Some systems installed in the 1970’s are still producing 80% of their rating.
So, the panels in question would save $32.5 million dollars over 25 years. Butte College claims similar numbers.
It is true that solar power won’t get us anywhere near energy independence, but it is at least cost effective.
Mark,
Non-political question: I searched online and found a guy making solar panels at home. Is this doable for the average person and affordable? I’m curious how much energy I could get out of them.
Steve
Steve,
I have heard of people making solar thermal (hot water) panels at home, but not solar voltaic (electricity) panels.
That said, typically your water heater is your top energy consuming appliance so solar thermal is a good first step. I have a solar hot water heater and it easily supplies our family of four, even in the winter.
Hope that helps.
Mark
I find that very interesting Mark. Seems like its not much trouble to create solar thermal panels and this saves a lot of money on NG. Did you make your own? Curious how yours are constructed? I think this is something I would like to do.