Iowa may be flooded, but it's also burning

Oh my.  I can identify one admirable thing about Michelle Bachmann - she sure has been coached well.  Past that, she's a liar.  Liar, liar, pants on fire.  Lie about almost everything.  Lie about lying.  Wow.  Check out her recent performance on "Face the Nation" if you need an example.

Here's a good write up about it:  http://www.examiner.com/events-in-columbia/truth-be-told-michele-bachmann-is-a-lying-machine

Iowa is a great state.  My mother grew up there.  My parents when to school there.  My grandmother lived there most of her life.  But hey, there, Iowa - you need to wake up and realize that HONESTY is a critical factor in choosing a candidate.

Think, boys, think.

Somebody prove me wrong

Here's what I think - somebody prove me wrong:

1. Cutting taxes for small business owners will not create jobs.
 If a small business owner has more money from lower taxes, that does not mean that they will create jobs.  They will create jobs when demand on the business necessitates it, or when they perceive that expanding their business will equal demand.  Only a fool is going to create a job that isn't necessary to run their business.  Until demand goes up, there is no reason for the business owner to create a new job.

2. Cutting taxes for the wealthiest Americans will not create jobs.

For the sake of argument, let's define "wealthiest American" as someone who makes over a million dollars a year.  That person is probably already spending as much as they would like to spend.  If given more money, they will in general either increase savings or investment.  Increased savings does not create jobs.  Increased investment doesn't create jobs - rule #1 above applies generally to both small and large businesses where people would invest.  A "demand" for investments, on the other hand, leads to overinflated prices for investments - a bubble.  Collapse of the bubbles can be dramatically bad, as we've seen.

3.  Cutting taxes for the middle and lower class will create jobs.

Middle and lower income Americans generally have needs and desires that they cannot normally afford.  That might include spending more on the basics, such as food, clothing, transportation, shelter.  They will support charities, but only as possible in their means.  They forgo many luxury expenses such as travel that they cannot afford.  Given additional income in the form of lower taxes, middle and lower income Americans will likely save and invest less than they will spend.  Their spending will increase the demand for business.  Increased demand on businesses will spur job creation.  More people with jobs - the vast majority of which are in the middle and lower income levels - will put more money into the spending cycle.  At the same time, more income for businesses puts more money into the hands of business owners.

So how do we cut taxes for the lower and middle class Americans?  First, you increase taxes on the wealthiest Americans, and balance that with tax cuts for the lower and middle class Americans.  That's called "no tax increase" in the overall.   After the economy picks back up, you then increase select taxes for small businesses if necessary to then help cut the deficit.  Small businesses will have already reaped the benefit of the increase from the lower and middle class spending, and therefore a tax increase should be a neutral move.


Like I said, prove me wrong.  I'd like to know if I'm right.

Robert Reich Explains the Economy

Robert Reich Explains the Economy

Continue - how do we get a stronger middle class with more buying power. A few suggestions - raise wages. That's not a tax, folks, that's "sharing". Shift taxes - make the wealthiest percent of Americans pay more in tax. That will allow more buying, which gets more money to small business, which then makes more money, hires more people, etc.

Totally non-political and totally baseball

Just a quick post to say congratulations to Kevin Sprague, who has officially opened Strike Zone Baseball, www.strike-zonebaseball.com   If you are in the Shawnee area, or play at Johnson County 3&2 or Mid-America Baseball, check it out!

Obama Pledges to Not Extend Bush Tax Cuts Again

Obama Pledges to Not Extend Bush Tax Cuts Again

This is only reason folks. When the ship is going down, you stop the leak AND bail out the water. Can't do just one and keep it afloat.

Pants on Fire

I just have to share a few sites I love:

http://politicalirony.com/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/rulings/pants-fire/


http://www.dailykos.com/



Have fun.

Santorum: After the "Weiner" thing, do you really think that's a good idea?

I don't know Rick Santorum, really.  I know his name, I know that he is a conservative Republican.  I know that he has made some statements that ~really~ upset the gay community.  That's about it.  And that may be all I get to know for now, despite the fact that he says that he is going to run for President.

For while I like to know the candidates, and I'm pretty open-minded to the idea of a new and better one, I don't think that I will ever get past the search results for "Santorum" in taking this guy seriously.  It's like a bad party joke, folks. Only those willing to live with the mental imagery consequences should try it.

Ultimately, I almost feel bad for the guy.  However, I'm fairly sure that he "made his own bed" (with whatever he prefers to do in it) and is now laying in the consequences.

5/8ths. Is that it?

I will never again refer to Sarah Palin as "Governor", or "former Governor", or "Gov.".  I added it up, and from now on I'll only refer to her as "5/8th former Governor", or "62.5% Governor", or perhaps my favorite,  "Partial-term Governor".  I might even refer to her time as Alaska's leader as a "Partial-term Govortion".

Why in the world would we give even 5/8th or our attention to Former Partial-term Governor Sarah Palin?  I guess I just did.  I want that back.