Comments on: Dems’ Stimulus Bill Has Hidden Left Agenda

By: lukemcgook

lukemcgook — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 02:12:36 +0000

We don’t know how extensive the underground economy is. It’s underground! Sure, other things equal, people will go to greater lengths to avoid taxes where taxes are more burdensome. But taxes (and licensing and enviro regulations and all kinda stuff) vary over states and localities, and what you suspect is going on could be a state/local thing. If the Obama (peace be upon him) raises the federal income tax, will more of the economy be driven underground? Yes, but my hunch is that, where taxes are concerned (as opposed to environmental regs, say), most of the underground are trying to avoid hassles — record-keeping and withholding and so on — rather than the income loss itself, and so will be unaffected when the feds start fiddling brackets and marginal rates.

What I do see happening is this. 1) O and the D’s will be raising taxes, and 2) inflation will take off in a big way. (Have you seen the famous money supply chart yet?) The tax increases will target the rich, where “rich” means “not rich,” and inflation will start bumping people into higher brackets. A lot of Blue state O-blivions will suddenly find themselves paying for their feckless voting behavior. It’ll be like the late 70′s, where the misery index was up in the 20′s. And we all remember fondly the 1980 election, and the 1978 numbers weren’t bad either. So, in short, I don’t think the producer class is ready for the Big Shrug any time soon, but I do expect a lot of voters, producers and parasites both, to be feeling more R-ish in two years. We’ll see.

By: Patrick Sperry

Patrick Sperry — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 17:06:09 +0000

Thanks for the compliment!

And yes, I am referring to the “producers” as a class. I know that those people (producers) will always produce, however, all around me I am seeing what might be called a revolt of sorts. A new underground economy as it were. If that were to become widespread then the government and those that suck from the governments teat will have a problem. No tax revenue, or at least greatly diminished milk…

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 16:31:30 +0000

What Congress is up to, per Mark Steyn

… magically transforming pork into “stimulus” by sticking another three zeroes on the end

By: Dems’ Stimulus Bill Has Hidden Left Agenda « Mountain Republic

Dems’ Stimulus Bill Has Hidden Left Agenda « Mountain Republic — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 14:40:38 +0000

[...] via Dems’ Stimulus Bill Has Hidden Left Agenda « Goodtimepolitics. [...]

By: lukemcgook

lukemcgook — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 06:34:52 +0000

Well, depends. Who’s “Atlas”? There aren’t any John Galts in the world; there never were. (Personally, I’m thankful for this, as I’ve always thought Galt an insufferable blowhard.) It may make sense to talk about an “Atlas class,” those of us who produce goods and services valued by others. Most government workers, many of the instructors and most of the educrats in the government schools and the universities, many in the legal profession, an ever larger fraction of media workers — these are people who do not produce value, or who produce value only insofar as the state creates new preferences to be hurdled or new rents to be sought. Obama is their champion, and for them he is a godsend. Tell me who your “Atlas” is, and then we’ll talk about what it would mean for him to shrug.

Nice blog, btw.

By: Patrick Sperry

Patrick Sperry — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 02:44:38 +0000

So lukemcgook, is Atlas ready to shrug?

By: lukemcgook

lukemcgook — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 17:15:00 +0000

Here’s Glenn Reynolds (Instapundit)

This is not so much a stimulus, as a massive transfer of wealth from the politically unconnected to the politically connected.

And the “connected” include more than the bankers-in-despair Friends of Barney or the local pork hustlers that every congressman lives with. Also connected, and “stimulated,” are the teachers’ unions, state bureaucrats at all levels (to include those in the soon-to-be-expanded health care regime), scare scientists and green lobbyists in general, the abortion lobby, the arts lobby, and, of course, people on the dole … the progressive base, in other words, the people who want to “remake” America in order to feel better about themselves and to make the rest of us pay attention to them (and also to make more money).

By: lukemcgook

lukemcgook — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 16:45:33 +0000

boythatwasalongone

By: lukemcgook

lukemcgook — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 16:44:32 +0000

The implication seems to be that it’s unpatriotic or “un-American” not to support the Prez. (Well, sometimes the connection is right out there, not just implied.) This rule, I suppose, took effect Tuesday. Prior to Tuesday, not supporting the president was the highest form of patiriotism … or something. And some of our more naive citizens seem to think that every president is entitled to general support until he shows himself unworthy in one way or another. But this is wrong, too. Anyone who paid attention during the campaign (a minority of voters, sure) knows that, insofar as Obama is a principled politician, his principles are radical and leftist — statist, collectivist, radically egalitarian, race-conscious — and that his team is not at all averse to intimidation, by crowd action or by government agency, as a tactic. We are, at the moment, closer to rapid and politically irreversible oppression by the state than we have been since the 1930′s. The conceit that Bush was somehow a threat to our liberty was always silly. The idea that Obama — with his partially hidden agenda of big government , “hate” laws, redistribution, punitive taxes, “green” laws, gun control, media “fairness,” and so on — is just a benign reformer is even sillier.