Friday, September 30, 2011

Karl Marx on Obama's Jobs Plan

Karl Marx has been attracting fawning fascination lately, noted Bloomberg Businessweek's Peter Coy, "from the likes of New York University economist Nouriel Roubini and George Magnus, the London-based senior economic adviser to UBS Investment Bank." In fact, Bloomberg Businessweek published "Give Karl Marx a Chance to Save the World Economy" by George Magnus in late August.

"To put Marx's spirit back in the box," said Magnus, policy makers "have to sustain aggregate demand," through "fiscal incentives" like Obama's old and new stimulus plans. But Marx was no Keynesian. On the contrary, his essay on "The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte," commenting on the December 1851 coup of Napoleon's nephew, was fiercely critical of what Marx called the "Napoleonic idea" of using government deficits to expand government jobs and public works schemes.

Marx began by saying, "Hegel remarks somewhere that all great world-historic facts and personages appear, so to speak, twice. He forgot to add: the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce." The farcical jobs plan of Louis Bonaparte relied on government jobs and public works projects financed by budget deficits, which meant a crippling burden on future taxpayers. "Industry and trade, hence the business affairs of the middle class, are to prosper in hot-house fashion under the strong government," Marx explained. "The people are to be given employment. Inauguration of public works. But the public works increase the obligations of people with respect to taxes."

Millionaires to Buffett: Butt out on taxes

Billionaire Warren Buffett can pay more taxes if he wants to, but some "ordinary millionaires" say they're already paying plenty.

Buffett has been outspoken in saying the super-rich should pay more. Others in that club -- like Bill Gates -- agree. And President Obama has been pushing the "the Buffett Rule", a guiding principle that aims to ensure the rich pay as much a share of their income as the middle class.

Even so, some millionaires say Buffett doesn't speak for them.

"There is more of a difference between my financial position as a multi-millionaire and Buffett's than there is between mine and a guy that makes minimum wage," one CNNMoney reader said. "Why am I grouped with him and why does he feel he can speak for me?"

Inspiring Stories of Entrepreuneurship

Last week, I mentioned that most Americans have no objections to wealth if they feel that it’s the product of hard work rather than luck or political favors. AEI’s Arthur Brooks, for instance, wrote:

Most Americans believe we live in an opportunity society. The General Social Survey has asked Americans since 1973 to answer whether people get ahead because of “their own hard work”or because of “lucky breaks and help from other people.”For four decades, 60 to 70 percent of Americans have said “hard work,”while never more than 16 percent have said “lucky breaks.”

It’s hardly a shock that seven in 10 Americans believe in the American dream. If you descended from immigrants, ask yourself: Why did my ancestors come here? I suspect it wasn’t to find a fairer system of forced income redistribution. It was to find a place where they could get a fair shake, where they could start their own business, and where hard work and good ideas would be rewarded.

Yet, when you listen to the president these days you would think that today’s entrepreneurs and small business owners are job creators because they are hard-working, but millionaires got their money because of lucky breaks. This is why I am really glad to see an increasing number of those millionaires speaking up about how they got to where they are now. Dan Foster yesterday linked to Ted Leonsis’s account of his upbringing:

Holding Obama's Party Accountable

Barack Obama is on a far worse political trajectory than Jimmy Carter was. First, the Democrats lost Sen. Ted Kennedy's seat to a Republican in ultraliberal Massachusetts who campaigned against Kennedy's signature issue of national health insurance. Nothing that dramatic happened while Carter was President.

Then Democrats suffered historic, grievous losses in the 2010 midterm elections, with a New Deal size loss in the House of 63 seats, and a loss of 6 seats in the Senate. In Jimmy Carter's 1978 midterms, Democrats lost only 15 seats in the House and 3 seats in the Senate.

Now in the recent special election in New York City, Democrats have begun to lose seats they haven't lost since before the New Deal.

Let Them Eat Windmills

The White House recently announced a “jobs plan” that will cost American taxpayers about $500 billion starting in 2013 for a government spending spree today. We knew what to expect: green-energy subsidies, tax breaks for people who already pay no income tax, further stimulus for non-shovel-ready projects, increased taxes on the wealthy — in short, most anything except what would actually create jobs, namely lifting the prohibitive regulatory and tax burdens on the nation’s job creators. Obama’s policies — particularly his heartless energy policies — promise to eliminate many more jobs than they create.

In times of economic hardship, high energy prices cut particularly deep. Nobody has said it better than the empathizer-in-chief:

One area of particular concern has been the cost and security of our energy. In an economy that relies on oil, rising prices at the pump affect everybody — workers and farmers, truck drivers and restaurant owners. Businesses see it hurt their bottom line. Families feel the pinch when they fill up their tank. For Americans already struggling to get by, it makes life that much harder.

Revolution as the Elite Tremble

MADRID — Hundreds of thousands of disillusioned Indians cheer a rural activist on a hunger strike. Israel reels before the largest street demonstrations in its history. Enraged young people in Spain and Greece take over public squares across their countries.

Their complaints range from corruption to lack of affordable housing and joblessness, common grievances the world over. But from South Asia to the heartland of Europe and now even to Wall Street, these protesters share something else: wariness, even contempt, toward traditional politicians and the democratic political process they preside over.

They are taking to the streets, in part, because they have little faith in the ballot box.

5 Major Ways The Obama Administration Is Killing American Jobs

Admittedly, the country was not in great shape when Barack Obama came into office. The United States had already gone into recession, the housing bubble had burst, and the global economy didn't look so hot either. Unfortunately, Barack Obama took a bad situation and made it much worse. Had Obama done nothing, chances are the country would be better off today and had he actually pursued a pro-growth policy of slashing regulations, cutting taxes, and tamping down the deficit, the economy would be immeasurably stronger than it is now. Instead, Barack Obama pumped job-killing, growth-draining rat poison directly into the veins of our nation's economy.

1) Obamacare: Obama pushed a massive new entitlement program past a Congress that didn't even read the bill. Many businesses don't fully understand how Obamacare will impact them when it goes into effect in 2014, but they do know their lives will be much more complicated, it will cost them a lot more money, and it will be considerably more difficult to provide health care for their employees. Obamacare is a major disincentive to hire new people.

This week Gallup is unveiling a series of in-depth analyses of “Americans’ views on the role and performance of government” based on its annual Governance Survey. The first overview, released on Monday, is a real-eye opener. According to Gallup, Americans are expressing historic levels of negativity towards the US government, with “a record high 81 percent of Americans dissatisfied with the way the country is being governed,” including 65 per cent of Democrats, and 92 per cent of Republicans. Gallup concludes by stating that “Americans’ various ratings of political leadership in Washington add up to a profoundly negative review of government,” ratings which are likely to get worse during the lead up to next year’s presidential elections.

Congress’s job performance takes a real hammering at 82 per cent disapproval, with 69 per cent of Americans declaring they have “little or no confidence” in the legislative branch of government (consisting of the US Senate and House of Representatives), an all-time high, and up from 63 per cent a year ago. Gallup’s polling also finds that more than half of Americans “have little or no confidence in the men and women who seek or hold elected office.” Congressional disapproval is even higher in some other recent polls – 84 per cent according to CBB/Opinion Research, and 87 per cent in the latest Associated Press/GfK survey. The RealClear Politics average now stands at 83.3 per cent disapproval, with just 13.5 per cent approval for Congress.

Obama’s Jobs Bill: Read It and Weep

The dim news about the current economic situation has prompted the Obama administration to put forward its latest, desperate effort to reverse the tide by urging passage of The American Jobs Act (AJA), a turgid 155-page bill. The AJA’s only certain effect is to make everything worse than it already is by asking Congress to tighten the stranglehold that government regulation has already placed on the economy.

That sad fact would certainly elude anyone who accepted the president’s justification for the AJA when he sent the bill to Congress. This bill, he said, will "put more people back to work and put more money in the pockets of working Americans. And it will do so without adding a dime to the deficit." How? Why, by closing "corporate tax loopholes" and insisting that the wealthiest American’s pay their "fair share" of taxes.

Illustration by Barbara Kelley

What is so striking about Obama’s shopworn rhetoric is its juvenile intellectual quality. His explanation for how the AJA will create jobs is a non-starter because he does not explain how we get from here to there. As in so many other cases, the president thinks that waving a wand over a problem will make his most ardent wishes come true, even when similar earlier efforts have proved to be dismal failures. This dreadful hodgepodge of a bill will likely be dead-on-arrival in Congress, but it remains a patriotic duty to explicate some of its worst provisions.

Mitt Romney is a Mormon and I am a Baptist: Get Over It!

The Baptists, Methodists, Catholics, Lutherans, Pentecostals, Mormons and a few other faiths have three things in common – they believe in Jesus Christ, that He is the Son of God and that He died and was resurrected for our sins.

So what's the problem?

The political pundits continue to try and make Mitt Romney's religious beliefs a big issue as he runs for the Republican presidential nomination. Different denominations of Christianity are just that – different denominations – which means different worship practices of the same fundamental Christian beliefs.

Some people have commented that they cannot support Mitt Romney because he is a Mormon. When they are pressed to explain why that is objectionable, they stutter. Still others are skeptical of Mitt Romney based solely on hearsay or lack of knowledge about Mormons.

Rep. Ron Paul: The country is ripe for revolution

Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul rallied a sold- out crowd of more than 1800 of his most ardent under-thirty-year-old supporters in New York City Monday night.

Tickets to the event cost $20-25. It was originally scheduled to take place at the famed Webster Hall's Marlin Room, but, the event had to be moved to a room twice as large at the last minute due to an overwhelming response. The final setting was in the Grand Ballroom, which has hosted celebrities to the scale of Mick Jagger and Madonna.

"We are seeing a level of enthusiasm for Ron Paul that can be compared with President Obama in 2008", said Eric Brakey, Media Coordinator for NYC Liberty HQ, the grassroots organization hosting the rally for the candidate. "Congressman Paul's youth support is different now than it was during his last presidential campaign. It's more organized and it's picking up steam and continues to grow".

Americans Express Historic Negativity Toward U.S. Government

This story is the first in a weeklong series on Gallup.com on Americans' views on the role and performance of government.

PRINCETON, NJ -- A record-high 81% of Americans are dissatisfied with the way the country is being governed, adding to negativity that has been building over the past 10 years.

Trend: Reaction to How the Nation Is Being Governed

Majorities of Democrats (65%) and Republicans (92%) are dissatisfied with the nation's governance. This perhaps reflects the shared political power arrangement in the nation's capital, with Democrats controlling the White House and U.S. Senate, and Republicans controlling the House of Representatives. Partisans on both sides can thus find fault with government without necessarily blaming their own party.

Obama's 'Hate the Rich' Campaign

In his so-called jobs speeches, Obama exploits class envy shrouded in fairness. President Obama continues to escalate his divisive assault on achievers, purposely pitting Americans against each other.

Obama's "Hate the Rich" campaign appeals to our lower nature and encourages the sin of covetousness. If Obama's despicable campaign proves successful, it will be a sad commentary about who we have become as a people and how far we have fallen as Americans.

It angers me that Obama and his minions in the liberal media have put achievers, risk-takers, on the defensive. It angers me that Obama's followers think that they are entitled to the fruit of someone else's labor.

Coke CEO Blasts U.S. Taxes, Praises China, Russia

Muhtar Kent, the CEO of All-American corporate giant Coca-Cola (KO), knocked Washington over its handling of taxes and the level of political rancor and said he sees China and other emerging markets becoming more business friendly than the U.S.

The critical comments from Kent, who has been CEO since July 2008, underscore growing discontent in Corporate America over political gridlock in Washington, a tougher regulatory environment and corporate tax levels.

“In the west, we’re forgetting what really worked 20 years ago,” Kent said in an interview with the Financial Times. “In China and other markets around the world, you see the kind of attention to detail about how business works and how business creates employment.”

Tax Demagogues Are Lying Liars, in One Graph

The rich pay lower tax rates than we do. Bush's tax cuts were only for the rich. Both the Reagan and Bush tax cuts were sops to the rich. Schmucks like you and me pay all the taxes so the rich can ride free.

You hear these lies every day.

In case you think I make these lies up, here are some examples.

"Changes in tax rates have strongly favored the very, very rich." -Paul Krugman

"Like Ronald Reagan, President Bush began his term in office with big tax cuts for the rich[.]" -Paul Krugman

"We know, for instance, that taxes on the rich have fallen dramatically in recent decades." -Ezra Klein

"The rich pay a huge share of the total taxes in the United States because they have a huge share of the money." -Matthew Yglesias

"If you make money with money, as some of my super-rich friends do, your percentage may be a bit lower than mine. But if you earn money from a job, your percentage will surely exceed mine -- most likely by a lot[.] Back in the 1980s and 1990s, tax rates for the rich were far higher[.]" -Warren Buffett

"Based on an exhaustive analysis of tax records and census data, the study reinforced the sense that while Mr. Bush's tax cuts reduced rates for people at every income level, they offered the biggest benefits by far to people at the very top[.]" -Edmund Andrews, The New York Times

"And that's why this plan eliminates tax loopholes that primarily go to the wealthiest taxpayers and biggest corporations -- tax breaks that small businesses and middle-class families don't get. And if tax reform doesn't get done, this plan asks the wealthiest Americans to go back to paying the same rates that they paid during the 1990s, before the Bush tax cuts." -President Obama

These lies are rebutted by a single graph produced by the Congressional Budget Office, below.

The taxes included in this chart are for all federal taxes, not just income taxes. Each quintile is one fifth of taxpayers, based on income. The top quintile is the one with the highest incomes.

Why Does the Good Life End?

A look Back

People just don’t disappear. Look at Germany in 1946 or Athenians in 339 B.C. They continue, but their governments and cultures end. Aside from the dramatic military implosions of authoritarian or tribal societies — the destruction of Tenochtitlan, the end of Nazism, the collapse of the Soviet Union, the annexation of tribal Gaul — what brings consensual states to an end, or at least an end to the good life?

The city-states could not stop 30,000 Macedonians in a way — when far poorer and 150 year earlier — they had stopped 300,000 Persians descending on many of the same routes. The French Republic of 1939 had more tanks and troops on the Rhine than the Third Reich that was busy overrunning Poland. A poorer Britain fought differently at el-Alamein than it does now over Libya. A British battleship was once a sign of national pride; today a destroyer represents a billion pounds stolen from social services.

Give me

Redistribution of wealth rather than emphasis on its creation is surely a symptom of aging societies. Whether at Byzantium during the Nika Riots or in bread and circuses Rome, when the public expects government to provide security rather than the individual to become autonomous through a growing economy, then there grows a collective lethargy. I think that is the message of Juvenal’s savage satires about both mobs and the idle rich. Fourth-century Athenian literature is characterized by forensic law suits, as citizens sought to sue each other, or to sue the state for sustenance, or to fight over inheritances.

The Johnny Appleseed Visitor’s Center, located on Route 2, in Lancaster, will celebrate the local folk hero’s birthday with cake and ice cream this Sunday, Sept. 25th, and warmly invites the community to join in.

Diane Burnett, director of the Center, said she and her fellow coworkers at the center are very excited to be part of the celebration and thrilled to show tourists and local residents all they have to offer.

“We are the gateway to Central Massachusetts, and we try to show people coming through all that is here,” she said.

The center carries an assortment of local products, such as jams, jellies, and honey, and is proud to showcase the products made right in our own backyard.

“This is our busy time with apple pickers and leaf peepers, people come to this area for all that we have to offer them. We direct visitors to the local orchards and promote the local businesses. We are very proud of our area,” Burnett said.

Can We Tell the Truth?

The question arises: How effective are weasel words in fighting off weasel words?

With its leader having proposed to expand our deflating economy by redistributing another $1.5 trillion from private-sector producers to public-sector gluttons, the Obama Left’s talking point du jour is: “We are just asking the rich to pay their fair share.” The point here is not to rehearse the illogic of that assertion. The top earners in the economy already pay all of the income tax and virtually all of the taxes, period. You could look it up.

What I’d like to home in on is the single number the president and his diminishing ranks studiously ignore — the “x” in the equation that never quite gets a value assigned. “Fair share” — what is it?

Want to make a cable-news Democratic party-strategist squirm? Ask her what she means by the “fair share” that must be paid by the rich. (No point further tarrying over what she means by “the rich,” since we already know they are billionaires and millionaires who jump about in corporate jets while somehow making only $200,000 a year.) In response to the “fair share” question, you will hear how Bush single-handedly destroyed the economy. You will hear about the diabolical Republican plan to desert the elderly, starve the young, and exploit everyone in between. You will hear a vague concession that “the rich” must be allowed to keep some semblance of their wealth — enough, at least, to keep them in the game of “paying it forward” to future generations of government wards. But what you won’t hear is a number.

In Arizona, nibbling away at free enterprise

Cindy Vong is a tiny woman with a problem as big as the government that is causing it. She wants to provide a service that will enable customers “to brighten up their days.” Having fish nibble your feet may not be your idea of fun, but lots of people around the world enjoy it, and so did some Arizonans until their bossy government butted in, in the service of a cartel. Herewith a story that illustrates how governments that will not mind their own business impede the flourishing of businesses.

Vong, 47, left Vietnam in 1982, and after stops in Indonesia, Thailand, Taiwan and Hong Kong, settled in San Francisco and lived there for 20 years before coming here to open a nail salon with a difference. Her salon offered $30 fish therapy, wherein small fish from China nibble dead skin from people’s feet. Arizona’s Board of Cosmetology decided the fish were performing pedicures, and because all pedicure instruments must be sterilized and fish cannot be, the therapy must be discontinued. Vong lost her more-than-$50,000 investment in fish tanks and other equipment, and some customers. Three of her employees lost their jobs.

Obama Administration Set to Ban Asthma Inhalers Over Environmental Concerns

Remember how Obama recently waived new ozone regulations at the EPA because they were too costly? Well, it seems that the Obama administration would rather make people with Asthma cough up money than let them make a surely inconsequential contribution to depleting the ozone layer:

Asthma patients who rely on over-the-counter inhalers will need to switch to prescription-only alternatives as part of the federal government's latest attempt to protect the Earth's atmosphere.

The Food and Drug Administration said Thursday patients who use the epinephrine inhalers to treat mild asthma will need to switch by Dec. 31 to other types that do not contain chlorofluorocarbons, an aerosol substance once found in a variety of spray products.

The action is part of an agreement signed by the U.S. and other nations to stop using substances that deplete the ozone layer, a region in the atmosphere that helps block harmful ultraviolet rays from the Sun.

But the switch to a greener inhaler will cost consumers more. Epinephrine inhalers are available via online retailers for around $20, whereas the alternatives, which contain the drug albuterol, range from $30 to $60.

Warren Buffett’s Tax Story Is Bogus

For years, Warren Buffett has been claiming that his secretary pays a higher tax rate than he does. Recently, President Obama has taken that claim and run with it. I don’t know Mr. Buffett’s particular tax situation, but I do know that his claim as a general matter is bogus.

Let’s look at some numbers. The first chart shows IRS data for income tax rates by income group for 2009. These are average effective tax rates, calculated as income taxes paid divided by adjusted gross income (AGI). The chart shows that taxpayers with incomes above $500,000 had tax rates averaging about 25 percent. Middle-income taxpayers had tax rates of half of that or less. A few years ago, Buffett claimed that his secretary earned $60,000 and paid a 30 percent tax rate. But looking just at income taxes, that seems way off. (Note that this data doesn’t include the “refundable” portion of tax credits, which wipes out taxes for many people at the bottom end).

Perhaps Buffett was referring to the fact that his secretary pays a heavy load of payroll taxes in addition to income taxes. But when you look at data which includes all federal taxes, the system is still highly graduated with much higher rates at the top end.

Illustration: EPA scary by Alexander Hunter for The Washington Times

Thursday is a D-Day of sorts for House Democrats. That day they will get to choose between jobs or job-killing Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations.

The House is scheduled to vote this week on the Transparency in Regulatory Analysis of Impacts on the Nation Act of 2011 (TRAIN Act), a long-overdue measure to rein in the Obama administration’s out-of-control EPA.

The TRAIN Act calls for a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis of proposed EPA regulations and their impact on jobs and electricity prices. Importantly, for anyone worried about the cost and reliability of electricity, it places on hold two of the most expensive Clean Air Act regulations ever proposed by the EPA - the recently promulgated Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) and the pending Clean Air Mercury Rule.

Obama’s Predictable Scandals

The media finally conceded the Obama administration to be inexperienced and inept, reminiscent of the Carter administration — but, they maintained, not possibly involved in any corruption. Then suddenly scandals erupted on nearly every conceivable front: the crony-capitalist half-billion-dollar loan guarantee to a now bankrupt Solyndra; the Fast and Furious gun deal, in which, in lunatic fashion, the U.S. government sold deadly automatic weapons to Mexican drug-cartel killers; the administration’s pressure on a four-star general to fudge his testimony as a favor to a big campaign donor whose suspect company, LightSquared, was doing business with the Pentagon; and the politically inspired dropping of investigations by the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department.

Study: Obamacare will jack premiums up 55%-85%

So, Ohio, how do you like President Obama now that you have had 2 1/2 years of him in the Oval Office? The Buckeye State turned blue for him in 2008, as the majority of voters bought into his mantras of hope and change and yes we can. The centerpiece of his domestic policy is Obamacare and now a new study shows that 790,000 Ohioans will lose their private health insurance and premiums will rise 55%-85% when Obamacare takes full effect in 2014.

The Ohio Department of Insurance commissioned a study by Milliman Inc. of Seattle on what to expect from Obamacare, National Underwriter reported.

From National Underwriter: “The number with some kind of individual commercial coverage could increase to 7.4%, or 735,000, from 350,000. The percentage with some kind of government coverage, or coverage provided by a private insurer but paid for in whole or in part by the government, could increase to 31%, from 20% in 2010. Although the percentage of residents with coverage could rise by about 7.9%, the price of individual health insurance coverage might rise about 55% to 85%, excluding the impact of medical inflation, the Milliman consultants predict.”

Student Suspended for Saying Gay Is Wrong

FORT WORTH, Texas - A Fort Worth high school student was sent to the principal’s office earlier this week for telling another classmate he believes homosexuality is wrong.

Fourteen-year-old Dakota Ary spent most of the day Tuesday serving an in-school suspension. It was punishment for discussion in his German class at Fort Worth’s Western Hills High School.

“We were talking about religions in Germany. I said, ‘I’m a Christian. I think being a homosexual is wrong,’” he said. “It wasn’t directed to anyone except my friend who was sitting behind me. I guess [the teacher] heard me. He started yelling. He told me he was going to write me an infraction and send me to the office.”

An assistant principal called Ary’s mother at work to let her know he was in trouble.

A Palestinian State? Don't Count on it

If the Palestinian Authority genuinely desired international recognition as a sovereign state, Mahmoud Abbas wouldn't have come to New York to seek membership in the UN General Assembly this week. There would have been no need to, for Palestine would have long since taken its seat in the United Nations.

Were Palestinian statehood Abbas's real goal, after all, he could have delivered it to his people three years ago. In 2008, then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert proposed the creation of a sovereign Palestinian state on territory equal (after land swaps) to 100 percent of the West Bank and Gaza, with free passage between the two plus a capital in the Arab section of Jerusalem. Yet Abbas turned down the Israeli offer. And he has refused ever since even to engage in negotiations.

"It is our legitimate right to demand the full membership of the state of Palestine in the UN," Abbas declared in Ramallah on Friday, "to put an end to a historical injustice by attaining liberty and independence, like the other peoples of the earth."

How Obama and Buffet FIRED 40,0000 Workers in One Day!

While Obama and Buffet are working on finding new ways to fleece middle class America of more of our money to finance the salaries of the new storm troopers, the SEIU, Teamsters and Teacher’s unions and the various ACORN spawned organizations, the two are simultaneously prosecuting an all out war on the private sector.

To hear the old kook tell it the idea came to him while he was playing in the bathtub.

Those of us who no longer believe in the tooth fairy prefer to to dig a little and find out just exactly how did this seemingly Archimedian epiphany come to the so called Oracle of Omaha.

The Buffet official fairy tale is that he was in the middle of his “splish splash I was taking a bath” when he just decided that he would invest $5 Billion dollars in the moribund Bank of America. Gee ain’t that just peachy! It’s right up there with the Obama birth certificate!

How to Fix our Entitlement Programs

Beyond the naming calling and hyperbole, the two largest government programs - social security and Medicare - threaten our long term national fiscal security. Both are now requiring the redirection of income tax revenue to retirees, and in the future, will face significant but not fatal shortfalls. Without any other action, social security payments will be cut to around 75% of promised, while Medicare (and the veteran healthcare program) will require ever higher co-payments. There are, however, many possible solutions that could be achieved with bipartisan co-operation and a quieting of the public rabble rousers, who profit from discontent. The truth is SS & Medicare are rather pedestrian, boring programs that fulfill a critical need, and fixing them can be done in practical ways without sacrificing old age security.

1. Pass a balanced budget amendment for social security. Declare that social security income must exactly equal outflow and overhead each year (modified, perhaps, with a rainy day fund for unusually bad years like 2008). A formula can be developed that spreads future shortfalls out amongst the three interested parties: reduced benefits, increased withholding rates, and higher wage cut-offs. With this amendment, the size of the social security check is not fixed, neither is the withholding rate, and the wealthy may have to pay in at a higher recovery rate than others -- all of which is a negative, to be sure -- but the program itself will never and can never go broke. The young worker who now complains of uncertainty will know that SS will survive now and forever, so long as there is an America.

2. Create a stone wall between SS and the rest of government. Do not allow any use of excess SS revenue -- it there is excess, let it build the rainy day fund or be distributed immediately to seniors. If there is shortfall, let the checks shrink and withholdings grow, but do not use general funds. With this modification, SS will never contribute to the deficit. All projected federal government deficits will decrease dramatically.

Solyndra execs to plead 5th at House hearing

Two top executives at a bankrupt California solar energy company say they will invoke their Fifth Amendment rights and refuse to answer questions when they appear at a House hearing on Friday.

Solyndra Inc. Chief Executive Officer Brian Harrison and Chief Financial Officer W.G. Stover sent letters to the House Energy and Commerce Committee on Tuesday informing them of their plans to remain silent. The Associated Press obtained copies of the letters, which cite an ongoing criminal investigation by the FBI.

Harrison and Stover said they still plan to appear before the committee, which is investigating a $528 million loan Solyndra received from the Energy Department in 2009.

Obama's Fascist Economy

Barack Obama and his minions in the administration as well as many Democrats in the Congress are often described as Socialists, or in the extreme as Marxists. However, their actions and strategy are straight out of the fascist economic playbook. They have become the modern reincarnation of the fascist mindset, without the militarism of Italy and Germany, that dominated Europe in the 1920s and '30s.

Over the past seventy years, the left and their allies in the media have succeeded in labeling fascism as a right-wing or conservative philosophy when it in reality was an offshoot of socialism. Socialism/Marxism seeks the total control of a society's economy through complete state control of the means of production and income. Fascism seeks that same control, indirectly by the state domination of private ownership, as well as controlling individual income and wealth through taxation and regulation. Jonah Goldberg's masterpiece Liberal Fascism convincingly demonstrates the progressive roots of fascism.

Per Sheldon Richman in the Concise Encyclopedia of Economics:

As an economic system, fascism is socialism with a capitalistic veneer. In its day (the 1920's and 1930's), fascism was seen as the happy medium between boom-and-bust-prone capitalism, with its alleged class conflict, wasteful competition, and profit-oriented egoism, and Marxism, with its violent socially divisive prosecution of the bourgeoisie.

Where socialism abolished all market relations outright, fascism left the appearance of market relations while planning all economic activities. Where socialism abolished money and prices; fascism controlled the monetary system and set all prices and wages politically. [Emphasis added.]

White House’s Testimony ‘Guidance’

A second government official has come forward saying the White House tried to influence his testimony concerning a wireless broadband project backed by a Democratic donor that military officials fear might impair sensitive satellite navigation systems.

Anthony Russo, director of the National Coordination Office for Space-Based Positioning, Navigation, and Timing, told The Daily Beast he rejected “guidance” from the White House’s Office of Budget and Management suggesting he tell Congress that the government’s concerns about the project by the firm LightSquared could be resolved in 90 days, a timetable favorable to the company’s plans.

“They gave that to me and presumably the other witnesses,” Russo said. “There is one sentence I disagreed with, which said that I thought the testing could be resolved in 90 days. So I took it out.”

LightSquared: Obama's Dangerous Broadband Boondoggle

If you thought the half-billion-dollar, stimulus-funded Solyndra solar company bust was a taxpayer nightmare, just wait. If you thought the botched Fast and Furious border gun-smuggling surveillance operation was a national security nightmare, hold on. Right on the heels of those two blood-boilers comes yet another alleged pay-for-play racket from the most ethical administration ever.

Welcome to LightSquared. It's a toxic mix of venture socialism (to borrow GOP Sen. Jim DeMint's apt phrase), campaign finance influence-peddling and perilous corner-cutting all rolled into one.

The company is building "a state-of-the-art open wireless broadband network." Competition in the industry is a good thing, of course. But military, government and civilian aviation experts have long objected to LightSquared's potential to interfere with the Global Positioning System (GPS) satellite network. As the government's own Positioning, Navigation and Timing agency explained:

Stealth Wealth Tax

The stealth wealth tax may be the single-largest tax ever imposed on the American people, yet virtually no one knows about it. What is particularly unconscionable about this tax is that it has been imposed upon the most responsible citizens and the elderly in a most disproportionate way, and the real tax rate on American savers has soared to record levels.

The Federal Reserve has held down interest rates so that the average person receives less than 1 percent on money-market funds or certificates of deposit — that is, money used for precautionary and low-risk savings. At the same time, the Fed has allowed inflation to rise to an annual rate of more than 3.5 percent. As can be seen in the accompanying chart, when inflation rates are higher than interest rates, people suffer an effective real tax rate above 100 percent. At present rates of interest and inflation, this means that most Americans pay effective tax rates on their savings ranging from 360 percent for lower-income people to 390 percent for higher-income people.

Inflation is a non-legislated wealth tax. If you had kept a $100 bill a year ago, today you would be able to buy just $96.20 worth of goods and services, given the current 3.8 percent inflation rate. The Fed, by its failure to preserve the value of the currency as it is charged to do, has imposed a stealth wealth tax on you.

Obama’s Attack on Big Oil: Fair Share or Targeted Tax Hike?

President Obama says he wants big corporations, including oil companies, to pay their “fair share” in taxes. His deficit reduction plan includes eliminating what he calls special loopholes and subsidies for oil and gas companies—despite the fact that they’re not specific to the oil and gas industry but the broader manufacturing sector. If the President wants to collect more money from the oil and gas industry, he should support increasing access to America’s energy resources. This would greatly increase the amount of revenue coming into the federal government, and it would do so without raising taxes.

If Congress opened access and placed a freeze on environmental regulations and the Administration moved to effectively permit new projects, the federal government would collect more than $36 billion as soon as 2015 and more than $800 billion by 2030, according to a study from Wood Mackenzie. The general economy would stand to benefit tremendously: Increased production would generate more than 1 million jobs by 2018 and more than 1.4 million jobs by 2030. President Obama’s “Living Within Our Means and Investing in the Future” plan ignores this sensible idea.

Instead, the President’s plan for economic growth and deficit reduction proposes to eliminate what he calls special tax breaks for the oil and gas industry. Most of what the President and anti-oil crusaders label as oil subsidies and oil tax loopholes are not tax treatment specific to the oil and gas industry. These are broad tax policies that apply to many industries. For instance, the tax credit under Internal Revenue Code Section 199 goes to all domestic manufacturing. Producers of clothing, roads, electricity, water, and many other goods produced in the United States are all eligible for the manufacturer’s tax deduction. Even Hollywood and The New York Times can take it.

Republicans dodge the real lesson of Solyndra

In Republican-leaning circles in Washington, the question of the moment has been "Does this Solyndra thing have legs?" -- in other words, will the news media keep running stories on the subsidized, politically connected solar power company that just went bankrupt?

When Republicans ask this question, they mean, "Will this significantly detract from President Obama's re-election chances?"

The brief answer is: Probably not, because too many Republicans are asking the wrong questions and drawing the wrong conclusions.

Media Myth Debunked: Millionaires Don't Pay Less Tax as Percent of Income Than Lower Earners

As President Obama trots out his new "Buffett Rule" to raise taxes on millionaires, the media are predictably assisting his efforts by spreading misinformation about the wealthy paying less taxes than lower wage earners as a percent of income.

2009 tax figures recently released by the Internal Revenue Service thoroughly refute this assertion:

The chart above is an abbreviated version of the IRS's 2009 Table 1.1 "Selected Income and Tax Items."

Meeting Young Obama

My first meeting with young Barack Obama raised strong feelings and left me with a positive first impression. At the time, I felt I'd persuaded a young man anticipating a Marxist-Leninist revolution to appreciate the more practical alternative of conventional politics as a channel for his socialist views.

I met Obama in December of 1980, a couple of days after Christmas, in Portola Valley -- a small town near Stanford University in Palo Alto, CA. I was a 23 year old second-year graduate student in Cornell's Government Department, and had flown to California to visit a 21 year old girlfriend, Caroline Boss. Boss was a senior at Occidental College, where she had taken a class in the fall of 1980 with political theorist Roger Boesche. She met and befriended Obama in that class.

I had been an angry Marxist revolutionary during my undergraduate career at Occidental College. During my hyperactive sophomore year, in the fall of 1976, I founded the Marxist-Socialist group on campus and named it the Political Awareness Fellowship. As I recall, I developed this innocuous sounding name because there were so few students on campus as radical as I, and I was fearful of turning off moderate students who might be willing to learn more about Marxist theory.

Mark Steyn: Obama’s magical thinking on green jobs

The president has taken to the campaign trail to promote his American Jobs Act. That's a good name for it: an act. "Pass this bill now!" he declared 24 times at a stop in in Raleigh, North Carolina, and another 18 in Columbus, Ohio, and the act is sufficiently effective that, three years into the Vapidity of Hope, the president can still find crowds of true believers willing to chant along with him: "Pass this bill now!"

Not all supporters are content merely to singalong with the prompter-in-chief. In North Carolina, a still-devoted hopeychanger cried out, "I love you!"

"I love you, too," said the president. "But… ."

Officials hope to approve more loan guarantees

The Obama administration is moving to finalize as many as 15 loan guarantees for renewable energy companies before the stimulus program ends on Sept. 30, and Republicans are questioning whether that could lead to more failures like Solyndra Inc., a company that filed for bankruptcy and may leave taxpayers on the hook for a half-billion-dollar loan.

The loan guarantees essentially make it easier for the companies to get financing as the government guarantees repayment in the event of default. In Solyndra's case, the loan came from the government itself, but private banks often provide the financing.

A spokesman for the Energy Department said the department won't take any shortcuts during the approval process.

"We will only close the deals that are ready to close on Sept. 30," said spokesman Damien LaVera.

A congressional subcommittee is examining the loan guarantee program. It released documents Wednesday that appeared to show senior staff at the White House Office of Management and Budget chafing about having to conduct "rushed approvals" of a loan guarantee for Solyndra, a California manufacturer of solar panels. The company is also the subject of an FBI investigation.

Republican members of the committee said the emails raised questions about whether the loan was rushed to accommodate a groundbreaking ceremony in September 2009 that featured Vice President Joe Biden and Energy Secretary Steven Chu.

Solyndra, the logical endpoint of Obamanomics

The bankruptcy of solar-panel maker Solyndra neatly encapsulates the economic, political and intellectual bankruptcy of Barack Obama’s Big Idea. It was the president’s intention back in 2009 to begin centrally reorganizing the U.S. economy around the supposed climate-change crisis.

To what end? Well, Obama claimed his election would mark “the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.” But that was just the cover story. At its core, Obamanomics is about the top-down redistribution of wealth and income. Government spending on various “green” subsidies and programs, along with a cap-and-trade system to limit carbon emissions, would enrich key Democrat constituencies: lawyers, public sector unions, academia and non-profits.

Oh, and Wall Street, too. Who was the exclusive financial adviser to Solyndra when it was trying to secure the $535 million loan from Washington? Goldman Sachs. And had the cap-and-trade scheme been enacted, big banks stood ready to reap billions from the trading of carbon emission credits.

Obama Wants Fairness More than Jobs

Surely Obama has noticed that his stimulus policies have not created jobs. The assumption by his economic advisors that spending a trillion dollars automatically creates 2.5 million jobs has not worked out for him -- or us. Unemployment and poverty are at record levels and the federal government is insolvent. Thanks to Obama's belief in stimulus spending, our debt will be 100% of our GDP by 2014 -- Greek territory.

Conservatives debate why Obama doesn't do a Clinton, move to the middle, become more effective, and give himself a shot at a second term. Instead, stimulus II, which calls for another half a trillion in government largess, seems to be doubling down on failure. Why doesn't Obama learn from his mistakes? Is his problem incompetence or ideology? conservatives wonder. Others suggest that it is pure politics, with Obama's focus groups telling him that voters respond to his tax the rich rhetoric, and will blame Republicans for our economic woes. Yet surely Obama's advisors have crunched the numbers, and know that even taxing the rich 100% of their income will pay for only a tiny fraction of Obama's annual spending.

There is another factor at play. Our president has made it completely clear that for him, making America a more fair country trumps mundane economic considerations. As it turns out, every time he acts for fairness, he is also rewarding his political base and holding onto power. So our president keeps hoping that by doing good, he will do himself good -- as he defines good. Those who disagree with him are not just wrong; they are selfish and unfair -- in a word, Republicans. His Democrat base agrees and eggs him on. So our president doesn't focus on the suffering of the unemployed, now 50% among young blacks. He doesn't admit to himself that he is clawing middle-class families down into poverty. He applauds himself for working on fairness.

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less.'
- Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass.

Humpty was a Statist, calling on all the King's horses and all the King's men -- taxpayer-funded, of course -- to repair his fecklessness.

It's difficult to discuss policy, or even listen to Statists (or Progressives or Democrats -- your choice of terms) like Humpty with any understanding, because their words and phrases don't mean what we in the real world understand them to mean -- only what they choose them to mean. Therefore, with election season upon us (as if it ever left), here's a little help. Readers should feel free to add additional terms this short review has missed.

Quit Coddling the Rich. Quit Coddling the Poor. Quit Coddling Everybody.

As President Obama said in his recent "Jobs" speech, "Yes, we are rugged individualists. Yes, we are strong and self- reliant. And it has been the drive and initiative of our workers and entrepreneurs that has made this economy the engine and the envy of the world." Truthful words. Why, then, do so many in Washington operate as though we are weak and incapable of taking care of ourselves?

Our history is stuffed to the brim with stories of bravery and self-reliance. Our early ancestors braved the seas to come to America and start a new life. We fought the War of Independence so we could be our own nation and govern ourselves as we saw fit. We didn't need to be coddled by Britain -- and we did not want to be told what to do or how to live our lives. We did not want a government that required our enslavement. We wanted our freedom and the responsibility that came with it. We wanted independence.

Independence. Think of what that means. A common definition is freedom from the control, influence, support, aid, or the like, of others. I would be surprised if most Americans didn't agree wholeheartedly with every aspect of the definition.

EPA Declares Hay a Pollutant in Effort to Antagonize Small and Mid-Sized U.S. Cattle Feeders

During his presentation on the status of the nation’s new country-of-origin labeling (COOL) law, and on behalf of the R-CALF USA COOL Committee, R-CALF USA member and Kansas cattle feeder Mike Callicrate was asked a non-COOL question that set convention goers on their heels during the 12^th Annual R-CALF USA Convention held August 26-27 in Rapid City, S.D.

“Has the Environmental Protection Agency declared hay a pollutant?” an audience member asked. Callicrate responded affirmatively and explained that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently initiated a formal enforcement action against his Kansas feedlot for, among other things, failure to store his hay in a pollution containment zone. “Now that EPA has declared hay a pollutant, every farmer and rancher that stores hay, or that leaves a broken hay bale in the field is potentially violating EPA rules and subject to an EPA enforcement action,” Callicrate said. “How far are we going to let this agency go before we stand up and do something about it?”

Callicrate is permitted to handle 12,000 cattle at a time in his feedlot, which is considered a small to mid-sized feedlot in an industry now dominated by mega-feedlots such as those owned by the world’s largest beef packer – JBS-Brazil – with a one-time capacity of over 900,000 cattle; or the other mega-feedlot that also feeds hundreds of thousands of cattle at a time and is owned by the nation’s second-largest beef packer - Cargill; or the other handful of mega feedlots with capacities of hundreds of thousands of cattle such as those owned by Cactus Feeders, Inc. and Friona Industries.

Employers Say Jobs Plan Won’t Lead to Hiring Spur

The dismal state of the economy is the main reason many companies are reluctant to hire workers, and few executives are saying that President Obama’s jobs plan — while welcome — will change their minds any time soon.

That sentiment was echoed across numerous industries by executives in companies big and small on Friday, underscoring the challenge for the Obama administration as it tries to encourage hiring and perk up the moribund economy.

The plan failed to generate any optimism on Wall Street as the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index and the Dow Jones industrial average each fell about 2.7 percent.

Federal agents have expanded their examination of the now-bankrupt California solar power company Solyndra, visiting the homes of the company's chief executive, a founder, and a former executive, examining computer files and documents, the Center for Public Integrity's iWatch News and ABC News have learned.

Agents visited the homes of CEO Brian Harrison and company founder Chris Gronet. Agents also visited the home of a third executive involved in the company from the start, according to a source who agreed to speak only on condition of anonymity because of the legal sensitivity of the situation.

Gronet, reached at his home Friday morning, did not dispute that his home was visited by federal agents a day earlier.

“I’m sorry,” Gronet said in an interview. “You probably understand full well that I cannot comment.”

Obama’s Job Speech Full of Bad Ideas

I note on National Review today that President Obama’s “jobs” package is full of bad ideas, including:

A temporary payroll tax cut. This is not a tax cut at all because the president would “pay for it” with tax hikes later on. And if it’s temporary, it won’t encourage businesses to hire additional workers anyway.
More federal infrastructure. When the federal government spends on infrastructure, it often misallocates the funds. The list of federal infrastructure boondoggles and cost overruns is endless — in public housing, dam-building, Corps of Engineers projects, bridges to nowhere, high-speed rail, etc. Instead, what we need is higher-quality infrastructure spending financed and built by the private sector. We need private airports, private air-traffic control, and private toll highways.
A federal infrastructure bank. Such a financial scheme would reduce transparency in federal spending, which would go directly against a key Obama promise of increased budget transparency.

Romney Announces Jobs Plan

Mitt Romney is putting meat on the bones of his contention that he will be the nation’s turnaround artist.

Romney announced his jobs plan — an array of specific steps packaged in a 160-page tome entitled “Believe in America” — in a speech in North Las Vegas, at McCandless International Trucks Inc. The end goal of his plan is a restoration of national prosperity by the completion of his first term.

“The entire jobs-and-economic-growth plan will achieve about 4 percent year-over-year GDP growth,” a Romney aide asserts, citing the campaign’s economic models. “This means the economy will create eleven and a half million new private-sector jobs over the course of the governor’s first term as president. We project the unemployment rate to be about 5.9 percent by the end of his first term in office. On the spending side, we spend about $1.6 trillion less than President Obama proposes over the first four years, and over eight years, about $4 trillion less than the president proposes.”

I recently finished reading two GREAT books, back to back, that are fictional scenarios about an EMP (electro magnetic pulse) attack on the U.S. Both books are very well written, extremely realistic, and I had a hard time putting them down. The first one (still my all time favorite) was “Alas, Babylon” by Pat Frank. The second, as recommended by many readers on this site was “One Second After” by William R. Forstchen. (Warning, occasional language in this book qualifies it as “rated PG-13”) Both authors are so expert in their fields of knowledge on the matters which they write, that I feel the books are more a prediction of things to come, rather than a work of fiction. Out of all of the possible scenarios of a man-made crisis, the most likely to occur against the U.S. is an EMP attack. However, what disturbed me so greatly is the majority of the pain and suffering in either of the books could have been substantially negated with the addition of a very legitimate reality in my world—a years supply of emergency food, water, and other items.

For those of you who may not be aware, the U.S. has received countless amounts of intelligence that an EMP attack is very likely. (Google EMP attack + U.S.) More recently, China has even admitted to preparing an EMP to “use on its enemies.” It’s no surprise that N. Korea has been playing with nukes lately. And contrary to the naïve understanding of many Americans, the Soviets have also been dedicating a great deal of their resources towards the perfection of nuclear attacks. In all actuality, an EMP attack could be done in such a way that we wouldn’t necessarily have any way of knowing WHO launched the attack against us (as accurately portrayed in Forstchen’s book).

New Report Threatens Civil War, Collapse of International Trade and Sovereign Default if Euro Fails

The Union Bank of Switzerland (UBS) has just released a report titled “Euro Break Up—The Consequences,” wherein they predict the death of the euro and the long-term consequences should that occur.

The report starts out cheerily enough: “Under the current structure and with the current membership, the Euro does not work. Either the current structure will have to change, or the current membership will have to change.”

Oh, well. That’s all.

The report then proceeds to calculate what it would cost a country should it decide to resign from the euro zone. What is truly interesting, as it is astutely pointed out by Zero Hedge, is that the report focuses a great deal of attention on Germany. This signals one thing: Germany, the most effective and prosperous of all the European countries, may be considering an exit from the euro.

As a result of this widespread belief, it would seem that portions of the report were written in an apparent attempt to dissuade the Germans from a hasty departure:

Were a stronger country such as Germany to leave the Euro, the consequences would include corporate default, recapitalization of the banking system and collapse of international trade. If Germany were to leave, we believe the cost to be around €6,000 [$8,400] to €8,000 [$11,200] for every German adult and child in the first year, and a range of €3,500 [$4,900] to €4,500 [$6,300] per person per year thereafter. That is the equivalent of 20 [percent] to 25 [percent] of GDP in the first year.

Gallup: Uninsured Have Increased Under Obama and Since Obamacare Was Enacted

The percentage of American adults who lack health insurance coverage has not only increased during the presidency of Barack Obama, but it has continued to increase since Obama signed his signature piece of legislation last year mandating that by 2014 every American carry health insurance, according to a Gallup survey released today.

In 2008, when George W. Bush was president, according to Gallup, 14.9 percent of adult residents of the United States lacked health insurance coverage. That increased to 16.2 percent in 2009, the year that Obama was inaugurated, and to 16.4 percent in 2010, the year that Obama signed his law requiring that all Americans have health insurance.

In the first half of this year, according to data released by Gallup today, the percentage of adults in the United States lacking health insurance ticked up to 16.8 percent.

Spending in the Tax Code

The IRS made payments of $4.2 billion last year in refundable tax credits to illegal aliens, according to an audit by the Treasury’s Inspector General. “Refundable” tax credits are cash subsidies — federal outlays — given to people who don’t pay any income tax.

Even by Washington standards, flushing $4.2 billion down the drain in a single year is pretty impressive. And what’s weird in this case is that federal law is apparently ambiguous about whether or not these payments should have been made.

The larger problem here is that the overall cost of refundable tax subsidies has skyrocketed in recent years. The chart shows the outlay portions of the largest two refundable tax credits—the earned income tax credit (EITC) and the child tax credit (CTC). (This is fiscal year federal budget data).

What Does the FBI Worry About?

An electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack is one of the “huge” potential threats that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) worries about. At least that is what Art Cummings, a deputy assistant director in the agency’s Counterterrorism Division, told Ronald Kessler in an interview for Kessler’s new book The Secrets of the FBI.

An EMP is a high-intensity burst of electromagnetic energy caused by the rapid acceleration of charged particles. The burst causes disruption of an electromagnetic system and fries electronic devices within its line of sight. Depending on its intensity, an EMP could instantly send the United States back to the 19th century. An EMP is one of the results of a nuclear weapon explosion, but non-nuclear weapons and geomagnetic storms can cause it as well. Despite the FBI’s recognition, the United States remains largely unprotected from the effects of an EMP.

The most effective way to cause an EMP is to detonate a nuclear warhead at a high altitude. A ballistic missile could be the means for such an attack. Iran and North Korea possess ballistic missile capabilities that would allow them to target the U.S. homeland and U.S. allies in Europe and the Middle East. North Korea has nuclear weapons, and Iran is well on its way to obtaining these as well. The Russian Federation and China have EMP capabilities and delivery means. In addition, their nuclear warheads can be augmented to create a stronger EMP blast and lower radiation fallout. But an EMP, albeit on much smaller scale, could be created by a lone terrorist with right equipment. If the electrical power grid were destroyed, it would take years to replace critical transformers, since only a few countries build them; it takes more than a year to make one transformer.

As Republicans and Democrats roll out their jobs agendas, they seem to be on pace to agree on virtually nothing. Even scheduling President Barack Obama’s joint session before Congress turned into a war. And with the economy continuing to sputter — last week’s dismal employment report being a case in point — the two parties have intensified their blaming of each other.

Amid the conflict, though, the agenda for Obama and House GOP leaders seems to match up on one key point: They’re both talking about a tax cut aimed at businesses to boost the economy. They agree on where to go, just not how to get there.

Obama has urged Congress to extend the payroll tax cut, having done so as recently as Aug. 20 during his radio weekly address. Many insiders expect his address Thursday to Congress to include the employee payroll tax cut and a proposal to expand it to their employers.

Ken Blackwell: Growing Proof of Obama’s Imperial Presidency

President Barack Obama’s National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is on a job-killing rampage. It’s claiming unprecedented powers far beyond what federal law allows. Taken with Obama’s other agencies, these executive actions paint a picture of what has become an imperial presidency.

A federal appeal is certain once NLRB’s shocking attack on Boeing Co. goes through the administrative process. In a free-market society, government bureaucrats cannot dictate to a private company where they can and cannot open factories or create jobs. Boeing—whose general counsel was formerly one of the most brilliant federal judges in America, Michael Luttig—should win this court battle.

NLRB’s power grab is not limited to Boeing. It’s also claiming jurisdiction over St. Xavier University, saying that the school doesn’t qualify for the religious exemption to NLRB’s authority because St. Xavier is not Catholic enough. NLRB cites to a 1979 Supreme Court case as giving it this authority, when that case instead makes clear that this government agency would be running afoul of the First Amendment by presuming to rate the religiosity of bone fide church organizations.