Connect with us


Americans don’t trust government, yet polls say they want more of it



Americans dont trust government yet polls say they want more of it

I hate to be too critical of my fellow Americans, but there are times when enough is enough. The insane proposals of hyper-leftist politicians have captured the imagination of much of the nation. Now, apparently millions of people are actually considering the notion that if we drastically increase taxes on the rich, it will make the lives of the rest of us much better.

This is the general sales pitch used for everything from Medicare-for-All to the Green New Deal to flat-out socialism itself. Unfortunately it’s working. A batch of recent polls show a majority of Americans support various types of tax increases against the wealthy, including 70% taxes for those making over $10 million per year.

Based upon the Politico story, it seems like all variations of “charge the rich a ton to pay for stuff for us” are gaining majority support. There’s a reason I’ll bring up shortly that will hopefully remind conservatives and inform progressives about why this is a terrible idea, but first, let’s look at some of the common reasons these ideas are bad. All of these should be common sense, but let’s put them on paper for the mass of people who seem to be missing the points.

  • Wage gaps between executives and employees are not artificially created. They are based on skillsets, experience, training, and demonstrable success. These attributes are much more difficult to embody than lower level jobs. In other words, it’s much harder to find a CEO who can lead a restaurant chain successfully than an employee who can properly bring the food to the table.
  • Even if you make the case the pencil company CEO doesn’t work as hard as the pencil maker, it doesn’t change the fact that the pencil company CEO’s money is his or her money. It’s not the employee’s, at least not beyond what was agreed upon beforehand to pay the employee. It’s not the government’s, though Democrats seem to ignore this fact. The money is the property of the individual who owns it. Government-mandated theft is theft nonetheless.
  • Before we get to the most important reason people shouldn’t support the obtuse tax structures proposed by the hyper-leftists, let’s look at some math. Estimates for the 70% tax for revenue over $10 million per year range from $189-$700 billion over a decade. This is a lot of money, but let’s compare it to the price tag of the things they’re proposing to pay for with this bump. Medicare-for-All has an estimated cost of $32 trillion over a 10-year period. That means 70% tax on the rich won’t cut it. In fact, it’s very possible that 7000% tax on the rich wouldn’t be enough, and that’s just to cover the costs of one of the many progressive policy proposals out there among Democrats today.

Now, to the most important reason these ideas are awful.

The bottom line to all of this comes down to a series of questions asked by conservatives over the decades that should be case-closed for anyone wanting to embrace the socialistic taxes being proposed by Democrats. The first question is, do you believe the government is trustworthy and capable of doing a good job of managing important components of our lives like healthcare?

Keep in mind, this is the same government that botched the Cash-for-Clunkers program and mismanaged it to oblivion. This is the same government that spent over $2 billion to build the Obamacare website which is still having problems today. It’s the same government that paid $1.04 billion to expand the lightly used San Diego trolley system by 10.9 miles.

Within the thick forest of bureaucracy and flowing down the rivers of wasteful projects is a level of corruption that has diverted literally trillions of dollars into pockets that didn’t deserve it. It’s the scam of scams known as budgeting that hides hundreds of criminal actions for every individual that gets caught. The reason they rarely get caught isn’t because they’re so clever. In most cases, what they’re doing is close enough to being legal that law enforcement doesn’t even bother with most battles.

This leads us to the second question. If you don’t trust that government is competent and incorruptible, why would you want them to build more programs that require more money from all, not just the rich. The dirty little secret proponents of these socialistic principles won’t tell you is that raising taxes on the rich won’t reduce your tax burden, nor will it reduce your costs on nearly anything. For example, our healthcare system, as imperfect as it was before Obamacare, was still vastly superior from a value perspective than it is today. Average Americans are paying more for healthcare than before Obamacare was implemented. This is why it’s so perplexing to believe the solution isn’t the free market system that built our economy. Instead, they believe giving government more control over our healthcare is going to work this time.

If the people generally don’t trust the government and believe the government is extremely wasteful, what makes people think giving them more money for more programs is a solution to anything?

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Nicolás Maduro, stop being obtuse



Nicols Maduro stop being obtuse

By Friday, there will be 190 metric tons of aid ready at the border between Colombia and Venezuela ready to be delivered to a people who desperately need it. The only thing standing in the way is the ego and ineptitude of a failed leader who is more concerned about his own power than the lives of the people he supposedly serves.

Contested Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro has set up a military blockade to prevent the aid from reaching the people. His reason: the aid is just an excuse for the United States to invade Venezuela. This is ridiculous, and the United States plans to get the aid to the people one way or another.

Mark Green, the administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), is hoping Juan Guaido, who the United States recognizes as the leader of Venezuela, will be able to assert enough control over the situation to bypass or remove the blockade and allow the aid to reach the people.

“That really is up to Juan Guaido and his people and his team,” Green told Fox News. “We are working with them to try and pre-position that assistance and give them the tools to lead their people and provide hope.”

For the last couple of years, the collapse of Venezuela’s economy has been pointed to by fiscal conservatives in the United States as an example of how socialism fails, even for a country as well-off as oil-rich Venezuela once was. But we’re now well beyond calls to condemn socialism. It has obviously failed and it’s up to the international community to prevent a catastrophic humanitarian crisis in which masses of people could die.

Yes, the situation is rapidly deteriorating that badly.

Whether through Guaido or Maduro, this insane refusal to help the people must be averted immediately. It’s odd that starving Venezuelans must somehow bypass their own government’s idiotic pride in order to receive the aid that’s ready and waiting for them.

Real news. Crowdfunded. We need donations today.

How the United States goes about forcing the aid into the country is a delicate proposition. If they don’t want it, there’s nothing we can do to force them to take it. The question is, who is “them” in this equation? If the vast majority of the people would welcome the aid, as I suspect, then we must coordinate with the international community and Guaido to secure passage and distribution of the aid to where it’s needed the most.

Unfortunately, there’s not a ton of information hitting mainstream media about the situation on the other side of the border. Is it as bad as we think? If so, then something short of a U.S.-backed coup should be considered. We must continue to respect Venezuela’s sovereignty and just because we believe Guaido is the rightful leader doesn’t make it so. It’s up to the people of Venezuela to say they’re done with Maduro.

But if Maduro continues to control the military, it’s a moot point. There’s no recourse for the people or Guaido in the immediate future. They’ll have to continue to fight Maduro’s regime through information and revolt in order to sway the military to Guaido’s side. Outright civil war seems impossible at this point because Maduro’s forces are too strong. Waiting them out seems untenable as well because the people are dying today. They may not have time for a slow, steady revolution.

It comes down to someone convincing Maduro to stop being obtuse. We’re not invading Venezuela Aid that we would deliver is just as good if not better than what they can receive from Russia or other Maduro-friendly countries and it’s clearly more abundant; Maduro said Russia was sending 30 metric tons of aid “soon.”

Maduro has two choices: Maintain power and let his people die or give up power and help his people live. It’s insane that he seems to be leaning towards the former, but that’s the nature of despots.


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading


Beto O’Rourke is throwing crazy ideas against the wall and some seem to be sticking



Beto ORourke is throwing crazy ideas against the wall and some seem to be sticking

Ever since the 2018 midterm elections, I’ve considered Beto O’Rourke to be one of the biggest threats to President Trump in the 2020 election. The obvious counter to this notion is that he lost his race for Senate to Ted Cruz, but here’s the thing. He got close, much closer than anyone would have thought possible a year before, and he was able to raise more money than any Senate candidate in our nation’s history.

For a hyper-leftist Democrat to come within a few percentage points of victory in deep red Texas tells us this is someone who knows how to campaign, raise funds, and draw a crowd.

Lately, he’s been acting like a lost puppy trying to get back some of the attention he lost when others announced their candidacy. Before Senators Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, and Amy Klobuchar announced their candidacies, O’Rourke was being played up as the guy who could challenge Senator Bernie Sanders and former Vice President Joe Biden if they entered the race. Now that Sanders has, O’Rourke finds himself on the outside looking in.

I still consider O’Rourke to be one of the four candidates who should concern President Trump the most, but there’s a caveat I must add. If he continues to throw out ideas that make no sense, such as taking down the 700 miles of wall currently built along the southern border or offering amnesty to pretty much everyone already here illegally, he may fade quickly.

Then again, it may propel him to the top of the list.

It’s important for conservatives to never underestimate the leftward lurch that’s happening across America today. The combination of scholastic indoctrination, media propaganda, and a strange spirit of deception spreading across the nation have resulted in a growing American populace that is open to the untenable ideas of socialism, open borders, and expanded government control over our lives. This is why instead of counting O’Rourke as being down for the count, we should probably watch the responses and start taking him more seriously.

Support conservative news.

There seems to a trend emerging. The crazier they get, the more they’re loved.

A decade ago, it would have been unfathomable for even half of the Democrats to embrace taking down portions of the border wall that are already built. It’s one thing to not want to spend money on more wall, but to spend money on taking down current walls is pure stupidity. And yet, there’s no rebuke from the left. No Democrats are saying, “stop this lunacy.” No Democrats are out there calling for common sense to prevail.

Instead, they’re saying, “Yes, that might work.”

Do not get caught up in the notion that socialism, open borders, and oppressive government could never happen in America. Three or four years ago, I might have thought that. Today, it seems more than possible. It must be stopped.


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading


Conservatives railed against the NY-Amazon deal before Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez thwarted it



Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is partially right about the Amazon deal

When New York Governor Andrew Cuomo wrote an op-ed in November defending the decision to offer Amazon $2.8 billion in incentives to build their second headquarters in Long Island City, there was an interesting condemnation you don’t often see.

“The extreme conservatives and the socialists both now vehemently oppose incentives for Amazon,” Cuomo wrote.

Of course, “extreme conservatives” and “socialists” are on the opposite ends of the political spectrum, so what was it about the deal that made it so unappealing on both sides of the fence? It comes down to the incentives that were being offered and the inherent “quick fix” mentality of politicians near the center of the ideological spectrum.

Where conservatives and socialists split on this issue is in how the money should have been used, but both extreme sides agree that using it as an incentive for a company like Amazon is simply lazy governance. Fiscal conservatives understand that in a city like New York City, there’s less of a need for big companies to come in and a much bigger need to plant small businesses throughout. Crowded cities that already have multi-billion dollar corporations get much less benefit from another multi-billion dollar corporation setting up shop than they would from a similar infusion of small businesses. From a fiscally conservative perspective, it’s better to use incentives to bring 250 companies that employ 100 people each than one company that employs 25,000.

Smaller cities without infrastructure or housing issues are the opposite. It makes sense to try to get an Amazon to become a central hub to attract other businesses. These smaller cities do not have to suffer through the same problems a city like NYC has to contend with when there’s such a massive infusion into an already-crowded housing market and an already-crumbling infrastructure.

100% crowdfunded journalism. Please support us.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez skips a few steps when she says the money for Amazon could be used to fix other problems already facing New Yorkers, but technically speaking she’s correct. If New York utilized incentives to bring in smaller companies that would generate more tax dollars in the long run, her programs could be initiated as a result if properly earmarked. That’s not to say I agree with all of the programs she’s referring to and the money “saved” from the collapsing Amazon deal couldn’t be used directly for them, but combined with conservative fiscal principles and a focus on small businesses, her ideas are doable.

Conservatives balked when the deal was announced. Now, suddenly, many of the same conservatives are laughing at Ocasio-Cortez for being the catalyst that made the deal go away. This is disingenuous. We can debate with her the semantics of how the incentives should be used, but let’s not switch sides and call the deal a winner when we were universally calling it a loser three months ago.

As always, conservatives should stay consistent and not do as the leftists do by picking a side against a politician for the sake of that politician. Conservatives were complaining about the Amazon deal well before AOC became the face of the opposition.


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading



Copyright © 2019 NOQ Report