Time to Erase the U.S. Department of "Education"

It has only been around for thirty years, consumed hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer money, and yet our government educational system seems to be turning out more morons than ever before.

Not only that, but this parking lot for otherwise unemployable bureaucrats is promoting things that are not a little hostile to my concept of freedom and liberty by using our tax dollars to push the written works of America-hating commie scum such as Saul Alinsky and Cloward Piven, to name just a few.

It's time to pull the plug on one of the most useless (not to mention dangerous) federal agencies in existence.

Via Doug Ross at directorblue.blogspot.com:

You may be surprised to discover that the Department of Education did not even exist until 1980.

Yet, over the last three years alone, the Department has spent roughly a third of a trillion dollars with copious amounts of 'Stimulus' spending sent directly to the bosses of the teachers' unions.

I think even progressives would agree that the Department of Education has been an abysmal failure. Hundreds of billions of dollars were spent in just the last few years alone with literally no measurable effect.

But the progressives claim they need more money.

I disagree. I recommend we excise the entire Department of Education and save tens of billions of dollars a year. Whatever they're doing isn't working and has never worked. And the United States survived just fine for over 200 years without an Education Department

You can read the rest at this link.

I am hoping (perhaps somewhat naively) that the 112th House of Representatives is serious about getting a handle on out-of-control spending and cutting out much of the fat that has built up in the federal government over the years.

It seems to me that the Department of Education is as good a place to start as any.

Then they can turn there attention (and their knives) to the EPA, DoE, PBS, NEA, FCC, IRS, and a whole host of other federal agencies that are nothing more than places for fat-ass bureaucrats to park their over-fed behinds for forty hours a week, and that have no constitutional basis for existence.

If the repubs have the stones to do it.

They'd better, as the near-term survival of this republic is at stake.

(h/t: Boortz.com)

"Recovery" Summer

Via www.atr.org:

• The Obama Administration and Congressional Democrats have said that they want to raise taxes in the top two income tax rates in January 2011. Under their plan, the 33 percent rate will rise to 36 percent, and the 35 percent rate will rise to 39.6 percent automatically in January. These rates affect families and small business owners earning at least $200,000 per year.

• 
  Unlike corporations, small businesses usually don’t pay their own taxes. Rather, business profits flow through to the business owner. The business owner pays taxes on her small business by adding the profits to her income tax form. Therefore, personal income taxes are the same thing as small business taxes.

• 
  According to the IRS, most small business profits pay taxes in households making more than $200,000 per year. The IRS keeps track of two types of small business income: sole proprietors, and “pass-through” entities like partnerships and S-corporations.

• 
  All small businesses. There were 30 million tax returns reporting small business income in 2008. On net (profits reduced by losses), these owners reported business profits of $631billion. A large chunk of this net profit--$457 billion—faced taxation in households making more than $200,000 per year. A majority of small business profits will face a tax rate hike under the Obama-Pelosi-Reid plan.

• 
  Sole proprietors. There were 22 million tax returns reporting sole proprietor income in 2008. On net (profits reduced by losses), these owners reported business profits of $264 billion. A large chunk of this net profit--$90 billion—faced taxation in households making more than $200,000 per year. 34 percent of sole proprietor profits will face a tax rate hike under the Obama-Pelosi-Reid tax hike plan.

• 
  S-corporations and partnerships. There were 8 million partners and S-corporation shareholders in 2008. On net (profits reduced by losses), these owners reported business profits of $367 billion. Virtually all of this profit faced taxation in households making more than $200,000 per year. Aggregate pass-through entity profits will almost entirely fall in households making more than $200,000 per year.
  

The above can be found in its original form here.

The Wall Street Journal has more here.

For someone who claims to want to "fix" our ailing private sector economy, the former community agitator seems to be doing all he can to destroy it.

The Debt Monster is Upon Us

And it's about to bite us right in the ass.

Via Reason.com:

America’s financial situation is unsustainable. In 2009 the federal government spent $3.5 trillion but collected only $2.1 trillion in revenue. The result was a $1.4 trillion deficit, up from $458 billion in 2008. That’s 10 percent of gross domestic product, a level unseen since World War II. Worse, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that we’ll be drowning in red ink for the foreseeable future, with annual deficits averaging $1 trillion during the next decade.

While these figures are dramatic, they pale in comparison to what the federal government owes foreign and domestic investors. According to the CBO, in 2009 America’s public debt reached $7.5 trillion, or 53 percent of GDP, the highest it has been in 50 years. In 2010 the debt will cross the 60 percent threshold, a level at which many economists believe a country is putting itself in financial peril.

And the situation is deteriorating rapidly. Figure 1 compares the CBO’s long-term public debt projections from 2010 with long-term projections calculated in 2007. Three years ago, the CBO projected that the debt held by the public would not surpass 60 percent until 2023.

You will find the entire article at this link.

Scared yet? You should be shaking in your loafers.

I hope the American people are finally waking up to the imminent financial peril we face as a nation, as I believe the time we have to avoid disaster is growing very, very short.

Time to End Universal Suffrage?

Tom Tancredo makes his case:

---

---

The uncivil debate over civic illiteracy

---

Posted: February 13, 2010
1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

After 35 years in politics, I am seldom surprised by the venom that flows from the mouths of liberals when one of their sacred cows is criticized. But the "fan mail" following my speech a week ago to the tea-party convention in Nashville has been truly amazing.

I spoke to the opening session of the event about why it is a good thing that John McCain was not elected president. I expected those remarks to be controversial in some quarters, but the only controversy in the news coverage of my speech was about my suggestion that we need a civics literacy test for voters.

Evidently, you cannot question the value of universal suffrage, and in the liberal lexicon, universal suffrage means not only that there should be no unreasonable or discriminatory bars to voting, but that all adults should be forced to vote, no matter how ignorant or disconnected to the civic affairs of the community.

I did not say in Nashville that all 67 million Obama voters are illiterate rabble who would fail a civics literacy test. What I did suggest and what I believe is that in the 2008 presidential election, the margin of victory for Obama was provided by people who would not be at the polls if we had meaningful civics literacy requirements for voting. Hence my statement that the lack of a civics literacy requirement is one reason we have a committed socialist ideologue in the White House today.

That statement provoked a stream of angry e-mail messages from outraged Obama voters, many of whom proudly proclaimed their advanced degrees in art history, Egyptology and political science. The message was as consistent as it was strident: What an ignoramus I must be to question the educational level of Obama voters!

My tea-party remarks had nothing to do with educational credentials or even IQ. We are all painfully aware that Barack Obama, like Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton before him, got more votes from college professors than his Republican opponent. My remarks were aimed at the electorate's lack of civics literacy, which is quite different. Literacy in civics and American history is not necessarily enhanced by additional years of higher education devoted to increasingly specialized expertise in some field.

I have often suggested that new voters should be required to pass the civics literacy test already given to immigrants who want to become naturalized citizens. Yet, my suggestion was twisted into the idea that I want to see a return to "Jim Crow laws" that were used to keep blacks from voting.

This distortion of my proposal requires two acts of self-deception. First, it requires you to believe that minorities will fail any civics test, an idea that is highly insulting to all minorities. Secondly, it requires a willful disregard of the real history of Jim Crow laws. Blacks were not kept from voting by the laws themselves but the blatant discriminatory way they were administered by local officials. It is absurd to claim that any civics literacy test will be discriminatory, yet that is how my proposal was described by leftist bloggers and liberal journalists like E.J. Dionne.

Predictably, in this age of Internet video messaging

, left-wing blogs and liberal advocacy groups sent the video clip of my remarks to their members and asked them to "send Tancredo a message." The messages generated by this organized temper tantrum ran the gamut from questions about my patriotism to solemn prayers that I would get some horrible disease and die a painful death – and soon.

All our founders' inspiring, biblical quotes in one place – a must-have for your library: "America's God and Country Encyclopedia of Quotations"

The potential for "elected despots" was well understood by our nation's founders, and they devised mechanisms in the Constitution to reduce that danger. They understood that throughout history, democracies had followed certain patterns and cycles, cycles ending in tyranny. So, instead of a pure democracy, they designed and established a republic organized as a representative democracy, with checks and balances and other innovations to help safeguard our liberties.

Voting your own short-term self-interest over the common good is a problem as old as Rome, but today it has taken on a new urgency. Using the powers of government to expropriate other people's wealth and property enters the pandemic stage when half the voting public pays no taxes

and a third of adults are government employees

or living on government pensions.

Can civics literacy programs in our schools and civics literacy tests for voters hold these forces in check? Maybe it's not the whole answer, but to me, it sure seems like a good start.

-End

Tom Tancredo's commentary was originally posted here.

I agree wholeheartedly with Rep. Tancredo. The votes of the stoopid and the illiterate (civic or otherwise) have pushed this nation right to the very edge of its destruction.

In fact, I would go one step further and restrict voting in national elections to only those who actually pay federal income taxes. Net tax consumers should have no say.

There is, after all, no constitutional right to vote in a national election.

If we continue to allow the non-productive to use the power of the federal government to take from the productive, the fate that Alexis de Tocqueville warned us about all those years ago is going to become a cold, stark reality.

Since the beginning of recorded history all free republics have shared one common trait: They all managed to vote themselves right out of existence.

Perhaps we might be the ones to finally break the chain.

Obama is Spending Us Into Well Beyond Mere Oblivion

Let's face it, folks, George W. Bush did not exactly endear himself to we of the fiscal conservative persuasion, but Barack Hussein Obama, with no small amount of help from a slew of like-minded, out-of-control congress-critters, is on a blistering pace to make the Bush administration appear positively miserly in comparison.

I pulled this form Boortz.com a little earlier, and it doesn't paint a pretty picture for future Americans:

THE TRUTH ABOUT GOVERNMENT

By Neal Boortz @ February 8, 2010 8:42 AM

Since we're talking about our wonderful Imperial Federal Government .... Here are some shocking facts to keep in mind:

-The cost of our federal government is 25% of our total economy (GDP).
This is compared with the average of 20.7% of the GDP during 1970-2009

- If you include the cost of state and local government, the total cost of government is almost 40% of our GDP

- Since 2008, the cost of our federal government has increased by one-fourth

- By 2020, Obama will have increased the federal government by one-half on a per family basis

- Before the recession, federal spending totaled $24,000 per household

- By 2020, Obama would raise that to $36,000 per household

Just remember these numbers folks. They have meaning.

-End

Obama and the far-left are very rapidly spending this country right down the financial crapper. Personally, I believe this is being done deliberately.

This idiocy must be stopped now, not in 2013.

The Government Wants Your Retirement Cash

Via Neal Boortz:

I've been telling you about this for a while now. This, to me, is one of the most dangerous schemes currently slithering through the crevices and dark spots of the Imperial Federal Government in Washington. What am I talking about? What I believe to be plans by the Obama administration to, in effect, seize your retirement funds and use them to finance their deficit spending. Remember ... there are more than $3 trillion dollars sitting out there in individual retirement, IRA and 401K plans. Politicians just cant stand the idea of this much money sitting out there in private investments ... out of the grasp of politicians. So .... Something needs to be done. And sure enough, something is going to be done. The Treasury Department and the Department of Labor were going to start taking comments on ways to promote the idea converting 401(k) savings and IRAs into annuities or other steady payment streams. Well you can finally take a look at this document for yourself:

Request for Information Regarding Lifetime Income Options for Participants and

Beneficiaries in Retirement Plans

Here, I'll post a little to get you started:

The Department of Labor and the Department of the Treasury (the "Agencies") are currently reviewing the rules under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) and the plan qualification rules under the Internal Revenue Code (Code) to determine whether, and, if so, how, the Agencies could or should enhance, by regulation or otherwise, the retirement security of participants in employer-sponsored retirement plans and in individual retirement arrangements (IRAs) by facilitating access to, and use of, lifetime income or other arrangements designed to provide a lifetime stream of income after retirement. The purpose of this request for information is to solicit views, suggestions and comments from plan participants, employers and other plan sponsors, plan service providers, and members of the financial community, as well as the general public, on this important issue.

You will find Neal's entire article here.

Wake the hell up, sheeple. You are missing one hell of a coup.

America's Declining Economic Freedom

If, like me, you are one who pays fairly close attention to the level of freedom and liberty we still enjoy as citizens of the greatest experiment in freedom that has ever been conducted since the first historians began scratching figures into the walls of caves, you have no doubt noticed that we have been losing said freedoms at what I consider to be an alarming, as well as an unacceptable, rate.

Like me, you have probably wondered from time to time just exactly where we stack up against the rest of the world in this all-important area. Well, the people at the Heritage Foundation have been examining this, as they do each year, and have come up with some analysis that should send a chill down the spine of anyone who truly values their freedom, particularly that of the economic variety. One year ago, we were the sixth freest economy in the world, which was pretty pathetic. Now we have dropped to eighth place.

Via the Wall Street Journal (Bolds are mine):

The United States is losing ground to its major competitors in the global marketplace, according to the 2010 Index of Economic Freedom released today by the Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal. This year, of the world's 20 largest economies, the U.S. suffered the largest drop in overall economic freedom. Its score declined to 78 from 80.7 on the 0 to 100 Index scale.

The U.S. lost ground on many fronts. Scores declined in seven of the 10 categories of economic freedom. Losses were particularly significant in the areas of financial and monetary freedom and property rights. Driving it all were the federal government's interventionist responses to the financial and economic crises of the last two years, which have included politically influenced regulatory changes, protectionist trade restrictions, massive stimulus spending and bailouts of financial and automotive firms deemed "too big to fail." These policies have resulted in job losses, discouraged entrepreneurship, and saddled America with unprecedented government deficits.

In the world-wide rankings of economic freedom, the U.S. fell to eighth from sixth place. Canada now ranks higher and boasts North America's freest economy. More worrisome, for the first time in the Index's 16-year history, the U.S. has fallen out of the elite group of countries identified as "economically free" by the objective measures of the Index. Four Asia-Pacific economies now sit atop the global rankings. Hong Kong stands in first place for the 16th consecutive year, followed by Singapore, Australia and New Zealand. Every region of the world maintains at least one country among those deemed "free" or "mostly free" by the Index.

You will find the rest at this link. I strongly encourage you to read it in its entirety.

I have to believe the overall decline of America is reversible, even though it flies in the face of recorded history.

What helped get us here was the spread of the idea that people could use government to loot the property of others. That idea can be eliminated, even though doing so is an extremely tall order.

History does not have to repeat itself.

The Approaching Financial Train Wreck

From Dr. Mark W. Hendrickson at the Center for Vision & Values:

We have a problem. This could be “the big one”—bigger than coping with the Ahmadinejads, Kims, and Chavezes of the world and bigger than our current economic woes. Our republic, our society, may be heading for a crackup. We are bankrupt, both financially and politically.

The source of the problem is democracy. Decades of so-called “progressive” thought have led us to abandon the limited-government, constitutional republic established by our founding fathers. In the name of putting more power into the hands of "the people," the government has arrogated sweeping powers.

[...]

Crude, majoritarian democracy (as in, “there are more of us than there are of you, so we’re going to redistribute your wealth”) inevitably undermines the harmony of society. A free market, as competitive as it is, is based on peaceful, voluntary cooperation. When commerce is free and unfettered by government interference, both sides to a transaction normally gain, thereby promoting social harmony.

Democracy, by contrast, engenders social conflict. Money changes hands by force of the taxman and the threat of imprisonment, not voluntarily. Democracy pits citizens against each other in a sordid squabble whereby many strive to have the state confer benefits seized from their fellow citizens.

[...]

How bad could it get? If the social order breaks down, civil unrest could disrupt markets and shortages of essential goods could occur. The resulting chaos could trigger martial law. A strong leader—a Caesar—could institute some sort of command order. Millions would resent it, but it would be accepted, because the alternative—civil conflict, chronic disorder, and impending starvation—would be intolerable. In such a calamity, Caesar would be the lesser of two evils. The American Republic and Constitution would join earlier democracies in the ashbin of history.

God help us.

God help us, indeed.

You will find the entire article here.

All I can say at this point is buckle up, as I really do not see a way to avoid the approaching train wreck.

(h/t: WorldNetDaily)

Photocredit: The Relationship Economy

$4 Billion Bailout for the Postal Service?

Via David Rogers at Politico (emphasis mine):

The House voted Thursday to freeze Medicare Part B premiums for most elderly next year, even as Democrats moved to exempt the Postal Service from having to make $4 billion in payments due next week to cover retirement health benefits for its employees.

[...]

At a meeting of House and Senate Appropriations Committee negotiators Thursday morning, the Postal Service language was incorporated into a stop-gap continuing resolution, or CR, that Congress must enact in the next week to keep the full government operations. As adopted, the postal agency, which now faces a liability of $5.4 billion due Sept. 30, would have to pay only $1.4 billion and would be allowed to effectively defer the remaining $4 billion until after 2017.

Will their even be a Postal Service by 2017? I have my doubts here.

“That’s good news” said a Postal Service spokesman, who argued the arrangement posed no risk for the taxpayer since the retirement fund holds $32 billion at this time. Nonetheless, critics argued the $4 billion will now be added as a potential cost on the government’s books given the fragile state of the Postal Service, and the whole handling of the issue is seen by many as a parliamentary sleight-of-hand.

Republicans made no effort to target the postal provision but complained it had been added without warning to the otherwise non-controversial 30 day resolution. Moreover, to doubly protect their work product, the Democratic leadership for the Appropriations Committees has wrapped it into an otherwise non-controversial $4.65 billion budget bill covering the operations of the Capitol and such agencies as the Library of Congress.

[...]

Ranking Republican, Rep. Jerry Lewis of California, countered that the whole strategy was “one of the most cynical legislative maneuvers I’ve ever seen.” And Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.) said Democrats made matters worse by wrapping the spending provision into the legislative appropriations bill –taking care of Congress’s “backyard” and doing little for the rest of the nation.

You can read the entire article here.

My question is, where are they going to get $4 billion? We're effectively broke.

I think it's time to cut the USPS loose and let it sink or swim on its own. Seriously, given the advent of faxing, email and texting, do we even need a Postal Service anymore, especially one that is going to pick our pockets every time it gets in over its financial head?

Maybe people attending the next Tea Party in D.C. will show up with the pitchforks and torches, as that appears to be our only option to finally put a stop to this endless fiscal insanity.

If this lunacy continues unchecked, and it appears it will, by November of 2010 we are going to be in dire straits as a nation.

Even more dire than we are already.

(h/t: Boortz.com)

From the No Sh*t, Sherlock File:

IG: Taxpayers May Lose Money on Bailouts

Thursday, September 24, 2009 1:21 PM

By: Dan Weil

Taxpayers may lose money on the $700 billion bailout engineered by the Treasury Department of the Bush and Obama administrations.

So says Neil Barofsky, inspector general of the bailout, formally known as the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP).

In testimony prepared for the Senate Banking Committee Thursday, Barofsky says the Treasury Department has ignored suggestions to improve the program’s transparency. And he says Treasury has never solved the vexing problem of disposing with the toxic assets that remain on banks' balance sheets.

"While several TARP recipients have repaid funds for what has widely been reported as a 17 percent profit, it is extremely unlikely that the taxpayer will see a full return on its TARP investment," Barofsky said in the remarks, as cited by The Wall Street Journal.

The Treasury’s attempt to use government aid to spark bank loans hasn’t worked, he says. Lending has actually dropped, despite the government’s injection of billions of dollars into the banking system.

To be sure, he acknowledges that lending would have plunged even more precipitously if the TARP program hadn’t been enacted.

Barofsky has clashed repeatedly with the Treasury over the program’s transparency.

"TARP largely remains a program in which taxpayers are not being told what most of the TARP recipients are doing with their money and will not be told the full details of how their money is being invested," Barofsky said.

While U.S. taxpayers may not make out so well in the financial buyout, some other investors have profited handsomely. Warren Buffett, for instance, has earned paper profit of $3 billion, or 60 percent, on the $5 billion investment he made in Goldman Sachs a year ago.

And Singapore’s sovereign wealth fund Government of Singapore Investment Corp. (GIC) announced this week that it gained a $1.6 billion profit by selling about half of its holdings in Citigroup.

© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

-End

I have long felt that TARP was nothing less than an illegal treasury raid cooked up by Paulson & Co. for the express purpose of helping out their Wall Street buddies. I never bought into the notion that our financial system was on the verge of imminent collapse.

I hope to see an investigation someday into where our money went, who got it, and what it was used for, but I won't hold my breath waiting for it.

Personally, I think TARP is the largest and most egregious scam ever pulled off.

Are We Heading Toward Financial Armageddon?

What if you woke up tomorrow and saw a headline in your local paper that said this: U.S. Government's Financial Obligations Exceed the GDP of the Entire World!

Would you spill your coffee all over yourself? Possibly soil yourself? Choke on your bagel?

Well, it appears our federal government's total financial obligations are now at an eye-popping $65.5 Trillion.

Yes, you read that right. That is Trillion with a T.

Just take a bite and chew on that one for a moment. Feel like reaching for the Tums? Planning to be at your local liquor retailer later, waiting for him to unlock the door for the day's business?

Jerome Corsi at WorldNetDaily has come across some very interesting information regarding the unvarnished truth about the deep financial dog-squeeze we are truly in as a nation, which you can read all about here.

I urge caution here, because you are not going to like what you see. Here is a little blurb:

"The federal government is bankrupt," Williams told WND. "In a post-Enron world, if the federal government were a corporation such as General Motors, the president and senior Treasury officers would be in federal penitentiary."

It appears our government has not been exactly, a'hem, forthcoming about just how deep in the poor-house this nation actually is right now.

Mad yet?

Looks like it is going to be one hell of a train wreck.