Next stop...Galt's Gulch

Millionaires Go Missing - an OpEd piece posted on the Wall Street Journal.

I read this headline and almost peed myself in excitement. Could it be that Atlas has begun shrugging?

As the State of Maryland has discovered, raising taxes on the "super-rich" to fund bloated government budgets doesn't necessarily equate into more tax revenue for the state. From the article:

Maryland couldn't balance its budget last year, so the state tried to close the shortfall by fleecing the wealthy. Politicians in Annapolis created a millionaire tax bracket, raising the top marginal income-tax rate to 6.25%. And because cities such as Baltimore and Bethesda also impose income taxes, the state-local tax rate can go as high as 9.45%. Governor Martin O'Malley, a dedicated class warrior, declared that these richest 0.3% of filers were "willing and able to pay their fair share." The Baltimore Sun predicted the rich would "grin and bear it."

One year later, nobody's grinning. One-third of the millionaires have disappeared from Maryland tax rolls. In 2008 roughly 3,000 million-dollar income tax returns were filed by the end of April. This year there were 2,000, which the state comptroller's office concedes is a "substantial decline." On those missing returns, the government collects 6.25% of nothing. Instead of the state coffers gaining the extra $106 million the politicians predicted, millionaires paid $100 million less in taxes than they did last year -- even at higher rates.

Sure, the recession and the Bear market has likely taken a toll on the number of millionaire tax returns this year. And while it's not too likely Galt's Gulch has opened for business, it is very likely many of them have simply moved to more tax-friendly states. Raise the tax rates high enough and the "super rich" simply vanish, proving that Trickle Up Poverty really does work.

Where do I sign up !!??!!

Posted over at American Thinker.

Quite possible the best.column.ever. A definite MUST read. Here's a few snippets to wet your whistle.

I wish I were a liberal

I wish I were a liberal, because then everyone would like me. My family would start talking to me again, and chances are, my ex-husband would want to renew the marriage vows he broke when I started spouting conservative opinions.

I'd like to be a liberal because it's ever so much easier to allow others to form my opinions for me instead of researching an issue myself. That always gets me in trouble, especially when the facts I discover diverge from the latest politically correct consensus.

I'd like to be a liberal because then I'd be rewarded for all my shortcomings and nothing would ever be my fault. I'd be an important cog in the wheel of social justice, and a cherished warrior in the current fight for equality.

I'd like to be a liberal because any guilt I would normally feel for what used to be considered deviant, irresponsible behavior may be assuaged by merely advocating the expenditure of other people's money on whatever the cause du jour is. Very cool. Especially since my stock portfolio has tanked.

Click over and read the rest. You know you want to...

Would be funny if it weren't so creepy

Photo sampled from here.

Charge your iPod, kill a polar bear?

Posted on The Seattle Times

In a report Wednesday, the Paris-based International Energy Agency estimates new electronic gadgets will triple their energy consumption by 2030 to 1,700 terawatt hours, the equivalent of today's home electricity consumption of the United States and Japan combined.

The world would have to build around 200 new nuclear power plants just to power all the TVs, iPods, PCs and other home electronics expected to be plugged in by 2030, when the global electric bill to power them will rise to $200 billion a year, the IEA said.

Ummm, if environmentalists are concerned about the increased electrical power needed to charge our iPods in the future, they're gonna go freakin' ape-shit when we start plugging in all the electric cars they're gonna make us drive.

It's ironic that these environmentalists are the same environmentalists who don't want us to build any more power-generating plants. After all, the polar bears need a place to live, too.

Words to live by

These words are frequently misattributed to Abraham Lincoln, due to a speech Ronald Reagan gave in 1992. The true author of these words was William J. H. Boetcker,a 19th-century, German born Presbyterian minister. These words appeared in a pamphlet he published in 1916, entitled "The Ten Cannots".

• You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
• You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
• You cannot help little men by tearing down big men.
• You cannot lift the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer.
• You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.
• You cannot establish sound security on borrowed money.
• You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
• You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than you earn.
• You cannot build character and courage by destroying men's initiative and independence.
• And you cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they can and should do for themselves.

These ten statements are what differentiates traditional liberal values from conservative values. They espouse civic virtue, personal responsibility and personal liberty, while not creating a reliance upon the state to provide everything for everybody. However, in my opinion, neither of the mainstream political parties in this country truly represent these values. The Republican party used to be close, but has strayed over the years. And the Democratic party, in my opinion, was never very close. Perhaps it is time for a 3rd party to emerge? Sure, I know our political system already has numerous "also-rans". However, none of them are big enough to compete, nor will the Big 2 really allow them to compete.

Why is it we have 12 candidates from which to chose the next American Idol, but only 2 from which to chose our next president?

Zombies

nuff said...

Excuse me sir, but your slip is showing

So, James Carville, the political consultant and strategist for the Democratic party thinks the Democrats will retain their majority status for the next 40 years. He's so sure of himself and his prediction, he has written a book entitled "40 More Years: How the Democrats Will Rule the Next Generation."

Notice the title...he uses the word Rule. I would think an American political consultant would know that Americans do not elect rulers, we elect leaders to represent us in our government. Remember the whole "government of the people, by the people, and for the people" thing??

If I wanted to be ruled over, I'd move to some other flea infested rat hole third world country. I would rather my elected officials lead or govern me. Ruling is what socialist dictators do. Sound familiar?

Perhaps Carville's book title is correct. He envisions the Democratic party ruling Americans for the next 40 years. Telling us what to do, how to do it, when to do it, and how much to pay for it. And not to worry...those of us who don't fall in line will just get branded as potential terrorists by the Department of Homeland Security.

Those of us who are already counting down the days until November 2012 and praying we make it until then, should be happy to see the left so convinced of their longevity. The more convinced they are, the easier it may be for them to fall.