Dec 17 2008

Hold onto you wallets there’s a state budget deficit

Governor will release her balanced budget this week. It does not recommend new taxes to offset the expected $5.8 billion deficit. That sounds like the Governor plans to cut state spending, but before you signal approval, consider that there’s a game being played here. Odds are there will be a tax increase. The legislature is fixing to
raise your taxes without breaking Gregoire’s promise.

The majority in the state House and Senate must find a way to pass a balanced 2009-2011 budget are not about to slash the very programs and services that got them elected. That means that the legislature is going to look for ways top pay for things to keep the special interest groups they cater to happy, and that means turning to you. That means
raising your taxes. Of course we’ll hear them say that they tried everything possible to avoid tax increases, but trust me, they are already crafting their excuses. of course believe that the state’s budget problems are the result of previous overspending by and not lack of tax revenue. will tell you it’s all ’s fault.

The good news is that the majority party in Olympia isn’t known for its courage. In this fragile economy, extracting more money from struggling taxpayers will not be politically popular. Therefore, you’ll see no boldness in the way these political weasels go about getting you to part with your limited resources. They plan to persuade voters to approve some forms of revenue increases by playing on past conceptual support for certain items voters seem to like, such as smaller class sizes and higher teacher salaries. Whatever they come up with, you’d better hold onto your wallets because they’re coming after you.

Share/Save/Bookmark

No responses yet

Sep 01 2008

Not nearly the disaster that disingenuous politicians claim

To hear tell it, the U.S. economy is in the toilet, and it’s all ’s fault.

The trouble is that the yardsticks used to measure our economic condition do not support that pessimistic view. Real gross domestic product — the output of goods and services produced by labor and property located in the United States — increased at an annual rate of 3.3 percent in the second quarter of 2008, the period from April to June. In the first quarter of the year, real GDP was up 9-tenths of a percent. The real GDP trend in the current fiscal quarter shows continues economic growth that is predicted to surpass quarter two.

What this means is that the economy is in the black and gaining positive momentum, despite all the glum estimates and political fabrications.

According to the Manpower Employment Outlook Survey, (another important economic indicator), in the current third quarter of 2008, employers are hiring at a positive pace. From July to September, 27% of companies plan to hire more employees, and 60% expect to maintain their current staff levels. That suggests that 87% of U.S. employers are optimistic, and will either add staff or remain at current staffing levels, and only 13% of employers expect to reduce their payrolls.

That outlook hardly seems dismal.

Government statistics disclose that personal income is higher than it was last year, at 5.6%, the national unemployment rate remains below the average of the last 16 years, and fewer Americans are without health insurance than at any time in our history.

Again, these are not terrible indicators.

The bottom line is that the U.S. economy is fundamentally sound, and anyone, (espescially politicians) who tell you otherwise, are advancing an agenda, not the truth. That doesn’t mean that every American is benefitting to their liking, but then, when even in perceived boom times, was that ever so?

Share/Save/Bookmark

2 responses so far

Jul 15 2008

The president lifts ban on off-shore oil drilling, and oil price drops 6%

Published by Chris Cargill under Sound Off Central

President Bush on Monday lifted the executive ban on oil drilling of the East and West coasts of the United States. At the same time, he called on Congress to do the same and lift the ban as well - which they must do or no off-short drilling can be done. The President kept up the pressure on Tuesday with another news conference, saying the same thing. And guess what has happened since then? Oil dropped - dramatically. Oil futures for August have plunged $9.26 (6.3%). Money guru Jim Kramer says “traders took a look at a feisty and aggressive and started selling the market well before a single new drop of oil has been lifted. What does this tell us? Well, if Congress moves to seal the deal, oil prices will probably keep on falling. That’s the way traders work. They discount the future. Psychology and expectations can turn on a dime.”

That’s exactly what the President said today. Its about psychology and the argument not to drill is one the are slowly losing. The Senate’s #2 Democrat, Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) said he would be open to it and others are following suit. In fact, there is a bill that would lift the ban trying to make it through the house, but Speaker Nancy Pelosi has vowed to not let it see the light of day.  Instead, the want to take oil out of the Strategic Oil Reserve.  And they keep blaming the President for not doing anything. But that may not work. There’s a “gang of 10” in the Senate, five and five , that is trying to work a compromise deal on lifting the moratorium, which expires at the end of September.

Polls have shown the majority of the American people now support drilling. If just mentioning drilling drops the price by 6% in two days, imagine what actually drilling might do. A new report says California could start producing new oil within one year if the oil drilling ban was lifted. Its what we need to do.

Keep building those fuel-efficient cars, keep coming up with ways to get us off oil, but for the sake of all of us who right now have cars that use oil, lets start drilling!

Share/Save/Bookmark

6 responses so far

Jul 09 2008

President Barack W. Bush?

Published by Chris Cargill under Sound Off Central

This is an interesting article I found from historian Victor Davis Hanson. It coincides with Senator ’s dance to the center, something he’s been doing for weeks now, to try and get more independent support. (The dirty little secret is, he has one of the most liberal voting records in the Senate) But nevermind that, most candidates, whether they be Republican or Democrat, move to the center after securing their party’s nomination. Obama, though, is moving a little too far for some . They like to say John McBush or John McSame when referring to Senator . The following article, however, shows just how similar is becoming to… George W. Bush.

Barack W. Bush?

By Victor Davis Hanson

Almost everyone is talking about ’s flip-flops, as the Senate’s most liberal member steadily moves to the political center and disowns firebrands like Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Father Michael Pfleger.

But less noticed is that Obama is not just deflating ’s efforts to hold him to his long liberal record, but also embracing much of the present agenda of an unpopular President Bush on a wide variety of fronts.

Take social issues. Obama is now a gun-rights advocate. Like Bush, he applauded the Supreme Court’s overturning of a , D.C., ordinance banning the possession of handguns.

The senator, also like Bush, supports the death penalty. He recently objected to the court’s rejection of a state law that allowed for the execution of child rapists.

And although Obama is still pro-choice, he now, like the president, thinks “mental distress” should not justify late-term abortion.

In addition, the new Obama would like to continue — and even expand — Bush’s controversial faith-based initiative of involving churches in government anti-poverty programs.

In fact, Obama is sounding a lot these days like those red-state, small-town conservatives he once caricatured in his infamous comment about Pennsylvanians who “cling” to such hot-button, but extraneous, social causes.

Consider also the campaign trail. Like a Republican in good standing — but unlike the maverick — Obama has, by his sudden forgoing of public funds, rejected the idea of campaign-finance reform.

In fact, he’s the largest raiser of private cash in American political history, and seems to have dropped opposition to accepting pernicious “special interest money.” Like a Republican, he raises the most among the nation’s wealthiest on Wall Street.

During the primaries, Obama seemed to advocate the dismantling of the North American Free Trade Agreement. But now candidate Obama has little desire to overturn the present Bush trade policies.

On foreign policy and the war against terror, Obama once leaned left in his primary battles against Hillary Clinton. But his latest mutations move him once again closer to .

For all his prior talk of the loss of civil liberties, a President Obama, like a President Bush, would give telecommunication companies exemption from lawsuits over tapping private phone calls at government request.

Obama wants to continue Bush’s successful multilateral efforts to fight the Taliban in Afghanistan, and now praises the Bush-inspired six-party talks with North Korea that led to the apparent dismantling of Pyongyang’s nuclear . Like Bush, he advocated expanding the military after the Clinton-era troop cuts. Obama once advocated lifting the embargo against Cuba — but no longer. Like Bush, he thinks that it is wise to leave it be.

There is suddenly not much difference when it comes to the Middle East, either. Palestinian supporters were dismayed to hear Obama promise that Jerusalem must be Israel’s eternal and undivided capital.

Obama once criticized Bush for his unwillingness to meet directly with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and exaggerating the danger from Iran, which supposedly didn’t “pose any serious threat.” Lately though, he agrees with the president that Iran now in fact is a “grave threat.”

Obama’s most serious about-face is on . He once promised a rigid and rapid timetable for withdrawing our troops. But given the radical success of Gen. David Petraeus’ surge and change in tactics, Obama is now calling for withdrawals to be based on the conditions on the ground in . How different is this plan from the present administration’s policy of incrementally sending home brigades as Petraeus hands off security responsibilities to Iraqis in additional provinces?

It makes political sense that Obama is moving to the center since he knows that a Northern liberal like himself has not won a presidential election since 1960. So don’t expect Obama’s metamorphosis to stop now. Before this campaign is over, he may well flip some more; would anybody be surprised if he starts supporting some of Bush’s proposal for expanded domestic oil drilling or backtracks on raising trillions in new payroll taxes?

In fact, replace ’s Texas twang, cowboy strut and evangelical Bible thumping with ’s mellifluous “hope and change” rhetoric, easy grace and leftwing Christianity and we may discover a flashy new cover to an old book.

A final question: If, even as Obama trashes Bush, he seems to agree with him on so many fronts, why don’t conservatives and adopt Obama as a welcome convert?

Some may, but most I’ve talked with don’t think Obama is sincere and feel he will flip back to being left wing if elected. Or they think that Obama is changing so fast and so radically that it’s hard to believe he really knows who he is — or would be as president.

Share/Save/Bookmark

One response so far