TANSTAAFL
Heinlein said it very clearly in “The Moon is a Harsh Mistress”: TANSTAAFL, there ain’t no such thing as a free lunch. From what is going on at the D convention, it appears that absolutely no one there has any clue as to what actually puts food on the table. If anyone would ask Ayn Rand’s question: “At whose expense?” you’d see a lot of bluster about taxing the rich and other equally stupid ideas because no one there knows what really makes civilization work.
When Hillary or Bernie say to tax the rich, they don’t mean the already rich, they mean the working rich. That is a definition that keeps changing as the situation gets more desperate. Before the government began its destruction of the US Dollar, someone making $250,000 probably was really rich. Back in 1940 you could buy a nice new home for $5,000, a Ford or Chevrolet new cost less then $1,000, and so on. Today a nice home costs $250,000 in a lot of areas, even after the housing crash. But they keep referring to people earning $250,000 as rich, and have no plan to tax the inherited wealth of John Kerry or the stolen wealth of Bill and Hillary. Probably the really rich are the same people who own our politicians, and thus can keep the government’s hands out of their pockets.
A vote for either the Green or Libertarian party is a vote for Hillary as neither have a snowball’s chance. Hillary’s bleak and failing policies have been well documented, but only recently has her total lack of accountability been made apparent. There is no reason to believe she will alter her strategy while under the protective media/government dome. So while many facets of Trump’s policies remain untested he has at least made known his plan to protect the Constitution with his potential Supreme Court appointments. Many gambled with Obama’s promise of “Hope and Change.” My choice is more defined by analysis of the past seven plus years.
As Reagan asked, “Are you better off now then you were four (or in the current case seven) years ago?” Is there any evidence that Hillary can actually accomplish anything more than filling her own pockets?
What I do know is that Hillary would be a disaster!
When Hillary or Bernie say to tax the rich, they don’t mean the already rich, they mean the working rich. That is a definition that keeps changing as the situation gets more desperate. Before the government began its destruction of the US Dollar, someone making $250,000 probably was really rich. Back in 1940 you could buy a nice new home for $5,000, a Ford or Chevrolet new cost less then $1,000, and so on. Today a nice home costs $250,000 in a lot of areas, even after the housing crash. But they keep referring to people earning $250,000 as rich, and have no plan to tax the inherited wealth of John Kerry or the stolen wealth of Bill and Hillary. Probably the really rich are the same people who own our politicians, and thus can keep the government’s hands out of their pockets.
A vote for either the Green or Libertarian party is a vote for Hillary as neither have a snowball’s chance. Hillary’s bleak and failing policies have been well documented, but only recently has her total lack of accountability been made apparent. There is no reason to believe she will alter her strategy while under the protective media/government dome. So while many facets of Trump’s policies remain untested he has at least made known his plan to protect the Constitution with his potential Supreme Court appointments. Many gambled with Obama’s promise of “Hope and Change.” My choice is more defined by analysis of the past seven plus years.
As Reagan asked, “Are you better off now then you were four (or in the current case seven) years ago?” Is there any evidence that Hillary can actually accomplish anything more than filling her own pockets?
What I do know is that Hillary would be a disaster!
