26th Aug 2014
spiritualinspiration:

You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives. (Genesis 50:20)
These are the words spoken by Joseph to his brothers, years after they threw him in a well and left him for dead, then decided it would be better to sell him into slavery. God took Joseph on quite a journey; from slavery to the palace to prison, and back to the palace, where he landed a position as second in command to Pharaoh and in charge of the whole land of Egypt. Certainly, Joseph’s brothers intended to harm him, but the sovereign God never wastes our time. .Did you hear that? God never wastes our time.
It may seem like it now as you live between jobs wondering how in the world you will be able to pay the bills…
It may seem like it now as you wait for God to bring the right mate into your life…
It may seem like it now as you recover from another round of chemo…
It may seem like it now as you live in the consequences of your sin…
It may seem like it now as you do your best to get through the day with your broken heart…
It may seem like it now as you recover from the death of a dream…
It may seem like it now as your life has seemingly been placed on hold…
But…the Sovereign, Almighty, All-Powerful God never wastes our time.
So hang in there! God is using every minute (every nano-second) to mold you into the person he needs you to be for the next leg of the journey. God is at work…He loves you with an unconditional love…He has given you an inheritance that can never perish, spoil, or fade…He has purchased you with the precious blood of his Son. He has eternity invested in you! Ask him what he wants you to learn and how he wants you to respond to today’s assignment. He is not wasting your time.
Father, for those who feel like they are stuck and their life is on hold…for those reeling from a difficult relationship or circumstance…please encourage them today with some tangible evidence that you are not wasting their time. In Jesus’ name. Amen.

I so needed this right now.

spiritualinspiration:

You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives. (Genesis 50:20)

These are the words spoken by Joseph to his brothers, years after they threw him in a well and left him for dead, then decided it would be better to sell him into slavery. God took Joseph on quite a journey; from slavery to the palace to prison, and back to the palace, where he landed a position as second in command to Pharaoh and in charge of the whole land of Egypt. Certainly, Joseph’s brothers intended to harm him, but the sovereign God never wastes our time.
.
Did you hear that? God never wastes our time.

It may seem like it now as you live between jobs wondering how in the world you will be able to pay the bills…

It may seem like it now as you wait for God to bring the right mate into your life…

It may seem like it now as you recover from another round of chemo…

It may seem like it now as you live in the consequences of your sin…

It may seem like it now as you do your best to get through the day with your broken heart…

It may seem like it now as you recover from the death of a dream…

It may seem like it now as your life has seemingly been placed on hold…

But…the Sovereign, Almighty, All-Powerful God never wastes our time.

So hang in there! God is using every minute (every nano-second) to mold you into the person he needs you to be for the next leg of the journey. God is at work…He loves you with an unconditional love…He has given you an inheritance that can never perish, spoil, or fade…He has purchased you with the precious blood of his Son. He has eternity invested in you! Ask him what he wants you to learn and how he wants you to respond to today’s assignment. He is not wasting your time.

Father, for those who feel like they are stuck and their life is on hold…for those reeling from a difficult relationship or circumstance…please encourage them today with some tangible evidence that you are not wasting their time. In Jesus’ name. Amen.

I so needed this right now.

23rd Aug 2014
Where are the social justice warriors now?
I can’t help but be entertained and slightly sickened by the lack of non-right outrage over Richard Dawkins’ horrific comments on his idea about the best way to ‘deal’ with unborn children with Down Syndrome.
On one hand, the SJW movement preaches inclusion and acceptance, refuting even the most minute perceived slight against anyone who is ‘different’, and yet they support policies and attitudes which infinitely decrease the collective value of human life.
All people are beautiful and worthy of life, no matter their circumstance. To Suggest that children with Down are less worthy of being born, or that their uniqueness is so terrible that it is immoral for them to be brought into the world is disgusting.
Because that really is at the crux of Dawkins argument… You shouldn’t bring anyone into the world that can not produce at the capacity he has decided a human being ought to produce. If they are going to be a drain on their parents, on their health system, on their communities, etc… Then why bother with them? ‘Try again’, as Dawkins so aptly put it.
I just wonder where it ends in Dawkins’ mind?
Who else is too much of a ‘drain’ to bother existing? Shall we abort anyone who is predisposed to illnesses like cancer? What about those who are statistically inclined to live a life of crime or social assistance dependency? The common argument there would be, 'well, we don't really know whether or not they will end up doing those things'…. But then again, the very same thing could be said about those with Downs. Do we know for sure if their life will be one of ‘suffering’? How can we know that they will be unhappy with their lives, live unfulfilling ones, or be a ‘drain’ on others?
Where does it end? When does it become heinous when the measure of being worthy of life is determined by your value to others… And not even those who immediately surround you! No, your value to people who have never met you, who don’t know you, and who just see you in terms of cost analysis. 
One thing I can say for sure is that most all persons with Downs produce a hell of a lot more than Richard Dawkins, who makes his living driveling on about who he thinks is worthy of life. 
Several times a week I see the special needs adults going on their escorted walk through the mall, and they light up everyone’s day with their bright attitudes.
One young man goes out of his way to give me a high five, especially when he thinks I am upset or feeling blue, and I couldn’t imagine getting through the day without him! To me and every one else whose lives they touch, they have amazing value.
I don’t expect Dawkins to understand.

Where are the social justice warriors now?

I can’t help but be entertained and slightly sickened by the lack of non-right outrage over Richard Dawkins’ horrific comments on his idea about the best way to ‘deal’ with unborn children with Down Syndrome.

On one hand, the SJW movement preaches inclusion and acceptance, refuting even the most minute perceived slight against anyone who is ‘different’, and yet they support policies and attitudes which infinitely decrease the collective value of human life.

All people are beautiful and worthy of life, no matter their circumstance. To Suggest that children with Down are less worthy of being born, or that their uniqueness is so terrible that it is immoral for them to be brought into the world is disgusting.

Because that really is at the crux of Dawkins argument… You shouldn’t bring anyone into the world that can not produce at the capacity he has decided a human being ought to produce. If they are going to be a drain on their parents, on their health system, on their communities, etc… Then why bother with them? ‘Try again’, as Dawkins so aptly put it.

I just wonder where it ends in Dawkins’ mind?

Who else is too much of a ‘drain’ to bother existing? Shall we abort anyone who is predisposed to illnesses like cancer? What about those who are statistically inclined to live a life of crime or social assistance dependency? The common argument there would be, 'well, we don't really know whether or not they will end up doing those things'…. But then again, the very same thing could be said about those with Downs. Do we know for sure if their life will be one of ‘suffering’? How can we know that they will be unhappy with their lives, live unfulfilling ones, or be a ‘drain’ on others?

Where does it end? When does it become heinous when the measure of being worthy of life is determined by your value to others… And not even those who immediately surround you! No, your value to people who have never met you, who don’t know you, and who just see you in terms of cost analysis. 

One thing I can say for sure is that most all persons with Downs produce a hell of a lot more than Richard Dawkins, who makes his living driveling on about who he thinks is worthy of life. 

Several times a week I see the special needs adults going on their escorted walk through the mall, and they light up everyone’s day with their bright attitudes.

One young man goes out of his way to give me a high five, especially when he thinks I am upset or feeling blue, and I couldn’t imagine getting through the day without him! To me and every one else whose lives they touch, they have amazing value.

I don’t expect Dawkins to understand.

22nd Aug 2014

thecrankyconservative

theturningpointusa

If you could label your political/economic philosophy in at most two words, how would you label it?

Hella liberty.
22nd Aug 2014
theturningpointusa:

College degrees are being given out at a greater rate than jobs requiring college degrees are being created.
[1][2]

theturningpointusa:

College degrees are being given out at a greater rate than jobs requiring college degrees are being created.

[1][2]

19th Aug 2014

Anonymous said: How do I know if I'm a conservative or not?

If you believe that the freedom of individuals is of paramount importance, and that people and organizations function better and more efficiently without Government tampering, then you are definitely rolling down the calm wave of conservatism, buddy. 

Really, conservatism is defined by a series of basic canons, and different factions of conservatism just branch off of those tenants in different ways. I will refer to Russell Kirk’s version of the canon, because I believe it is the most clear. I included some definitions where necessary.

  1. A belief in a transcendent order (does not have to be God or some version of God — Can be any kind of power that you see as larger than yourself. Important not for spiritual reasons, but because there has to be something larger than Government that gives human beings their value);
  2. An affection for the variety and mystery of human life (that people are awesome, diverse, and unique. But despite all of this, they are still human, and deserve to be treated as such);
  3. A belief in societal order;
  4. A belief that property and freedom are closely linked (Government should not be able to help itself to your property. With your own possessions and rights to those possessions comes many other rights);
  5. Faith in convention (if it aint broke, don’t fix it, and if it’s fixed, don’t break it!);
  6. An understanding that innovation must be tied to existing traditions (no social experimentation, or social products with unknown results. See number 5!)

All this being said, I certainly hope you are considering exploring conservative culture! It is an exciting, diverse political ideology that welcomes all and puts value on continuous learning and development.

Thank you so much for your question!

TCC

19th Aug 2014

New voters are getting registered, students are finding a voice, and the conservative movement is GROWING!

theturningpointusa:

image

image

image

image

image

This makes me so happy.

Good job, Turning Point USA!

18th Aug 2014

Wake up America

  • Receptionist: Thank you for calling the White House Relay Center, how may I direct your call?
  • Me: Ravioli Ravioli Give me the Formuoli.
  • Receptionist: One moment please...
  • Automated Voice: You have reached the Illuminati... Our office is presently closed. Please leave a detailed message, and Carl will get back to you as soon as possible.
  • Me: Goddamnit Carl.
18th Aug 2014
thecrankyconservative:

I believe these are rubber bullets. Can anyone confirm? #Ferguson

I retract that suggestion, they are cashews. Apologies.

thecrankyconservative:

I believe these are rubber bullets. Can anyone confirm? #Ferguson

I retract that suggestion, they are cashews. Apologies.

15th Aug 2014

Reflections on Ferguson + My Experiences with Police Brutality

I am sorry for what ya’ll are going through down there, I really am.

My sympathies are especially extended to those who have been injured and lost their lives in the rioting, both on the sides of those participating, and the police officers doing their best to follow orders.

I’ve made the statement that ‘soldiers are not the beaurocracy they work for’ to make the point that often, good people get caught up in the inherit maliciousness of the state and it’s ultimate goals of power and centralized control… And I’d be quick to make the same statement about police officers. I know that the immediate inclination in these kinds of situations is to jump on the ‘fuck the police’ bandwagon, but I’m not going to do that.

I am not taking anyone’s side in this post.

It might be useful to note that my mother was a victim of police brutality, and at the tender age of five I got to watch the whole thing unravel on the steps of our apartment building.

My parents had gotten into a fight, and my father ended up calling his police buddies on my mother, who proceeded to beat her out of the house in front of me and my family. I have vivid memories of that horrific afternoon.. Of watching my grandmother, an elderly Italian woman who could barely speak English, crying and trying to pull the two men off of her.

It will always stay with me.

Even today, A very deep, dark place in me gets emotional recalling the events, but despite that, I ended up going into policing myself, and am pursuing a law degree. So that being said, I think it goes without saying that I genuinely don’t believe the institutions themselves are without merit or good intentions.

Bad people can sometimes be drawn to the professions which guarantee them minimal oversight and power over others, and when they get in they can end up doing a lot of harm. But I have always maintained that the best way to stop bad people with power is to give good people the ability to properly defend themselves.

When we are dealing with the issue of police militarization, which I think many people have pointed out as being evident in Ferguson, we are ultimately dealing with concentrated power offsetting what should be a balance.

Democrats were quick to turn this into a race issue, instead of what it should be focusing on, which is the imbalance of power between society and those who are charged with protecting it. Why they did that should be obvious — Because it distracts from the bottom line of addressing that imbalance of power. And you know as well as I that telling the state to police itself is as idiotic as telling CEO’s to ensure they don’t make too much money.

Just as well, the state has a vested interest in keeping people without that means to defend themselves — and we saw exactly why during the Bundy standoff earlier this year.

The police certainly didn’t protect Cliven Bundy from having his land and property seized and life threatened by the Government, the well regulated militia did.

And we saw just how effective that well regulated militia was!

Honestly.

The Founding Fathers of America must have been perched up on a cloud somewhere, smiling a bit. 

You are your last line of defense, and you should be weary of anyone and anything trying to tell you that you don’t really need to defend yourself, let alone that the very people you want to be defended against will do just as good a job.

If you are against police brutality and militarization in any form, you should be both pro-gun and anti-state. It’s as simple as that.

9th Aug 2014
thecrankyconservative:

**GOODIE BAG CONTEST! READ BELOW FOR DETAILS**


So today I was having an interesting conversation with my boss on American politics.
When we started discussing the Tea Party movement, he dismissed it as an ‘extremist’ faction of the republican party that was doing more harm than good through fracturing the US conservative movement. He also stated that he believes it lacked vision and clarity, leading it to be defined by whatever radical says it is. 
When I calmly attempted to educate him on the Tea Party Movement’s focus, which is on restoring individual liberty and fiscal responsibility, as well as ensuring Government’s branches fully cooperated with the provisions set out in the Constitution, he scoffed and dismissed the notion that any Government official would be capable of bypassing the Supreme Court and violating the Constitution.
In other words, he believed that Government was adequetly held to account by the Supreme Court, who would not simply let a violation slip under their cushy, appointed noses.
I’d like to take it to you, my wonderful followers, to help me out in listing the many instances of Constitutional violations and generally unethical behavior set forth by this administration, and whether or not you believe the Supreme Court has been a reliable defender of the Constitution. Please give examples.
I will print out these reasons, and present them to my boss on Tuesday.
Now comes the fun part! When you respond to answer this question through a reblog, you will be entered in to win a fun Canada-themed prize pack  full of souvenirs, crafts, and candies from the Great White North. 
You have until Tuesday to get your answers in, and I’d love to hear from you!
Winner will be chosen at random. Like this post for an extra ballot! 
 Prizes include:
Canadian RCMP Shopping/Book Foldaway Tote
Lucid Dreams Tea from the Algonquin Tea Company
Bottle of Maple Syrup
Limited Edition ‘Northern Dreams’ Beany Baby
Mini Cuddle Bear
Canadian Flag Bracelet
Maple Leaf Pens and Pad Set
Canadian Sunset Notebook
Copper Keychain
Iron-On Canada Patch
Kerr’s Choco and Butter Toffee Moo Moos
Ste. Julie Quebecois Butter Fudge
Chocolate Loonies (Dollars)
Wooden Souvenir Bottle Opener
Good luck, everyone!
-TCC

**CLOSED. Congrats to proudlyconservative!**

thecrankyconservative:

**GOODIE BAG CONTEST! READ BELOW FOR DETAILS**

So today I was having an interesting conversation with my boss on American politics.

When we started discussing the Tea Party movement, he dismissed it as an ‘extremist’ faction of the republican party that was doing more harm than good through fracturing the US conservative movement. He also stated that he believes it lacked vision and clarity, leading it to be defined by whatever radical says it is. 

When I calmly attempted to educate him on the Tea Party Movement’s focus, which is on restoring individual liberty and fiscal responsibility, as well as ensuring Government’s branches fully cooperated with the provisions set out in the Constitution, he scoffed and dismissed the notion that any Government official would be capable of bypassing the Supreme Court and violating the Constitution.

In other words, he believed that Government was adequetly held to account by the Supreme Court, who would not simply let a violation slip under their cushy, appointed noses.

I’d like to take it to you, my wonderful followers, to help me out in listing the many instances of Constitutional violations and generally unethical behavior set forth by this administration, and whether or not you believe the Supreme Court has been a reliable defender of the Constitution. Please give examples.

I will print out these reasons, and present them to my boss on Tuesday.

Now comes the fun part! When you respond to answer this question through a reblog, you will be entered in to win a fun Canada-themed prize pack  full of souvenirs, crafts, and candies from the Great White North.

You have until Tuesday to get your answers in, and I’d love to hear from you!

Winner will be chosen at random. Like this post for an extra ballot!

 Prizes include:

  1. Canadian RCMP Shopping/Book Foldaway Tote
  2. Lucid Dreams Tea from the Algonquin Tea Company
  3. Bottle of Maple Syrup
  4. Limited Edition ‘Northern Dreams’ Beany Baby
  5. Mini Cuddle Bear
  6. Canadian Flag Bracelet
  7. Maple Leaf Pens and Pad Set
  8. Canadian Sunset Notebook
  9. Copper Keychain
  10. Iron-On Canada Patch
  11. Kerr’s Choco and Butter Toffee Moo Moos
  12. Ste. Julie Quebecois Butter Fudge
  13. Chocolate Loonies (Dollars)
  14. Wooden Souvenir Bottle Opener

Good luck, everyone!

-TCC

**CLOSED. Congrats to proudlyconservative!**

8th Aug 2014

I ship liberty/capitalism

8th Aug 2014

The Young Turks Video Titles — Some Suggestions

  • Republicans Hate Black People
  • Republicans Hate Female People
  • Republicans Hate Latino People
  • Republicans Hate Gay People
  • Republicans Hate People
  • REPUBLICANS?!?!
  • Assaults Against Transgendered Homosexual Black-Cree Labour Unionists on The Rise — Ties to the GOP?
  • Tea Baggers Tea-Baggining Women’s Rights
  • Vaginas under ATTACK by GOP
  • House Republicans — Satanists?
  • George Bush — Out of Office, but Still Staring Wars
  • LOL Sarah Palin
  • Israel ‘Enjoys Killing Palestinians’, says Benjamin Netanyahu
  • Tea Party ‘Fueling’ Global Warming
  • Impeach George Bush
  • Survey: 6 out of 10 GOP Representatives support abolishing marital rape laws
  • Jesus Would Support Gaza
  • Fox News RUINED by 3 year old!!
  • SHOCKING 9/11 Ties to George Bush and Republican Party
  • 'Everyone in Gaza is dead' — Palestinian Humanitarian Association
  • GOP Running Alex Jones?
  • Koch Brothers WAR on Obama
  • Koch Brothers WAR on Environmentalists
  • Koch Brothers funding War on Palestine?
  • The Right Wing vs. Mandela
  • The Right Wing vs. Bhudda
  • The Right Wing vs. 6 year old Girl with Cancer
  • Is the Bible Pro-Choice?
  • Survey: 96% of Women Have been Raped or Will Be
5th Aug 2014
collegethenlife:

at Museum of Communism

 Powerful and immensely saddening. This is a slab from the Berlin Wall, if I’m not mistaken.
“Let me live my life, enjoy freedom, touch the limit, reach the stars, understand the word. That’s what I want.”

collegethenlife:

at Museum of Communism


Powerful and immensely saddening. This is a slab from the Berlin Wall, if I’m not mistaken.

Let me live my life, enjoy freedom, touch the limit, reach the stars, understand the word. That’s what I want.”

5th Aug 2014

A friend just told me i need to focus less on politics and more on reality..

pfft.

more like u need to focus less on reality and more on reLIBERTY.

Holla.

4th Aug 2014
redbloodedamerica:

thecrankyconservative:

redbloodedamerica:

thecrankyconservative:

 


Social experiments perpetrated by Government for the ‘greater good’ are always terrifying, but I’m afraid I have to disagree with redbloodedamerica on this one. I’ve always supported a Friedman-style negative income tax or minimum income.
The only difference between what I support and what the Swiss are proposing is that a minimum income is actually supposed to completely replace any and all Government social programs.  Essentially, a minimum income just above poverty would be supplied, and Government would be reduced to a skeleton crew. People’s choice on how to spend the money, and whether to work for additional funds, would be left completely up to them. If you are provided a minimum income supplement and blow it all on drugs or booze — That’s on you. There is nothing there for you to fall back on.
No welfare, no subsidized housing, no nothing.
So while I totally support the idea of a minimum income, I just don’t trust that liberals will be willing to allow people to be responsible for their actions in a minimum income system, nor keep their bloated traps shut long enough about it to allow any intergenerational poverty-forming habits to give way to individual liberty and spontaneous order.
Sorry for interjecting!

Interjection is always welcome;  however, when you are talking about the Friedman style “negative income tax” do not confuse it with this plan of giving a 100% guaranteed income.  They are still two separate ideas.  The negative income tax was a subsidy that match in proportion of your taxable income rate.  If you had zero income, then you would receive the tax rate on whatever negative exemption amount would be.  Fast forward to about the 3:35 mark on this video to see what I mean:
I also believe the Swiss basic income scheme was also an alternative to ending welfare programs like you are saying.  To be fair, I’ve heard several economists like Hayek, Charles Murray as well as libertarians argue for a minimum income floor; but I think with the evidence we have today, this is precisely the warning Friedman spoke about above.  It also speaks to your fear in your last paragraph how liberals will abuse any government program like this.

(Cutting for Length)
The Negative Income Tax still guaranteed an income. If one had an income of 0, in other words they had no taxable income, they would receive the full rate on the base liability as there was nothing to tax. It’s a subsidization by any other name, and the late great one did allude to that. If not in this video, another one of his University Speeches.
Friedman even did, if somewhat bashfully, admit it was a sort of redistribution of income simply because of the fact that the limited impact of the tax on the wealthy would go towards ensuring a floor for those who were not as wealthy, or did not work at all. But the great thing about the NIT is that it did not penalize those who chose to work more , and those who did would still reap a great deal of benefits from the tax credit.
Now, I am not totally informed about this Swiss situation, and I never claimed to be, so you’ll have to forgive my ignorance if I suggested that the Government would be keeping it’s social programs in addition to the income guarantee. If they really are going to give a shot at eliminating most of the functions of Government as a ‘safety net’, all the more power to them.
Does Switzerland really have that much of a poverty issue to begin with? I never thought so…

They’ve had the same discussions lately about the gap of income inequality.  I believe the last time I checked, unemployment is very low and their poverty rate is still fairly low as well.  This is just how socialists operate though.  They’re never satisfied, so they keep trudging forward with these government solutions to distribute the wealth of the rich.
I agree that the negative tax income proposal was a move in the right direction, but I think Friedman wasn’t expecting it to be an income replacement.  He was counting on private third party entities like charities to step in and help instead of government programs as you pointed out.

And as you did, as well.
I think all we can say at this point is that an NIT-like situation will likely never be implemented to the degree necessary to ensure it’s success.
Liberals will always bitch, and change will continue to be elusive, and we’ll just die miserable and alone, clutching a copy of Vision of the Anointed close to our bosoms while a single, cold tear trickles down our wrinkled cheeks.

redbloodedamerica:

thecrankyconservative:

redbloodedamerica:

thecrankyconservative:

 

Social experiments perpetrated by Government for the ‘greater good’ are always terrifying, but I’m afraid I have to disagree with redbloodedamerica on this one. I’ve always supported a Friedman-style negative income tax or minimum income.

The only difference between what I support and what the Swiss are proposing is that a minimum income is actually supposed to completely replace any and all Government social programs.  Essentially, a minimum income just above poverty would be supplied, and Government would be reduced to a skeleton crew. People’s choice on how to spend the money, and whether to work for additional funds, would be left completely up to them. If you are provided a minimum income supplement and blow it all on drugs or booze — That’s on you. There is nothing there for you to fall back on.

No welfare, no subsidized housing, no nothing.

So while I totally support the idea of a minimum income, I just don’t trust that liberals will be willing to allow people to be responsible for their actions in a minimum income system, nor keep their bloated traps shut long enough about it to allow any intergenerational poverty-forming habits to give way to individual liberty and spontaneous order.

Sorry for interjecting!

Interjection is always welcome;  however, when you are talking about the Friedman style “negative income tax” do not confuse it with this plan of giving a 100% guaranteed income.  They are still two separate ideas.  The negative income tax was a subsidy that match in proportion of your taxable income rate.  If you had zero income, then you would receive the tax rate on whatever negative exemption amount would be.  Fast forward to about the 3:35 mark on this video to see what I mean:

I also believe the Swiss basic income scheme was also an alternative to ending welfare programs like you are saying.  To be fair, I’ve heard several economists like Hayek, Charles Murray as well as libertarians argue for a minimum income floor; but I think with the evidence we have today, this is precisely the warning Friedman spoke about above.  It also speaks to your fear in your last paragraph how liberals will abuse any government program like this.

(Cutting for Length)

The Negative Income Tax still guaranteed an income. If one had an income of 0, in other words they had no taxable income, they would receive the full rate on the base liability as there was nothing to tax. It’s a subsidization by any other name, and the late great one did allude to that. If not in this video, another one of his University Speeches.

Friedman even did, if somewhat bashfully, admit it was a sort of redistribution of income simply because of the fact that the limited impact of the tax on the wealthy would go towards ensuring a floor for those who were not as wealthy, or did not work at all. But the great thing about the NIT is that it did not penalize those who chose to work more , and those who did would still reap a great deal of benefits from the tax credit.

Now, I am not totally informed about this Swiss situation, and I never claimed to be, so you’ll have to forgive my ignorance if I suggested that the Government would be keeping it’s social programs in addition to the income guarantee. If they really are going to give a shot at eliminating most of the functions of Government as a ‘safety net’, all the more power to them.

Does Switzerland really have that much of a poverty issue to begin with? I never thought so…

They’ve had the same discussions lately about the gap of income inequality.  I believe the last time I checked, unemployment is very low and their poverty rate is still fairly low as well.  This is just how socialists operate though.  They’re never satisfied, so they keep trudging forward with these government solutions to distribute the wealth of the rich.

I agree that the negative tax income proposal was a move in the right direction, but I think Friedman wasn’t expecting it to be an income replacement.  He was counting on private third party entities like charities to step in and help instead of government programs as you pointed out.

And as you did, as well.

I think all we can say at this point is that an NIT-like situation will likely never be implemented to the degree necessary to ensure it’s success.

Liberals will always bitch, and change will continue to be elusive, and we’ll just die miserable and alone, clutching a copy of Vision of the Anointed close to our bosoms while a single, cold tear trickles down our wrinkled cheeks.

(Source: belcanta)