[ back ]
AND HOLD ON TO YOUR PENSIONS WHILE YOU'RE AT IT
In 1916, a minister and outspoken advocate for liberty, William J. H. Boetcker, published a pamphlet entitled The Ten Cannots .
"You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot help the poor man by destroying the rich.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot build character and courage by taking away man's initiative and independence.
You cannot help small men by tearing down big men.
You cannot lift the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer.
You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than your income. Y
ou cannot establish security on borrowed money.
You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they will not do for themselves."
AND HOLD ON TO YOUR PENSIONS WHILE YOU'RE AT IT
Some interesting happenings last week. Argentina proposes seizing all private pensions. The purpose? That would be to redistribute all of that money to people who actually need it more.
I believe it was Barney Frank, but some leading Democrat last week said that the pensions belonging to some evil CEOs would be the first to go. That's just the beginning folks.
Mark my words, because I want the "I told you so" on this one, after Obama is sworn in you are going to see an attack on privately held pensions and 401K plans.
There's about four or five trillion dollars out there, and the Democrats want their hands on it to further their redistribution schemes.
"A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul."
- George Bernard Shaw
Clueless People Shouldn't Even Vote
I keep hearing how important it is for everyone to vote.
Let me be politically incorrect and say that maybe some people shouldn't vote.
I know I'm swimming against the tide. Get-out the-vote groups now register young people at rock concerts. HeadCount (www.headcount.org) cofounder Andy Bernstein told me: "We registered over 100,000 people. It is so imperative that this generation's voice is heard."
But wait. Is that really a good idea? Many kids don't know much. At a HeadCount concert, "20/20" asked some future voters, "How many senators are there?" One said 12; another, 16; and another, 64. One girl guessed, "50 per state."
Most kids didn't know what Roe vs. Wade was about. "Roe vs. Wayne?" said one. "Segregation, maybe?" "Where we declared bankruptcy?"
HeadCount's Marc Brownstein concedes that a lot of voters are uniformed, but he said: "Democracy is not about taking the most educated portion of the society and having them decide who's going to run the entire society. Democracy is about every individual having a voice."
I suggested that, when people don't know anything, maybe it's their civic duty not to vote.
"It's an argument that really, really smacks against everything we hold dear as Americans," Bernstein said.
Maybe it was unfair to pick on kids at a rock concert. I went to Washington, D.C., and showed people pictures of prominent Americans. I'm happy to say that everyone recognized Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. John McCain.
But only about half recognized Gov. Sarah Palin, and most didn't know Sen. Joe Biden. Few people recognized Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, but everyone quickly identified TV's Judge Judy.
Economist Bryan Caplan, author of "The Myth of the Rational Voter," points out, "The public's knowledge of politics is shockingly low."
He scoffs at the idea that "it's everyone's civic duty to vote."
"This is very much like saying, it's our civic duty to give surgery advice," Caplan said. "We like to think that political issues are much less complicated than brain surgery, but many of them are pretty hard. If someone doesn't know what he's talking about, it really is better if they say, look, I'm going to leave this in wiser hands."
Isn't it elitist to say only some people should vote?
"Is it elitist to say only some people should do brain surgery? If you don't know what you're doing, you are not doing the country a favor by voting."
My ABC "20/20" segment about this enraged some viewers.
"That was a shameful piece you put together about youth voting . . . I wonder if the quality of the information in our society has anything to do with hackery like yours infesting the airwaves and drowning out reasonable discussion."
Another wrote: "You are a decrepit journalist and a poor excuse of a patriot."
And still another: "Democracy is defined by citizen participation. So you are undermining democracy. Thanks."
Someone even made a video parody mocking my story. Clearly, not everyone understood what I was saying.
"You sit there on television and ignorantly say that all youth should not vote . . . wow."
That's not what I said. I hope that informed young people do vote. I just don't think it's so wonderful when famous people drag uninformed and uninterested people to the polls.
One viewer raised a fair point: "You simply cannot create a litmus test for voters. At what point does a voter become satisfactorily 'informed'? Do they have to know the name of the president, vice president, both their senators? This is the problem with your argument; you don't state how informed a voter should be, just that they should be. This is a very slippery slope."
But I'm not saying that the government should impose a litmus test. God forbid.
I just want clueless people to find something else to do on Nov. 4.
Voting is serious business. It works best when people educate themselves.
If uninformed people stay home on Election Day, good.
That doesn't include you.
John Stossel
IMPUTED INCOME .... JUST WAIT
This is an idea that the Clinton administration was working on when the Republicans took over. The concept here is to take people who are not in the higher income tax brackets and move them on up, so to speak, by creating income for them out of thin air. That way you can tax them more. The name for this artificial income would be "imputed income," and it would be fully taxable.
Let's say you own your own home. You've had it for some time. Your mortgage payment is $1000 a month. Homes similar to you in your neighborhood rent for $2000 a month.
The IRS will tell you that since you are living in your home for $1000 a month less than you would have to pay if you were a renter, that extra $1000 a month is actually income to you, and you should pay income taxes on that money. That would be an extra $12,000 a year on your taxable income line!
And think what would happen if you owned your home free and clear? Bingo! $24,000 in imputed income!
Fine ... you sit there and tell me this could never happen. Put the Democrats in total and complete power and see how that works out for you.
ExxonMobil's record profit... or record taxes?
Headlines abounded this week trumpeting that ExxonMobil, that most evil member of the Big Oil coalition, recorded a record profit in the third quarter of $14.8 billion.
Left unsaid was how much of Exxon's revenue was confiscated by Big Government.
The number will astonish even the hardest socialist-Exxon's third quarter taxes were $11.3 billion.
Talk about windfall profits... and if you have half a brain. companies don't pay taxes!!! You and I will pay those taxes at the pump.
[ back ]
