Once again the Liberals and some Democrats prove to us that they
TRULY do not understand the concepts of rights, and how they apply in
real life. Case in point, Michigan!
Liberals and Democrats (Run by Big Business…uhhh I mean Unions) are
in an uproar over Michigan drafting right to work legislation.
A right-to-work law
is a statute in the United States of America that prohibits union
security agreements, or agreements between labor unions and employers
that govern the extent to which an established union can require
employees’ membership, payment of union dues, or fees as a condition of
employment, either before or after hiring.
In short the Liberal Unions who claim to be ALL about workers’ rights
are very, VERY against the most basic of all of those rights. That is
of course the right to choose whether or not they want to be associated
with the union.
I always bounce back and forth on whether or not I should use the
word stupid, or idiot. However sometimes it is hard to find any other
way of justifying the immense stupidity that bleeds from these people.
As we have seen in Wisconsin, Unions are always the cause of layoffs
and the closing of extracurricular programs that Liberals claim
Republicans and Conservative are trying to cut from the budget. Yet when
Conservatives have the power the teacher jobs and arts programs are
almost ALWAYS saved.
Many teachers in Wisconsin got pink slips ahead of Act10. School
boards were not allowed to adjust almost any percentage of the budget so
they would have had to fire teachers to make up the gap. The Unions
were OK with this because it protected their revenue stream. The fact
that everyone else would still be forced to pay dues to a Union that
does not care for the workers’ jobs is the irony of common union
supporter.
Scott Walker and the Conservatives pushed back against the Unions in
favor of the workers. The IDIOT teachers protested, the majority of
teachers did not, but very quietly for fear of backlash. The best part
is that they claimed their RIGHTS WERE AT STAKE!!!
The most basic of all knowledge is that forcing people to do things
will end up in failure eventually. People almost always resist when
being told to do anything. So it is no surprise, to a conservative at
least, when raising the tax rate does not mean we will have more income.
I have explained this on many posts, however since repetition is the
world’s best teacher, I will explain it again.
This country does have a tax problem. The problem is that there are
too many taxes and they are way too high. There is also a spending
problem in our country. The problem is not the military (Primary
function of the federal government), it is not the infrastructure
(Primary function of the federal government), it is the social programs
(NOT a primary function of the federal government).
Contrary to popular belief, the republican majority does not want to
do away with the programs entirely. As I have mentioned several times in
other posts, getting rid of those programs prematurely would be very,
VERY detrimental to the economy. The republicans and conservatives want
to, and NEED to reform those policies. Charity can work and can be
self-sustaining; we are surrounded by many private charities that do
more effective work than the government could ever dream.
Never mind that most problems in the United States can be directly
linked to the fiscal condition of the country. Most Democrats would have
you believe that the rich are somehow responsible for the well being of
the poor. If there are more poor people that must mean that the rich
are not paying enough.
Paul Krugman (apparently he is an economist) thinks that we should
tax the rich at 91% like we did in the 1950’s. He forgets two major
things, entitlement programs and the fact that we did not have a world
economy in the 50’s.
The other thing he is missing is the fact that people do not like being forced to do something undesirable.
Recently Britain introduced a 50% tax rate on its top earners. This
is the staple of the Liberal platform. Take from the rich and give to
the poor. They think they are Robin Hood, except that Robin Hood took
form a tyrannical government and gave the money back to the people from
which it stole.
So what happened? Did they make more money?
Why do conservatives say that objects or services are not rights? Or more importantly, why do some people think that the things they want or desire are owed to them by right? What is a right?
A simple Google search will reveal why "Rights" are such a hotly debated issue. In this post I will explain what I think a right is.
If you search the definition of Right, many different definitions pop up. Most of them being vague and open ended. To me the definition is simple, I believe that rights are things that God and nature provide for us naturally. To me a right in its most infantismal form ensures that no one other person can rob me of life and that I cannot do the same to another. Our cooperative existence is our rights.
In our country we have "rights" to many things. This is also where opinion causes our great divide. I have the right to provide for myself, I do not believe I have the right to force others to provide for me. I have a right to donate my time, services, or money. I do not believe that others have the right to demand them of me through force. You do not have a right to something as simple, or as you will soon see, as complex as a Pencil. You have the right to acquire one without imposing upon others rights.
This, as some might notice, is leading into our healthcare system and the debate that surrounds it.
Does someone in America have a right to "free" healthcare? Do they have a right to affordable healthcare? My answer is no. No one in this country has a right to anything produced by another.
Why do I think this, and how can I be so uncaring? It is simple, I do not believe that I have a right to anyone else's labor. I do not feel I have the right to put a price on the work that someone else does. I believe I have the right to choose and that right will inevitably get me what i want, at the price I want it at.
The healthcare system in this country is not broken, however, the legal system that surrounds it is. When laws go into effect that do not proportionally protect providers as well as patients, the market will adjust in order to create wealth equally. That is to say where laws go in that disproportionally support the consumer, the provider will balance it out by offering a cheaper quality product or charge more for the original product.
The very law that will force healthcare upon this nation, will destroy the quality of care we all currently have access to. It will diminish the system now that rewards the companies that have the best services at the lowest price, for a monopoly controlled by congress. The government will be running our healthcare system.
When the free market is truly free, competition and the consumer determine what the fair market value for the care they receive is. The reason healthcare costs so much now, is that the market surrounding it is not entirely free. Not in the least bit. It is surrounded by arbitrary laws that benefit trial lawyers who can easily file lawsuits against doctors for practically anything. Even with our current unfair market for healthcare the prices are PHENOMENAL!!!!
To go in for a standard visit and a checkup it can be around $50-$100. The majority of people only need to do this once a year. Now lets get crazy lets say you need a lot of work done and you get a lot of tests done every year. Lets say every year you need $3,000 worth of visits (About the average for Americans). And for some reason you are not taking advantage of the many private charities, or free clinics that RIDDLE the cities across the united states.
Lets look at other things we spend money on.
Women on average will spend $520 a year on hair cuts. If they color and buy product it can be around $1130 per year.
Americans spend about $1100 a year on coffee.
We spend $2,827 a year on entertainment.
We Spend $454 a year on alcohol.
We Spend $303 a year on smoking products
How about things that are essential to life...
We spend a whopping $17,115 on average per year for housing.
$6,462 for food.
$8,583 for transportation
My point is that we spend a lot of money on a lot of things. Americans in particular spend a lot of money on a lot of things that are "wants" and not "needs".
My question is, when did the cost of healthcare become so outrageous? Is it outrageous? I can live longer without healthcare than I can without food, or shelter, or even transportation to get the things I need. Why are we not demanding that those items be considered rights, and therefore free?
I am blessed with the gift of health, I attribute it to my lifestyle choices but also luck of the draw. I spend about $200 a year on doctors visits. Just normal check ups. I think this is a steal. A guy or girl who went to college for the better part of a decade, racking up bills near half a million to get a degree that makes them competent at saving and maintaining life, and i get to see him or her for only $50 (if I don't have insurance). Maintenance on my car every year is about $1000. Hell they even say on average bicycle maintenance is around $300 per year.
My point is that yes with a free market healthcare could improve. However for what you get, the price is pretty damn good now.
I know what you are all saying, "But Joe, that's only if you are healthy." This is true, but thank goodness for private charity and hospital payment plans. Very sick people have been getting free care for a long time now. This has only become an issue, because liberals make it an issue. Then they convince people that a corrupt government is the only solution.
I always wondered why all the free health proponents don't get together and form a non profit insurance company that takes donations to offer insurance to the poor???
When I did not have health insurance, and I went to get care, I got it, no questions asked. I also was 22 and had no money or a job. The hospital deferred my payments until I got a job , than accepted $5 a month, until it was paid or I put more in. They ended up cutting the bill for me after a certain time to do me a favor.
Healthcare is not a right, because it only exists due to labor form other people. The only way anyone can offer "free" care is to either take money from some people, and give it to others for the care (TAX), or force providers to give care to everyone regardless of the actual value of the service provided (Mandate and law). Obamacare is obscenely unconstitutional. It will do to healthcare what government subsidiesed student loans are doing to higher education. The existence will inflate the price regardless of quality. This will force the quality to drop dramatically because the money is now funneling through bureaucrats and not into providers who would use the profit to advance and become more competitive. If businesses have to compete against each other for our business the consumer wins. If there is no need or incentive to improve, they will not.
The rich will continue to get phenomenal world class care because they can afford to pay full price for it, while the middle class and lower class will receive whats left. This in turn will cause more outrage and ironically cause more and more people to vote liberal Democrat.
The job of the federal government is not to provide healthcare, education, food, or anything monitary. In a truly FREE society, the job of the government is to provide a means of protection as you or I pursue those very things at our own discretion. The cost of healthcare will drop if the government lets it. Common Sense regulation, mixed with open, free market capitalism will get us the best and cheapest healthcare money can buy.
It is no coincidence that the rich from other countries come here and pay full price for procedures they can get for free at home.
Obama has not only jeopardized the quality of care that everyone already has access to, but somehow he is promising to reduce the overall cost by adding a middle man...the federal government.
As mentioned before, watch this movie below. This is the beauty of the free market. It shows that it is not just a doctor visit you are buying with your $50, it is a network of millions of people working together to get you the service you require. Nothing is free, and when you really think about it. I cant believe how amazingly cheap everything is.
When Governor Walker took office, the Wisconsin state economy and
Illinois state economy were pretty similar. Both had major deficits,
both were having issues with unions, both were headed in the wrong
direction very fast.
This led Wisconsinites to elect Governor Walker. During his campaign
he promised fiscal responsibility form the state, and that’s exactly
what we got. Walker pushed through ACT 10 almost immediately. Basically
when school boards were budgeting every year there was a major
percentage of the budget that they had no control over, most changes to a
budget had to be voted by the Public Union, of course they never cared
about deficit as long as they got their benefits and perks. ACT 10 gave
the school boards (and essentially taxpayers) the ability to amend the
entire budget not just a small percentage of it.
One of the major amendments was shopping around for health plans,
instead of automatically reinstating the rate hiked union insurance
plan. Teachers were also required to pay 12% towards their OWN health
plan (terrible right?). This one change took a $3+billion dollar deficit
to a $256 Million surplus in only half a year! The act saved teacher
jobs, precious art and music programs, and other things slated to be cut
to try and harness the budget shortfalls. The very things unions would
be happy to cut to protect their own interests.
Illinois decided to go the liberal path, they caved to the unions.
Illinois leadership decided to raise taxes by 67% on small business
owners to try and cover their budget gap. So where is Illinois today?
Can you imagine a world where the beacon on the hill of freedom is no
longer the United States of America? I can, and it is that vision that
has the political fire in me burning so brightly. I have said this in
other posts, but being a real conservative takes a lot of patients, and a
level of hardness. You cannot be weak and a conservative in our current
world.
Being a conservative kind of sucks actually, we would want nothing
more than the utopia that liberals speak of. A world where people have
enough of what they need and are happy. The major difference between a
Conservative like me and a liberal is that we know the best way to get
there, and it is not the way we are currently going.
We know that when people succeed, it breeds more success organically.
The liberal belief is that the only way to succeed is to lie, cheat,
and steal. So it is no wonder that they lie, cheat, and steal to get
what they want. But I digress, CANADA!!!
At least they are going the right direction...
Canada, if anyone has been watching, is smart (or at least they are
getting smarter). They have been watching the world, and obviously they
have been taking notes. They have been watching socialism fail all over
the place, they have been watching our impending doom, and then they
have even taken pages from our founding fathers. I am referring to this
video below.
It features Pierre Poilievre, MP for Nepean-Carleton. He spoke to the
Canadian government regarding the 2012 budget. As the explanation on
the video states, he stood up to defend Economic Freedom for all
Canadians.
I truly believe Mitt Romney will be the next president of these
United States, I say probably because Liberals tend to take losses
pretty hard. They even anticipate losing by complaining, or over polling
democrats.
I have started to notice a heavy flow of excuse making by my Liberal
friends on the internet already. There are claiming that Republicans
will “steal” the election somehow. Or have even hinted at fraud! If you
do not see the irony and hypocrisy in the last statement, then you are
on your own.
With Michal Moore’s wonderfully articulate video,
the blatant lies from the left about where Romney stands, and what he
will do as President. Plus polling machines obviously hacked to turn
Romney votes into Obama votes. They will not take this loss lightly and
ironically are the ones actually trying to steal it. It is the age old
saying, if your partner is constantly accusing you of cheating, it is
because there probably doing it already. Continue at DS&P Mag
The irony of the Government declaring war on inanimate objects, or a
group of people’s current fiscal state has always baffled me. It is
almost like the government is writing its own epitaph without knowing
it. You cannot win a war against nothing. The wars on Drugs, Poverty,
wealthy, etc. are all losing battles.
You think prohibition would have taught us that if you want to make
something popular, make it illegal. Even when the Government hinted at
banning FourLoko it made sales go through the roof. I didn’t even know
what FourLoko was until they tried getting rid of it.
But i digress, we as a people spend a lot of energy and time trying
to control the choices and lives of other people. I could talk a lot
about legalization of drugs but I will save it for later.
What I want to talk about is the recent report from the Senate Budget
Committee; they compiled data from the Census, the office of Management
and Budget, and the CRS (Congressional Research Service).
In my most humble opinion, this single report should be the main
focus for the rest of the election. It is only evidence that we need to
support the smaller government argument. It is major proof that the
government cannot solve our issues for us and truly, TRULY does not
work.
To my conservative friends this will not be anything new. To all the others, it might just change your vote!
In 2011, according to the census the number of households below the
poverty line was 16,807,795. That is a family of four in one house with a
total income of $22,350 per year or less. Now for the mind bottling
part.
One thousand and twenty-five billion dollars was spent on programs
meant to fight poverty. Sure that is a lot of money, but that is not the
mind numbing paradox that is our government. It is the fact that when
divided by the number of poverty stricken households, it turns out we
spend $61,194 per impoverished household doing it!!!
Or put another way, we spend sixty thousand dollars per year per poor household fighting poverty!!!
The republicans on the Senate Budget committee released a note:
A congressional report from CRS recently revealed that
the United States now spends more on means-tested welfare than any other
item in the federal budget—including Social Security, Medicare, or
national defense. Including state contributions to the roughly 80
federal poverty programs, the total amount spent in 2011 was
approximately $1 trillion. Federal spending alone on these programs was
up 32 percent since 2008.
If this doesn’t change your vote then congratulations you are the
47%, there is nothing anyone can do for you, and have a wonderful day. Read More
After CNN of all news networks challenged Obama's new shiny booklet claiming to be a plan. The Obama camp was not particularly happy with the holes they poked in it. So they responded with the presidents budget. Thus damming them even more because Obama is lying. HE IS LYING!! He will not reduce the deficit he will add to it and his own budget proves it. It must be very embarrasing to be a Obama supporter who uses the word math to attck us. Apparently they have failed to look at the presidents plan first.
With every stimulus, Obama has been redistributing Federal Tax
Dollars without goods or services being returned, thus lowering the
value of each dollar spent by someone who didn’t “earn” it.
What does that mean in a stagnant economy? Well, if you don’t get a
raise, or make more money, you actually made less. Inflation is the
biggest hidden tax that no one understands. Wait. Strike that. A lot of
conservatives understand it.
So how does the almighty government solve this problem? Raise the
minimum wage, of course. Or tax all of the evil, greedy rich people
since they have all of our money. (Right??)
This sounds okay in theory (to a liberal), except that when you sweep
a floor for $8 an hour (or whatever fair market value for a good floor
sweeper is) and all of the sudden the government deems that job to be
worth $10 an hour, that further inflates the actual value of the job or
task being performed.
It’s all in an effort to get votes. The left gets votes because they
are better at making up hypothetical lies. You can’t prove them true or
false. Example: “Romney hates poor people.” (WHAT THE F***?!)
To put it in perspective, a gallon of gas is worth the exact same as
it was 50 years ago. (I said “is worth,” not “costs.”) I could even
speculate with modern technology that the price should have dropped.
That is mind boggling to think of so I will use a more mind-friendly
example. Computers. They are 100 times more powerful and 10,000 times
less costly than they used to be. Think about it. In 1951, the UNIVAC I
was sold by Remington Rand. They sold 46 machines at roughly $800,000
apiece. Here are the stats on that machine.
Speed: 1,905 operations per second
Input/output: magnetic tape, unityper, printer
Memory type: delay lines, magnetic tape
Technology: serial vacuum tubes, delay lines, magnetic tape
Size: 943 cubic feet Shorter nerd translation: Slow, big, and expensive.
Now fast forward to today. You can buy an Android Netbook for about $100.
800×480 7-inch LCD, 128 MB DDR2 (up to 256 MB Optional)
1 GB SSD (up to 4 GB Optional)
ARM11 533 MHz 32bit CPU
Touchscreen Shorter nerd translation: Fast, small, in-expensive
In 60 years, innovation has taken the cost of a computer from
$800,000 to $100 while expanding the processing power, shrinking the
size from a warehouse to your pocket, and enabling them to communicate
(literally) through air to one another. So why do commodities cost more?
The simple answer is Regulation, taxation, and inflation in an attempt
to control the market to favor one or more people in a certain way.
$1.00 in 1913 would require $21.60 in 2007 in order to match value. That’s a 96% devaluation of our currency in 94 years.
Gas has not changed much, our engines have become better at burning
it, our technology can get at it easier and cheaper than ever before.
Other energy sources like Nat Gas are coming to light which will lower
demand for oil. Yet the cost continues to rise.
Romney has hit the nail on the head when he preached, “Fair
regulation in a free market with limited government intervention is best
for Americas growth.”
Competition is a good thing! If I make a plunger and you open a
company that makes a better one, I have to make an even better one at
the same price (or cheaper) or risk going away into the ether. In the
end, the guy buying the plunger wins. Our current tax code has been
gifted an addition 13,000 pages of new regulations from Obamacare alone.
How will taxing companies that compete to make cheaper more affordable
healthcare, help patients get more affordable coverage? How about
reasonable tort reform?
Romney’s plan is simple. (Which is probably why people don’t
understand it.) Our economy, and the wealth in it, is not a finite
number. Wealth can be created out of thin air. If I have something in
abundance that you do not have and that you want, and you have something
in abundance that I do not have and that I want, couldn’t we trade each
other those things and BOTH be better off?
Take apart your iPhone (not literally). All of its components are not
worth very much to you and me. Yet when Apple puts them together and
writes software for it, I decide I’d rather have the phone than some
money and Apple decides they’d rather have my money than another phone
in stock. We are both richer in the transaction and therefore wealth is
created.
This is how you can lower taxes and create more wealth, which in turn creates more tax revenue.
In short, you cannot entice growth and innovation by penalizing those
who innovate and grow. Obama has effectively made becoming
independently wealthy a bad thing.
I want to be rich. And I want to become rich the way Mitt Romney did.
He should be on a freaking trading card. On the back it would say, “In
America, hard work and determination can get you anything.”
With the election only days away, it’s crucial to try and wipe out
and ignore the blur of political commercials. I am from Wisconsin, which
is a swing state. The only commercials I see during prime time TV are
political.
Needless to say, I have to hear the BS from both sides. I call it all
BS because, unfortunately, that is what the majority of Americans base
their vote on. They appeal to people who watch and like the show “Honey
Boo Boo.” (I am sooooo glad I can say that I have never seen that show.)
I spend almost every minute I have available outside of my job (and
four kids) attempting to open the minds of those people. The ones who
vote because of an advertisement on TV, whether it’s a vote for Romney
or Obama, I challenge that they dig deeper. When you take a closer look
at these politicians, it’s not hard to see that there are many
similarities. However, there are huge fundamental differences
when it comes to vision. So I challenge all of you to look at both of
these men. Research for yourself what they have both done with their
lives. You will see two very different visions on what America should
be.
All we hear from the left are issues that lack substance in the real
world. Big Bird, binders, war on women, bayonets. What do we hear from
the right? Economy, jobs and economy. Did I mention jobs?
I really don’t care what they say. I care more about what they do,
have done, or, more importantly, have not done in their lives. I also
could give a crap about Romney. I don’t worship him the way people
worship Obama. I would even fathom to say no conservative worships any
conservative leader that way. We worship the idea of a free America, and
we wholeheartedly back the candidate who can best move us in that
direction.
Obama followers are so far up his ass that he could set an orphan on
fire and they would get eccentric over his “Heat for the Homeless”
initiative. Romney could shake the hand of a homeless person and the
media would report that they cannot believe he is touching a homeless
person.
I will be the first one to critique Romney when he is president, even
more so than Obama. If I vote for someone, it’s for a purpose, not
because of popularity. If Romney does not live up to the expectations I
have, or cuts short of the promises that he has made, I will be pissed.
Obama has been getting killed, in debates and public appearances,
because his toughest questions from the last four years have been from
“The View.” Will Romney be the best president ever? I don’t know. I’m
not as good at telling the future as Chris Matthews is. We do know that
he HAS been very successful and HAS met promises he has made in the
past. He HAS balanced budgets, and saved jobs. So logically we know he
probably can do it again.
However, in my lifetime at least, Obama has been the worst. It’s why
he fell apart in the first debate. He couldn’t successfully debate his
record with a four-year-old. Yet his cult covers his ass. The very
people he has betrayed have come to his rescue. It’s like watching “Mean
Girls.” They all love Regina even though she is a horrible person to
them. (I wonder what character Matthews would be??)
What really, really makes me lose my marbles, are the people
who hate Bush for the exact same reason they love Obama. YOU ARE THE
47% ROMNEY IS TALKING ABOUT!! “He has doubled down on the Bush term as
far as the deficit goes.” “He is Bush 2.0.” “No, 4.0.” All democrats can
do is blame and point the same fingers they have been for the last
eight years. Forget about the democratic majority for the end of Bush’s
term, or the full control of the federal government for the first two
years of the Obama term.
The 2010 Tea Party congressional sweep would have been a wake-up call
for any normal person. But for a liberal it just means that we are all
dumb, bitter clingers who hate Obama because he is black. They don’t get
that we elected a congress to stop Obama not because of the color of
his skin, but the content of his character. Who knows where we would be
without them?
Mitt Romney has been a successful businessman for over 25 years. That
sentence alone holds more water than anything Obama claims to have done
or has done. He saved many jobs and businesses with private money (and I
bet women worked at some of those businesses). He donated his entire
inheritance to charity so he could pursue his own wealth. He has worked
as a public servant for many years for zero pay! He is the
shining example of an American: serving his country that has been so
good to him in for nothing in return. So what does “The View” hit him
on? “Well, he never served in the military.” So… Neither has Obama!!!
In contrast, Obama has taken and been handed everything. He has lost
billions of public money in businesses. His friends were literally
terrorists that loathe our country. Obama’s answer to fixing the economy
is hiring 100,000 more teachers. ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!
He truly believes it will work because that is all he knows. In
Obamaland, apparently the only types of employees are super wealthy
people who do no work and steal money, teachers, road workers, the poor,
and politicians.
If we let Romney run the government like he has run his businesses
and the state of Massachusetts, we can get back on the right path. The
tax plan and path to prosperity that they are pushing, was from a joint
commission of both Republicans and Democrats, put forth by Obama. They
came out with their report and Obama didn’t like it so he said, “Screw
you guys. Let’s do another stimulus.”
There is a lot to be said about the statement: “Obama supporters are
people who think I should be more upset about what Mitt Romney does with
his own money, than what Obama has done with mine.”
I work. Romney believes I should keep more of what I earn from my
labor. Obama thinks he has the right to take more of it away in order to
be fair.
This is so far the BEST representation of conservatism I have seen on the internet. Please watch and spread!
If I didn't love blogging so much this would be my last post ever! :-)
I am honored to say that I have been asked to contribute to DS&P Magazine. Please patronize the site and listen in to the Donlyn Turnbull Show w/Tim King on Thursdays.
I would give you more details but I will make you click on the link to find out more!
So on Facebook i was trying to have a civil debate with a liberal about why government should not be involved in healthcare. Here is yet another example of the tolerant left. (Notice i am even compromising against my religious beliefs)
After my post yesterday about CEO's. I thought it might be good to back everything up with a little perspective. As I stated yesterday, people BELIEVE it is the wealthy CEO's that are greedy and that the rest of us are being bled to feed their need. REALITY CHECK!!!!!
Exhibit A
Mitt Romney's 2011 Taxes
Adjusted Gross Income: $13,696,951
Charitable Giving: $ 2,250,772
Total Federal Taxes: $ 1,935,708 (That's Million with an M)
So his his percentages paid in taxes were 14%
His percentage paid in Charitable donations were 16%
Now lets compare that to the average American family who make up the (give or take) 50% who are not super rich and also pay taxes.
Average Income: $45.000
Average Taxes Paid: $5,060
Average Charitable Giving: $900
Average Percent Paid to federal taxes: 11%
Average percent of charitable donations: 2%
Romney has an income of roughly 304 times that of an average American, yet he is taxes at 382 times what the average American pays in taxes. Not to mention he gave roughly 2,500 times what the average American gives to charity.
If Romney paid .5% he would have paid $68,484 in taxes which compared is still 13 TIMES what an average American pays.
Are you getting the picture. the percentage doesn't matter, the number behind it does. If you do not understand percentages well enough to know that 1% for me is nowhere near 1% for Romney than shut your mouth.
SO you must be asking yourself, "Ok Joe, if Romney's is not the problem than who or what is?" I am glad you asked that fake voice in my head that mimics every liberal conversation i have ever had ever.
Time for the perspective
Get it?
On the scale that our federal gov. spends, Mitt Romney, with all of his wealth and taxes are all but a spec in the register.
The federal government spends about $6,750,00 a MINUTE!!!!! or even worse sounding $112,500 a SECOND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That means Romney's taxes would cover about 3 seconds of one day.
If they took everything Romney made it would cover about 2.03 minutes of one day. However since you took everything from him, you wouldn't get any taxes out of him next year.
Conservatives have been on the brink of going crazy trying to explain to the close minded liberals that there simply are not enough people in this country who pay taxes to cover these costs. NO MATTER WHAT THE RATE IS!!!!
We have said it a thousand times before and I am going to say it again.
We do not ahve a tax problem, or a percentage problem, hell we dont even have a loophole problem*, as much as we have a spending problem.
*I am against most if not all subsidies and corporate loopholes, I am in favor of a flat tax, I just recognize that the crack in the damn should not be fixed before the gaping hole.
I have decided to get upset about this now. I have always thought the topic Malarkey. For some reason, the traction is gaining on the topic, so I figured I would vent about it. What I am upset about, is the notion that the "CEO's" or other private businessmen and women are responsible for why our country is failing, and we need to reclaim what they have taken from us.
It was hard for me to even write that last sentence because of how utterly absurd it was. All I am hearing from my Lib friends is how evil and greedy these private business people are. All they do is take and take and the rest of us are screwed, they say. So it is time for me to post the one question that without fail unravels anything a lib ever has to say, ever.....Why? and How?
Why is it their fault? Why is it their responsibility now? Why are you so affected by someone who.....doesn't affect you? How do you know they are greedy? How do you know they do not contribute? How do you know what they do with their money?
You should see heads spin when I ask that series of questions after I the evil greedy statement.
What is hitting me hard is not the fact that people actually believe this stuff, it is the realization of how judgmental people can be. How easily people can be led astray with very limited information if not outright lies. I have long said, "Opinions are high where facts are scarce." This could not be more true about the way Obama and Co. has twisted the countries view on our job creators. YES THEY ARE!!!!! JOB CREATORS. They take risks, build companies, and organizations that employ hundreds to thousands of people.
What really brought this to light was a recent conversation I have had with a friend. We were discussing Steve Wynn. For those who live in a cave. Steve is the CEO of Wynn Resorts. He said on Monday that he was sitting on his thumbs
with over a billion dollars tied up because he was unsure what
government program the Obama administration would unveil next, and
stressed that he was “afraid of the president.”
Steve is very wealthy net worth is around 2.5 billion. He would fall under that evil greedy category, however, one thing we learned during his interview is the type of person Steve is. Here are some snippets from the sit down.
"I've created about 250,000 direct and indirect jobs,
according to the State of Nevada's measurement. If the number is
250,000, that's exactly 250,000 more than this president [has
created.]... I'll be damned if I want to have [President Obama] lecture
me about small business and jobs. I'm a job creator. Guys like me [and
Mitt Romney] are job creators, and we don't like having a bulls-eye painted on our back[s].
"The president has tried to put himself between me and my
employees [through] class warfare, by deprecating and calling [us, the]
group that makes money, "Billionaires and millionaires who don't pay
their share." I gave 120% of my salary and bonus away last year to
charities, as I do most years.
"I can't stand the idea of being demagogued; that is, put
down, by a president who's never created any jobs and who doesn't even
understand how the economy works."I'm afraid of [another term for]
President Obama. I have no idea what goofy idea, what crazy
anti-business program [his] administration will come up with. I have no
idea. And, I have to tell you John, that every business guy around the
country is frightened of [President] Barack Obama and the way he
thinks."
You would be hard pressed to believe this guy voted for Barack Obama in 08 and is a registered Democrat, but he did and is.
So when I pressed my friend about Steve, his response blew me away, and made me realize the real issue exploited by the left.
My friend said to me, "Well if all CEO's were like Steve, we would be a lot better off."
Re-read that response.....
So what I asked him next is what made him really think. How do you know other CEO's are not like this?
Where facts are scarce, opinions are high! Obama has been trashing the "faceless" CEO. He has been attacking someone who theoretically does not exist! When you attack an enemy that doesn't exist they cannot defend themselves.
All of the sudden, and rightfully so, these "evil" CEO's are starting to speak out. They have reached a point where they fear our president more than the potential backlash form the public.
A REGISTERED DEM WHO VOTED FOR OBAMA IN 08 AND CREATES THOUSANDS OF JOBS JUST SAID "I AM AFRAID OF THIS PRESIDENT."
I have had the wonderful opportunity in my position to meet many very wealthy CEO's. I have yet to meet the one they like to show in the movies. The guy who would throw anyone under the bus to make a buck. In most cases, I am told stories about giving up paychecks so they could make payroll for the rest of the employees. Not taking a vacation for 5 years! Not being able to turn it off at night. Stress induced medical conditions. Don't get me wrong, I don't think we need to "give" them anything. However, when you hear what it takes to become successful and wealthy. I also do not believe we should be discouraging them from continuing by taking more away.
I do typically ask these people why. I ask why they push themselves so hard. The answer is very rarely just for money. Most want to revolutionize an industry. Make life easier for people. REDUCE THE COST OF HEALTHCARE!!! They also want to get to a point financially where they can checkout, and live off of the fruits of THEIR labor.
Maybe it is me just being a conservative, but the last thing I thought before or after meeting these people was. You owe ME. I know you had 5 to 10 years of sleepless worrying and stress but now you owe me. Someone who never worked for you, or bought any product you made. What it made me realize is that very few people would think that either. So WHY do they?
My conclusion is that they have never met the people they are trained to hate. I hope more CEO's come out, tell their stories, and we can bury this failure of a president.
Bill Whittle does it again, exposing what some of us already know. That the majority of media and people who's perception of things manipulate what other people think are very liberal.
Bill is typically a little more laid back in my opinion. However he really lays into them in this one!
Medical Records: Sealed
Travel Records: Sealed
Academic Records: Sealed
These are not the stories you are looking for. Move Along.
After being told by the tolerant left who the real Mitt Romney is, I decided to look on my own. They typically do not hold the same standards for both sides. Especially after the infamous 47% comment (which is true and accurate by the way). They really were out to dig up dirt on one of the cleaner politicians out there. Here is a great summary on the type of guy Mitt is.
Here is the question that was
asked that generated the Romney "47%" statement plus the ENTIRE Romney
response.
Question: “For the past three years, all everybody’s been told is,
“Don’t worry. We’ll take care of you.” How are you going to do it, in
two months before the elections to convince everybody, you’ve got to
take care of yourself?”
Romney: “Uh, well there are 47%
of the people who will VOTE for the President no matter what. All
right, there are 47% who are with him, who are dependent upon the
government, who believe that, that they
are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for
them, who believe that they are entitled to healthcare, to food, to
housing, to you name it. That that’s an entitlement. And the
government should give it to them. And they will VOTE for this
President no matter what. And the, the President starts off with
48,49, 4--, he starts off with a huge number. These are people who pay
no income tax. 47 percent of Americans pay no income tax. So our
MESSAGE of low taxes doesn’t connect. He’ll be out there talking about
tax cuts for the rich. I mean, that’s what they sell every, every 4
years. And, uh, so my job is not to worry about those few. I’ll never
CONVINCE them that they should take personal responsibility and care for
their lives. What I have to do is to CONVINCE the 5 to 10 percent in
the center that are independents, that are thoughtful, that look at
VOTING one way or the other depending upon in some cases emotion,
whether they like the guy or not…...”
Romney is not saying he doesn't care about those people. He is being truthful, he will not win those people's votes no matter what he says. Libs are so blindly supportive of Obama that he could set an orphan on fire and they would champion his heat for the homeless initiative.
Example/Case/and Point
Said the 47%....... regardless of if it is true or not.
If anyone actually thinks that our economy, and our position in the world is better now than even 1 year ago. There is no hope within the next 30 days for them to see the light. It is NOT Romney's job to go for them and preach to them now. He need to get votes, focus on the independents, and moderate dems who will be the voice of reason.
Lets look at jut some of the things that define Mitt Romney... keep in mind this is all HIS money.
Obama doesn't have this kind of record with YOUR money.
ROMNEY’S ALTRUISM / CHARITY
- Gave away his
inheritance in 1998 to start / help fund the “George W. Romney Institute
of Public Management” at BYU (his father, George Romney, died in 1995).
- Donated his entire Olympics salary and severance package ($1.4M) to charity.
- While governor of Massachusetts, at HIS request, served the people of MA at the salary of $1/year (that’s right, ONE DOLLAR).
- Voluntarily served, without pay or re-compensation of funds, as a
Mormon missionary for 30 months in his late teens/early twenties (you
may not agree with what he taught but the fact is he did it on a
volunteer basis with the belief that he was helping to bring people
closer to Jesus).
- Volunteer service to community as a church
head pastor for 13 years all with ZERO pay (that's right, none); 5 years
as a “bishop” and 8 years as a “stake president”.
- Would give
ALL his Presidential salary ($1.6 Million total) back to the American
taxpayers if elected (yes, he's on record as committing to this).
- Based on a net worth of $200-250M and his constant
activity/involvement in his church, The Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints (the ‘Mormons’), has given at least $20-25 MILLION to
his church. (LDS church members pay tithing; one-tenth of what a person
earns. The LDS church uses tithing donations to build and maintain
churches and temples, print literature about Jesus Christ, etc. Can
anyone dispute this is not “charitable” giving?) BTW, that is NOT
including other charitable contributions to the LDS church in the form
of “fast offerings”. Go look it up.
- He also chose to NOT
receive any Social Security payments upon turning 65 because, again, he
knows he can take care of himself and therefore should not rely on our
tax dollars to help fund his daily living. (BTW, that’s HIS money that
he’s leaving in government accounts.)
- Shut down most of his
company, Bain Capital, and, at Romney’s expense, moved most of his
employees to New York City to help find an employee’s missing daughter;
set up a base of operations in a hotel room, posted thousands of flyers,
talked to hundreds of shop owners, talked to thousands of people on the
street, coordinated efforts with the police, worked with the media to
air their search on TV. And…..when they finally did find her, a doctor
said she was in such poor condition from a drug overdose she may not
have survived another day.
- Cares about his fellow man: gave $3,000,000 to charity in 2010 and
$4,000,000 to charity in 2011; that’s $7 MILLION in just 2 years. Would
you have done that? Romney did.
Never hit a man while he is down...unless its with words, and the man is a socialist. ~Me
WOW! That is all I have to say about last night. That makes me the one millionth conservative blogger with no followers to comment that way :-). However right after I felt extreme joy, i felt extreme disappointment. Not in Romney, or in the conservative message, but with half of our country.
My disappointment comes from the fact that this was truly the first challenge Obama has had on his presidency. The people who brought us minute to minute critiques of President Bush have been purposefully, and blatantly ignoring Obama's failures and coverups. It disappoints me most, because it is so prevalent, we just expect them to cover and lie for the President, and in a way we are... ok with that. Last night was not Romney just beating Obama at a debate. Last night Romney shed light on the lies that Mainstream media bestow upon us every day.
I have been hearing that Romney flipped on all of his opinions and views last night. At first I was all like, "That's preposterous! His views are the same since he started". Then I realized that they ARE the opposite of what he has been saying. Check that! His opinions and views are the exact opposite of what Chris Matthews, Bill Mahr, Hollywood, and other Lib lapdogs have been telling you he has been saying. I know we say people are brainwashed by the main stream media, but it has never been sooo evident.
What we also learned last night, is that Obama has no idea how the world works outside of government programs. His one answer to the economy and jobs was to hire more teachers, and give more money to the schools. It was almost like he took on the likeness of Trumpka right on stage. Mr. President how will we pay for them? We spend more on education than any other country and education is
slipping. More money does not = better anything unless there is a solid
foundation for growth.
Romney won the debate by telling hard truth. Free people with fair regulation produce more, and better goods and services than a monopolized government (I still don't know why that is the hard truth..but it is apparently). If private companies had a monopoly on a service with seemingly endless funding, they too would produce crap at a slow pace. In a free fairly regulated economy those "companies" go away at the hands of the consumer.
Last night proved that socialism in the face of a Constitutional Republic does not stand a chance.
Government run entities, that brings me to my next important topic. Government failure at almost everything. One of my favorite critics of big government is John Stossel. He doesn't pander to the ridiculous, he looks at what works and what doesn't. Then he finds out why what is working is working, and why what isn't working isn't working. Then he compares the two. Just like the media, it is sad that he is a pioneer in this way of reporting, should be common sense. I was reading an article of his on RealClearPolitics.com. The title was ' We Fund Dependency' it is an "expose" on government programs that are out there to help people find jobs.
Places like the Manhattan Job's Center and New York's Workforce1. What he and his intern found is that The "Job's" centers run by the government do not actually help people find jobs.
"They told me they don't do that. 'We sign people up for food stamps.' I
tried another jobs center. They told me to enroll for unemployment
benefits."
This is after he went around the neighborhood and found nearly 40 entry level job openings. One restaurant owner told him he would hire 12 people if workers would just apply.
He then sent his intern into the lions den...
"I explained that I didn't want handouts; I wanted a job. I was told
to go to 'WorkForce1,' a New York City program. At WorkForce1, the
receptionist told me that she couldn't help me since I didn't have a
college degree. She directed me to another center in Harlem. In Harlem, I
was told that before I could get help, I had to come back for an 8:30
a.m. 'training session.'"
Our government helps you apply for handouts immediately, but forces you through a maze if you want to work.
"WorkForce1's website says to arrive 30 minutes early, so I did,"
Zoelle said. "A security guard told me the building was closed. At 9:15,
Workforce1 directed 30 of us into a room where we were told that
WorkForce1 directs candidates to jobs and provides a resource room with
'free' phone, fax and job listings and helps people apply for
unemployment insurance and disability handouts. This seemed like the
only part of the presentation when people took notes.
"One lady told me that she comes to WorkForce1 because it helps her
collect unemployment. One asked another, 'What do you want to do?' The
second laughed, 'I want to collect!' One told me, 'I've been coming here
17 months; this place is a waste of time.'
"Finally, I met with an 'adviser.' She told me I lacked experience. I
know this. I asked for any job she thought I was qualified for, and she
scheduled an interview at Pret, a food chain that trains employees. At
Pret, I learned that my 'interview' was just a weekly open house,
publicized on the company's website. Anyone could walk in and apply.
Workforce1 offered no advantage. Despite my 'scheduled interview,' I
waited 90 minutes before meeting a manager. He told me that WorkForce1
had 'wasted my time, as they always do.' He said, 'They never call,
never ask questions.' He prefers to hire people who seek out jobs on
their own, like those who see Pret ads on Craigslist.'"
Sad but true reality for some people
This is how the government works at almost every level. We do not need more funding for these programs, we need to re-examine the use of the programs we have. Like the free market, the gov. should have the programs compete and get rid of the ones that are wasteful.
Here is a link to the full story, please read it all.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/10/03/we_fund_dependency_115648.html
I have watched and followed these videos since the first one was made. If you ever need a pick me up, this does it.
Just raw people, in there environments, enjoying a moment in life.
I implore you to watch all of Matt's videos. They are all truly beautiful.
Dems and Libs alike are in super cocaine driven media mode because Mitt Romney is one squeaky clean guy. Think about it.... I mean really ruminate on it. The only....ONLY attack that they have been perpetrating is that he is successful and created more jobs in his private life than Obama has as the President. Sure they focus on the individuals who might be bitter that the company they worked at closed, but he has overwhelmingly created more jobs and wealth than that lost. I always like to say, imagine an America where workers are in short supply? You want higher pay, you want better benefits. Create an America where businesses have to fight for workers.
Obama has made an abundance in the supply for workers and a very low demand for work. Dems are delusional though they still think it was Bush. Sure he was a spender and he had wars. New data has pretty much proven that those expenses have not caused our deficit it has been social programs gone wild. Fact it did start under Bush. Fact it was mostly the dems.
How you ask??????
DO YOU REMEMBER JANUARY 3, 2007?
The day the Democrats took over was not January 22nd 2009, it was
actually January 3rd 2007, which was the day the Democrats took over
the House of Representatives and the Senate, at the very start of the
110th Congress.
The Democrat Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the
first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995.
For those who are listen
ing to the liberals propagating the fallacy
that everything is "Bush's Fault", think about this: January 3rd, 2007
was the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress.
At the time:
The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77
The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5%
The Unemployment rate was 4.6%
George Bush's Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB GROWTH
Remember the day...
January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House
Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate
Banking Committee. The economic meltdown that happened 15 months
later was in what part of the economy? BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES!
Unemployment... to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping
5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac FIASCOES!
Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie - starting in
2001 because it was financially risky for theUS economy.
And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND FreddieMac?
OBAMA And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie? OBAMAand the Democrat Congress.
So when someone tries to blame Bush. REMEMBER JANUARY 3rd, 2007....
THE DAY THE DEMOCRATS TOOK OVER!"
Budgets do not come from the White House. They come from Congress and
the party that controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democrat Party.
Furthermore, the Democrats controlled the budget process for 2008 & 2009 as well as 2010 & 2011.
In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused
them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got toughon
spending increases.
For 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid bypassed George Bush
entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running
until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a
massive omnibus spending bill to complete the 2009 budgets.
And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that
very Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he
signed the omnibus bill as President to complete 2009.
If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the 2007 deficit, the
last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five
years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After
that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that
includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets.
If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself. In a
nutshell, what Obama is saying is " I inherited a deficit that I voted
for and then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since
January 20th.
To me this is one of the best videos Bill has made to date. It explains the most basic problem our country faces today. I have always believed in this, the people who complain about money so much are the ones who want it the most. I always called the jealous, but Bill has taken what I already believed and explained it in a better way. ENVY!
I am a conservative, I prefer to look at it that way because I don't like establishment Republicans (the few who really only look out for themselves and the wealthy)or Democrats, and Liberals are stuck in La La Land. However since we really only have a two party system, we conservatives get lumped in with what was the old idea of a republican. Like a John McCain Republican, a people pleaser who ends up not pleasing any of the people.
I am calling for a New republican platform, one that would align the rest of America and ensure we not only win in 2012, but that our party will have many years to correct the progressives "Prosperity Speed Bump".
With technology, and people getting better and better at basic math, it is becoming quite obvious that Conservatives know what it will take to get the economy going. Fair taxes, controlled social programs, and major accountability in public spending. You know that all so hated true philosophy, DON'T SPEND MORE THAN YOU TAKE IN! The only deniers are the ones who will look stupid when it works.
So why is the GOP struggling? We have these rock star conservative like Walker, Christie, and Ryan. The reformers like Romney. The up and comings like Mia Love. What is so hard?
I don't agree with this image but it sums up how the left views us.
Well the Dems have one last card to play, Passion. Thats right the only thing the Dems do better than us is play on peoples passions (I would have said Lie but we never lie). Just look at the speeches from this years DNC. They got massive applause and even a slight bump in the polls. However if you look back, they barely talked about the economy or unemployment. How the hell do they do it?
They play purely on the social issues, and the social issues will make people do crazy things. I think back to a skit from one of my favorite comedians Jim Gaffigan, he had a line in a stand up routine that hit our social culture square on the head.
In a lead in to one of his routines, he made a comment to the crowd along the lines of this, "I love being comfortable, and I want everyone here to be comfortable, and that is why I am going to talk to you about Jesus." It was funnier when he delivered it because of the sarcasm, it is also true. No two words can make a liberal go insane more than Jesus Christ (maybe Geroge Bush but you get what I am saying). I wont get in too deep, but my theory is that Libs in general think they are so much better than others, and know so much more that they are above the possibility of a higher power than themselves. You can neither prove God exists or does not exist that is why it is called "having faith".
I digress, How do we get all the independents and the leaning democrats to our side? It is simple, we accept concessions on the hottest buttons they have besides GOD. Abortion and same sex marriage.
I will begin with same sex marriage. To me it is time we let this issue go. I am not saying we all have to accept it, what I am saying as a true conservative who follows GOD and Christ we be good accepting people in GOD's image and we scale back gov. in the conservative image. I find myself asking, "Why the hell do I need a permit to get married?" Marriage is after all a religious thing. The word "marriage" derives from Middle Englishmariage, which first appears in 1250–1300 CE This in turn is derived from Old Frenchmarier (to marry) and ultimately Latinmarītāre meaning to provide with a husband or wife and marītāri meaning to get married. (Taken from Wikipedia).
I view the meanings as a moot point. I don't think that the Gov. should be involved in marriage at all. What is the point of their involvement? All i can come up with is two reasons. To fine us (marriage permit), and to tax us accordingly at the end of the year. So lets ditch the permit because I think it is unconstitutional. The tax thing is a good reason to track a "couple" especially if they recognize dependency by it.
I immediately think to myself, I had roommates and we used to be dependent on each other when we had a house, why did we not get breaks? In reality any two people who live together should be looked at the same way through the IRS beady little eye. So our platform should be to do away with Gov. recognized marriage and leave it to Religion.
Secondly Abortion. This is a hot issue for me, I know many people that have been affected by this and to me it is one of the greatest evils our planet has ever seen. It is the biggest genocide this planet has ever seen, and people are just fine with it. With that said, you will understand how important this country is to me. I think we should give up the issue. I think we should accept it as a woman's choice. SHOCKED?!?!?! Well wait, there is a major catch. Our concession on abortion would be accepted with one major guarantee.
That guarantee would be that not one single dollar or cent would ever be taken from the taxpayer to fund any abortion, and that you cannot perform an abortion once there is a detectable heartbeat. We concede to the woman's choice, but the woman has to pay for it. It sickens me everyday that my money could be used to terminate a babies life. It pisses me off even more when women and men tell me to stay out of it because I am not a woman, and I don't know what it's like.
I have one thing to say to that. If you get abortions in buildings, and by doctors that are subsidized by the government. It is my business, and I will not stay out of it. If you accept Obamacare, expect me to complain about how fat you are, how lazy you are, how you eat, how you drink, how you drive, and any other aspect of your life that I do not agree with for health reasons, because I am paying for it. You have chosen to let the government subsidize your body, you have sold your freedom for a empty promise by a man who only wants your vote, and to make a mark in history.
Our platform should be, that you are free to do what you want to yourself and your body without our intrusion, as long as we don't have to pay for it.
I think it is a very fair and common sense platform, I think it is inclusive, and I think it offers freedom to those who do not know they are slaves.
My favorite quote of the year very much explains the voter we need. "It is hard to free fools from the chains they revere."
My theory, is that making people pay for their own abortions would actually end it faster than the current method by fighting it. We are not doing well in this battle, more and more abortions happen every year, and planned parenthood gets more and more of our money.
So.......in WI, the will of the people is being held up by a couple of liberal Dane County Judges who like to use their power inappropriately. The reason they cite, is that the voter ID law is unconstitutional because it disenfranchises the voter. David Flannigans actual words are,
"the state’s new voter ID law required people who lacked
government photo ID to spend money to acquire the necessary documents —
such as birth certificates". He called that “a real cost that is imposed
on constitutionally eligible voters,” adding that was especially
“burdensome” for the elderly and disabled.
He said the ID requirement fell disproportionately on elderly people,
people of color and poor people, and said claims that the voting
process needed to be policed to prevent voter impersonation — or
fraudulent voting — were overblown and “extremely unlikely.”Link
So lets look at one group, the ones who are so burdened that they need an ID to vote. Elderly in WI (aged 65 and older) = 779,383
Percent below poverty = 7.1%
Number of Elderly 65 and Older in Poverty = 55,336
Now Since you need ID for healthcare lets eliminate the ones who have any coverage at all.
According to the same census document less than 1% of 65+ did not have some type of coverage.
or 779 people.
So of those 779 people, in order for them to not have a photo ID to vote would mean that. They do not receive disability, social security, welfare, food stamps, or other benefits from anywhere. They do not drive, have a bank account, they have never been married, never held a job, they don't live in a house or rent an apartment, they can not even cash a check, or more importantly have anybody to help them in anyway shape or form.
Unfortunately the census does not provide a narrowed down number from 779 after my list of other things that require ID. Lets be conservative though, lets say 10% still fall under that scrutiny and are still living.
We are left with 77 people who cannot vote.
Now lets look at those below poverty level.
WI has a total of 5,711,767 people in the state and 11.6% are below the poverty level.
That gives us 662,565 people who are below our countries set poverty standard.
Minus the number of people receiving food stamps since you need ID for them (469,853)
You are left with 192,712.
So of those 192,712 people, in order for them to not have a photo ID to vote
would mean that. They do not receive disability, social security,
welfare, food stamps, or other benefits from anywhere. They do not
drive, have a bank account, they have never been married, never held a
job, they don't live in a house or rent an apartment, they can not even
cash a check, or more importantly have anybody to help them in anyway shape
or form.
Just like before lets say 10% fall into this category and that they are actual people.
We are left with 1,927 people
In total I have come up with 2004 possibly disenfranchised voters.
With 72 Counties in WI, that is an average of 28 people per county(or roughly 10 people per city) that are having a difficult time voting.
In order for the dems argument to be locked would mean that these people have no way of getting to a DMV to obtain their FREE ID. However one thing I realized is that if you truly fall into this category, you do not have ANY commitments at all. You have all the time in the world to focus on two things, getting an ID and voting.
I pose this question. WHY AGAIN, IS IT SO HARD TO GET A FREE ID????????
Answer: It is not, the people who are against photo ID may use one or more of the following reasons.
-They themselves commit voter fraud
-They are aware of people who vote fraudulently and they agree with it.
-They know that in order for their politician to get elected they need the extra help.
-They just dont like that their party didn't come up with the idea.
or lastly....
-They truly believe in this magical population of people who have somehow skirted all known modern society since they turned 18, and for some reason have this unwavering passion to emerge from the cave they live in to vote and then vanish again until next election. Then they also assume each one of these people are dems.
As a last resort we could just draft some law requiring all citizens to get a government ID, since that sounds unconstitutional we can just call it a tax so it passes.
