{"id":543076,"date":"2010-04-25T23:01:21","date_gmt":"2010-04-26T03:01:21","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.personalliberty.com\/?p=13117"},"modified":"2010-04-25T23:01:21","modified_gmt":"2010-04-26T03:01:21","slug":"yellow-dogs-and-democrat-handouts","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/543076","title":{"rendered":"Yellow Dogs And Democrat Handouts"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>(Part  two of a two-part series. The first part was <em><a href=\"http:\/\/www.personalliberty.com\/liberty\/democrats-and-the-politics-of-envy\/\">Democrats And The Politics Of Envy<\/a><\/em>.)<\/p>\n<p>Ask  a yellow dog Democrat why he\u2019s a Democrat and he\u2019ll usually say it\u2019s because  the Democrat Party is the party of the working man. He believes it so strongly  that he\u2019d vote for the Democrat over anyone else, even if the Democrat on the  ticket was an old yellow dog.<\/p>\n<p>It  doesn\u2019t matter that Democrat policies have been devastating to the poor and  middle class workers in this country for almost 100 years. The poor and middle  class still turn out in droves to vote for them. Democrat politicians have  successfully positioned themselves as the party of the poor, and they\u2019ve  created an enmity between the poor and the rich.<\/p>\n<p>Democrats  leaders perpetuate this enmity with popular slogans like \u201cliving wage,\u201d \u201cfair  share,\u201d \u201cworking poor,\u201d \u201cgreedy rich,\u201d \u201crich Republicans\u201d and \u201cevil profits.\u201d  Their rank and file have bought it hook, line and sinker.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The Great Society<\/strong><br \/>\n  By  the late 1950s, ever-resilient America had somewhat recovered from the effects  of Woodrow Wilson\u2019s policies\u2014the Federal Reserve, the income tax and World War  I\u2014and Franklin Delano Roosevelt policies\u2014the New Deal and World War II\u2014and prosperity  was returning.<\/p>\n<p>Then  along came Lyndon Baines Johnson, the Great Society and the next great  expansion of the nanny state. Previous Democrat administration policies had  been devastating to the people they purported to help and, with his Great  Society programs, Johnson continued the assault on the poor under the guise of  giving them a hand up.<\/p>\n<p>Within  three years of assuming the Presidency in 1963, Johnson had requested 200 major  pieces of legislation and Congress had approved 181 of them, according to  Leslie Carbone in <em><a href=\"http:\/\/www.personalliberty.com\/suggested-reading\/slaying-leviathan-the-moral-case-for-tax-reform-by-leslie-carbone\/\">Slaying Leviathan: The  Moral Case for Tax Reform<\/a><\/em>. She writes:<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>\u201cRoosevelt had peddled the drug of government give-aways  primarily in the poor neighborhoods; Johnson set up shop in middle-class  cul-de-sacs, and most Americans, willingly or unwillingly, wittingly or  unwittingly, are forced to shoot up. Johnson\u2019s sweeping proposals sought to  address almost every issue of concern to Americans: civil rights, poverty,  education, health, housing, pollution, the arts, cities, occupational safety,  consumer protection, and mass transit, to name only the most prominent.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>As  she quotes Johnson aide Joseph Califano from the book <em>Lyndon Johnson and the Great Society<\/em>, \u201cLBJ adopted programs the way  a child eats rich chocolate-chip cookies.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>And  what have these programs wrought? Mark Owen, adjunct professor of economics at Northwood University, wrote a column for  LewRockwell.com on Feb. 7, 2007 entitled <em>The  Welfare State: Shredding Society<\/em>. In it he said:<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>\u201cBirths  out of wedlock were consistently at or below 5% between 1940 and 1960. By 1970,  the rate had risen to over 10% and has continued to rise to 33% of all births  today\u2026 Divorce rates increased from 9 to 23 per 1,000 married couples annually  from 1960 to 1980, while leveling off at 20 per 1,000 through 1998. How much of  this leveling off in divorce rates is the result of relationships in groups  with higher divorce tendencies never evolving past cohabitation is difficult to  ascertain. Over half of children born today in the US will live in a single parent  household, while in some areas the rate is much higher. It is hard to ignore  the statistical relationship between crime and family dissolution.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWhile  crime and family destabilization may be two of the more obvious results of the  welfare state, there are many others. The stigma for single mother births has  virtually disappeared. Intergenerational dependency on government programs with  the related lack of skills for self-sufficiency, much like a farm animal unable  to live without the farmer for food and shelter, has created people without  hope or ambition.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>The welfare state has created a cycle of  dependency that perpetuates itself. Now there are third and fourth generations  of single women living off welfare and raising children in single parent homes.<\/p>\n<p>Typically these women live in urban areas  and their children are held hostage to failing inner city schools systems. And  Democrat policies are to blame for these failing schools.<\/p>\n<p>In 1965 Johnson signed the Elementary and  Secondary Education Act. It provided for aid to poor  children in slums and rural areas, created a five-year program for school  libraries to buy textbooks and other instructional materials and provided for  educational research, among other things. Essentially, the Federal government  took over the education of the children, according to Carbone.<\/p>\n<p>Carbone writes: \u201cRepresentative Charles  Goodell warned that the bill\u2019s \u2018clear intent is to radically change our  historic structure of education by a dramatic shift of power to the federal  level.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The National Education Association (NEA)  teacher\u2019s union, a supporter of Democrat candidates and causes, opposes any and  all efforts to inject competition or reform into the failing schools. Therefore  Democrats oppose them as well. Combined with local teacher unions, the NEA also  fights efforts to change the tenure system which protects the jobs of bad  teachers to the detriment of the children.<\/p>\n<p>LBJ\u2019s War on Poverty programs have been  dismal failures. According to Carbone in <em>Slaying  Leviathan<\/em>, $800 million was appropriated for the Economic Opportunity  Bill of 1964. That bill created the Office of Economic Opportunity (OEO) and 10  other programs. The next year Congress appropriated $1.5 billion for OEO.  Between 1965 and 1972 Congress spent $15 billion on the War on Poverty.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cLaunching the War Poverty, Johnson  declared, \u2018[T]he days of the dole are numbered.\u2019 Within two generations, more  than $10 trillion have been spent on this war, more in current dollars than was  spent to win World War II,\u201d Carbone writes.<\/p>\n<p>And through all that, Democrats are still  looking for ways to spend money to fund programs to fight the War on Poverty.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Obama  And Echoes Of FDR<\/strong><br \/>\n  Like Herbert Hoover, George W. Bush was a  Republican without a conservative soul. And just like Hoover, his policies to battle the recession  were all wrong. First was the stimulus bill of 2008, a $150 billion\u20141 percent  of the gross domestic product (GDP)\u2014kick in the economy through tax rebate  checks that the government hoped would prevent or shorten the recession.<\/p>\n<p>Next came the $700 billion Emergency  Economic Stabilization Act and Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). \u201cI\u2019ve  abandoned free-market principles to save the free market,\u201d Bush said at the  time.<\/p>\n<p>Then Obama went one better than Bush. Just  two months after taking office he pushed through Congress a $787 billion  American Recover and Reinvestment Act of 2009. So within the space of one year  more than $1.5 million new dollars had been injected into the economy, further  eroding the value of the dollars the poor and middle class hold.<\/p>\n<p>What\u2019s more, as Michael Barone writes for <em>The Washington Examiner<\/em>, \u201cOne-third of  the 2009 stimulus money went to state and local governments&#8211;an obvious payoff  to the public employee unions which gave hundreds of millions of dollars to  Democrats and got hundreds of billions of dollars in return, to insulate public  employee unions from the effects of the recession which has affected everyone  else.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>There\u2019s another provision in the bill that  provides a sop to unions. The money for \u201cshovel ready\u201d construction projects  must be spent on firms using union labor. This raises the cost of the projects  and freezes out many non-union poor or middle class construction workers.<\/p>\n<p>But Obama wasn\u2019t finished. Despite the call  from the American people to focus on jobs and the economy, Obama and his Congressional  allies were single-mindedly pushing through an unconstitutional healthcare  program which will cost $940 billion, according to Congressional Budget Office  estimates.<\/p>\n<p>Touted as a bill to help the uninsured,  it\u2019s not likely to make things better. For one thing, those 32 million new  patients are going to be trying to get appointments with the same number of\u2014or  fewer\u2014doctors than we currently have. What\u2019s more, the plan cuts Medicare  payments and puts mandates on the states to cover more people under  Medicaid\u2014the program that insures the poor. This comes at a time when state  budgets are in crisis.<\/p>\n<p>Plus, many doctors already refuse to take  Medicare and Medicaid patients because the reimbursement is so low. With fewer  doctors for fewer patients, that means rationed care. And the poor and middle  class, who are unable to afford to pay out of pocket for a doctor\u2019s care, will  be the victims of rationed care.<\/p>\n<p>And then there are the tax increases in the  bill. According to <em>Bloomberg.com<\/em> the  bill imposes about $69 billion in penalties for individuals and businesses who  don\u2019t meet mandates to buy insurance.<\/p>\n<p>And <em>The  Hill<\/em> newspaper reports that the Joint Committee on Taxation, congress\u2019  official score keeper, says the new law will cost taxpayers earning less than  $200,000 a year roughly $3.9 billion more in taxes\u2014in 2019 alone\u2014by limiting  the medical expense deduction.<\/p>\n<p>On top of this are the taxes on  pharmaceutical companies, medical manufacturers and insurance companies which  will be passed on to the consumer.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the healthcare bill will affect  smaller rural communities with physician-owned hospitals. According to <em>CNSNews.com<\/em>, \u201cThe new health care  overhaul law, which promised increased access and efficiency in health care,  will prevent doctor-owned hospitals from adding more rooms and more beds.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Physician-owned hospitals have higher  patient satisfaction, greater control over medical decisions for patients and  doctor, better quality care and lower costs, according to Physician Hospitals  of America,  as quoted by <em>CNSNews.com<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The  Coming Value-Added Tax<br \/>\n<\/strong>Obama economic advisor and former Federal  Reserve Chief Paul Volcker recently suggested that it\u2019s time for America  to adopt a value-added tax (VAT). The White House immediately downplayed the  idea. Then last week Obama admitted he was on board.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cI know that there\u2019s been a lot of talk  around town lately about the value-added tax. That is something that has worked  for some countries. It\u2019s something that would be novel for the United States,\u201d  Obama told <em>CNBC<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>After Volcker\u2019s remarks the Senate passed a  nonbinding \u201csense of the Senate\u201d resolution that calls such a tax \u201ca massive  tax increase that will cripple families on fixed income and only further push  back America\u2019s  economic recovery.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>With the Tea Partiers already incensed over  the administration\u2019s policies and Congress\u2019 actions, a VAT is not on the table  before the November elections. But it\u2019s coming. You can count on it. After all,  it\u2019s European, and Obama is hell-bent on turning American into a European  socialist country.<\/p>\n<p>The VAT is a sales tax that is added onto  every product at each stage of production. It is a regressive tax that  inordinately affects the poor and middle class.<\/p>\n<p>In <em>Slaying  Leviathan<\/em>, Carbone writes: \u201c\u2026the VAT has been disastrous in Europe. As a hidden tax, it is easy to raise and has  continually increased. Its complicated nature expands government and makes it  expensive to administer. A VAT forces businesses to bear heavy compliance costs  in order to serve as tax collectors for the government.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Food and some necessities are often  exempted from the VAT, which helps the consumer but not the business which has  to administer it. Combine that with the fact that sometimes many different  rates are applied, and the cost of compliance inordinately affects small  businesses on which many families depend and which employ the most people,  according to Carbone.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, all the VAT will do is grow  government and give it more money to spend to further encroach on the lives of  Americans while crushing the economy.<\/p>\n<p>Of course, growing government and creating  a cycle of dependency is the goal of the Democrats. Party of the working man  (or woman)? Not hardly. Not even old yellow dogs lying under the porch waiting for  handouts thrive under Democrat policies.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>(Part two of a two-part series. The first part was Democrats And The Politics Of Envy.) Ask a yellow dog Democrat why he\u2019s a Democrat and he\u2019ll usually say it\u2019s because the Democrat Party is the party of the working man. He believes it so strongly that he\u2019d vote for the Democrat over anyone else, [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5330,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[7],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-543076","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/543076","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5330"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=543076"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/543076\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=543076"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=543076"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=543076"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}