Categories
Common Sense

Weekend with Bernie: Sanders’ Eleven

Bernie Sanders has a horde of helpers. Consider the attached visual meme; “Occupy Democrats” seem to have captured Bernie’s philosophy: spend and meddle.

All of the spending in the first item of Bernie’s 11-Step Economic Plan are best directed at the state level. Bernie voters should wonder: why havent politicians in the states kept up infrastructure?

There are reasons why some of us want to privatize more infrastructure: more responsible upkeep.

Bernie's PlanOh, and why hasnt the doubled amount spent on public K-12 schooling in my lifetime led to better schools or better-educated grads?

Just let that one hang there, and then contrast it with the disaster the feds have made of college costs while trying to “make college more affordable.”

Expanding Medicaid in one plank, and making “healthcare available to all,” in another, I take as repetition for emphasis. But the fact that Bernie’s backers want to expand spending in programs that recently have seen dramatic expansion — Social Security (in the form of radically increased rates of disability retirements), Medicaid (Obamacare), and food stamp participation (SNAP) — even while the programs lurch into insolvency, along with the whole federal budget, sends up a red flag . . . for irresponsibility.

Then there’s all the fiddling with free employment contracts that they pretend helps the poor, but can’t: unionization, raised wage minimums, and “equal pay” . . . for, presumably, unequal work, since we already have laws enforcing equal pay for equal work.

Several points are vague enough that, as stated, I could jump on board: I, too, want to reform the tax code and . . . “close corporate loopholes.” So does, famously this week, Donald Trump.

But what I mean by this and what progressives like Sanders mean? Big differences, I suspect.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


Printable PDF

Weekend with Bernie Sanders, http://cognitivebiasparade.prosite.com/, Paul Jacob, James Gill

 

Categories
links

Townhall: By Food Stamps Alone

It’s the Christmas Season. We want to give to the poor. But . . . are some ways more effective than others?

The answer is a resounding Yes.

This has an implication: some ways of helping the poor are disastrous. Self-defeating. Soul-crushing.

This Christmas Season, while the Obama Administration wants you to talk about medical insurance, why not think about giving and receiving and actual human betterment? At the very least, click on over to Townhall.com. And come back here for a few more chunks of holiday wisdom, if not cheer.

Categories
Common Sense

The Rest of the Story

One thrill of my lifetime occurred soon after I helped launch U.S. Term Limits in 1992, when radio commentator Paul Harvey phoned me to fact-check a story he was doing.

Harvey, king of radio back then, was a huge fan of term limits. And I was a big fan of him. I loved his quirky vocal mannerisms and the way he told us “the rest of the story.” Today, three years after his death, I’d like to bring you “the rest” of a few recent Common Sense stories.

I. “There is no Olympic medal for political dishonesty,” I concluded a recent commentary about a Missouri State senate race where the principled Ed Emery was wrongly and ridiculously smeared by State Rep. Scott Largent. “Let’s hope Show-Me State voters show Largent the agony of defeat.”

Well, voters did just that. In the August 7 primary, Emery narrowly defeated Largent.

II. Recall my rant on the California parks system apparently hiding $54 million from the department of finance?

With an investigation underway, the Sacramento Bee not only reports “a department that wanted to keep secret a reserve of its own special funds” and — surprise, surprise – the unauthorized use of those slush funds, but also “a springtime rush each year to spend money authorized by the Legislature to avoid having the funds return to the general fund.”

Seems the parks department may also have been dummying up million-dollar contracts to make funding look like it was spent when it wasn’t.

All while asking for donations from the public and closing parks.

III. Objected, I did, to the Obama Administration’s successful push to get a record number of people to sign up for food stamps. Others have objected to David Fowler, president of the Family Action Council of Tennessee, who posted on Facebook that we should follow the advice of the National Park Service — “Do not feed the animals” — noting that, “Their stated reason for the policy is because the animals will grow dependent on handouts and will not learn to take care of themselves.”

Fowler was denounced for being insensitive, for calling poor people animals.

But aren’t all people animals?

We’re not potted plants.

And now you know the rest of Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
ideological culture national politics & policies

Wealth on Welfare

Should a $2 million lottery winner be heartlessly denied food stamps?

In the Philadelphia Inquirer, Jay Ostrich, public affairs director at the Commonwealth Foundation for Public Policy, tells the story of “Leroy Fick, who won a $2 million lottery jackpot, but still legally collected food stamps.”

That is, until “Michigan enacted a $5,000 asset test” for those applying for food stamps, thereby stopping “exploiters such as Fick from taking advantage of the system.”

Now the Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare is doing likewise, implementing rules to block food stamps for anyone under 60 with $2,000 or more in assets ($3,250 if over 60 years of age) — excluding one’s home, car, a second car (if valued under $4,650) and retirement savings.

With state and federal welfare spending up 52 percent since 2002, and the friendly state facing a budget crunch, an estimated 2 percent of recipients could be affected to the tune of $50 million in annual savings.

But Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter calls the change “one of the most mean-spirited, asinine proposals to come out of Harrisburg in decades.” It’s “a disgrace,” according to State Sen. Shirley Kitchen (D-Philadelphia).

The Philadelphia Inquirer editorialized against the asset test on the grounds that it would “punish families for having a few dollars in a bank account.”

Punish? Not getting a handout is hardly punishment. The law just means that those with significant assets have to buy their own groceries.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.