Friday, October 04, 2024

Old People Should Not Have to Pay Taxes. Just Shift that Burden to Young Struggling Families, after all, They are Already Paying Your Social Security.

by Rod Williams, Oct. 4, 2024- I see the meme to the right or something similar a lot on my Facebook feed. Many are like this one and address income taxes and some of them say people over a certain age should not pay property taxes. I really like this meme because the selfish old guy is wrapping himself in the flag. 

My response is "Yes, by all means, make the young family trying to make ends meet and hoping to buy their first home pay more taxes. They already are paying your social security. Burden them some more."

I am a low tax kind of guy. I am glad that Tennessee does not have a state income tax. I think government should generally do less. I have rarely met a tax I like. However, to shift the tax to others just because of age is selfish and unfair. I know life is not fair and some people are poor through no fault of their own. However, unless some tragedy befell you, by the time you retire you should have a nest egg and a paid for house and a paid for car. With less expenses, one should be able to get by with less income. 

The elderly already get breaks. When it comes to income taxes, a couple where both are over the age of 65 doesn't have to pay any taxes unless they earn more than $30,700. There are programs to help low-income seniors with their property taxes. In Davidsons County there is the tax freeze program and the tax relief program. 

The elderly are not particularly bad off in America. Only about 8% live in poverty. The poverty rate for children is about 18%.  Female headed household have a poverty rate of 23%. Single males between the age of 18 and 24 have a poverty rate of 24%.  18% of Black Americans live in poverty. 

And yes, if you are on Social Security, it is people who are working now who are paying your social security. Social Security is like welfare. Welfare is a transfer payment and money paid in by working people is immediately paid out to current recipients. That is how social security works.

From time to time, we do need to tweak tax rates and tinker with tax credits, but to say just because you reach a certain age you should be exempt from taxes, in my view, is just selfish.  That is a desire to have a group that is in general better off, be subsidized by people who are worse off. 





Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

Thursday, October 03, 2024

This Election is not a Competiton of Policy Visions but a Competition of Civic Visions

by Rod Williams, Oct. 2, 2024 - I have long been active in Republican Party politics and political campaigns and the conservative movement. When not involved politically, I have been involved in the arena of ideas, reading the books of conservative thinkers, maintaining membership in the thinktanks advancing a conservative agenda, subscribing to and reading conservative political journals, and expressing my opinions in this blog.  I have been more than just a casual Republican.

When I broke with Trump, following his 2020 attempted coup, several people who know me were surprised.  They should not have been. In 2016 I do not vote for Trump but voted for the third-party candidacy of Evan McMullin. I did not think Trump was a conservative, nor a Republican of any conviction. Trump had flipflopped on several issues over the years and had changed party affiliation several times. I saw Trump as an opportunist and a carnival barker with no core values. 

After Trump was elected, I thought he governed better than I expected. While I was never sold on building a great big beautiful wall that Mexico would pay for, I was pleased that illegal border crossing declined under Trump. Also, the economy did quite well, and I was very pleased that he successfully put three conservatives on the Supreme Court. He did some things I liked, and he didn't screw up much.  I was bothered by his nasty rhetoric and some of his action and still thought he was kind of a snake-oil salesman but given the choice between Trump and a typical liberal in 2020, I chose Trump.

After the election of 2020 when he engaged in a campaign to overturn the results of the election and all that that entailed, and after the January 6th insurrection, I knew I could never vote for him again. I thought his actions, while not legally traitorous, was morally traitorous. I supported Nicki Halley in the primary and after she failed to stop Trump, I thought I might just write in a name, maybe Nicki Haley, maybe Mike Pence, or maybe Liz Chaney. Since Tennessee would not be in play, as a practical matter it didn't matter for whom I voted or if I voted at all. 

As time passed and I saw Trump become more unhinged and saw him associate with more radical characters and become more extreme and double down on his threat to democracy even saying he would be justified in suspending the constitution. He began reposted of QAnon memes and called for Barack Obama to be tried in a military tribunal and took more and more radical positions and told us he would seek restitution against his opponents.  I knew that for me, simply writing in another name was not enough. I knew I had to take a moral stand against evil.  Back in July, I publicly stated I would be voting for Kamala Harris. I explained why in this post.  

Some of my friends were shocked. I was told that they understand me not voting for Trump but could not understand me actually voting for Harris.  The below article reflects my view. This is not an election about policy but a competition of civic visions. I think those who may dislike Harris' policies should put that aside and vote for her anyway. It is time to put country over party. It is time to swallow hard, accept that one is voting for policies they may not like because American democracy is at stake. 

The Full Liz

By Nick Catoggio, The Dispatch, Oct. 3, 2024- Who said it?

“Kamala Harris is a radical liberal who would raise taxes, take away guns & health insurance, and explode the size and power of the federal gov’t. She wants to recreate America in the image of what’s happening on the streets of Portland & Seattle. We won’t give her the chance.”

No, it’s not Donald Trump. The words are properly spelled and capitalized, aren’t they?

It’s not J.D. Vance either. He would have thrown something in about foreign parasites sucking the blood out of American communities (and out of their pets, specifically).

It’s Liz Cheney. She tweeted the above on August 11, 2020, the day Joe Biden chose Harris as his running mate. Her post circulated again on Thursday morning as she prepared for a joint appearance in Wisconsin with the candidate she’s supporting this year: Kamala Harris.

How you feel about that tweet depends on how you view the choice next month.

If you’re treating the election as a competition of policy visions, Cheney’s post is evidence of hypocrisy so ludicrous that it should neutralize whatever influence her endorsement might carry with conservatives. Four years ago she claimed Harris was too liberal to be trusted with power; four years later she’s campaigning with her against a Republican. She’s free to be a progressive if she likes, but no right-winger who cares about policy should take her seriously ever again.

If you’re treating the election as a competition of civic visions, Cheney’s position then and her position now are consistent. Her old post bolsters the case for the Democrat today, in fact: If someone with as many misgivings about Harris’ policy agenda as Cheney had in 2020 is willing to lay them aside to support her in 2024, the civic threat posed by the Republican ticket must be truly dire. (There is much more, please read it all at this link)

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

Liberty on the Rocks meets Oct 15th

 

by Rod Williams, Oct. 11, 2024- Join me this coming Tuesday Oct 15 for Liberty on the Rocks. This is just a group of people sitting around drinking beer and talking about politics or culture or sometimes other topics. There is no speaker and no agenda. Recently about ten or so people have been in attendance. It is not always the same people but always some of the same.  People who attend this group are almost always well-read and well-mannered and can engage in civil discourse and can disagree without being disagreeable. Most of the group tend to be libertarian, but not exclusively. Anyone who support the concepts of individual rights and free markets would feel comfortable attending. 

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

Open Letter Urges Candidates to Focus on the Debt


Open Letter Urges Candidates to Focus on the Debt 

October 3, 2024

Tuesday marked the start of Fiscal Year 2025. With the ringing in of a new fiscal year, and with just over a month until Election Day, Board Members from the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget co-signed a letter calling on both Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump to put forward a plan showing voters how they would address the national debt.  

 

The letter follows a growing chorus of calls on the need to address rising debt and deficits and can be found below. 

Dear Vice President Harris and former President Trump,


On behalf of the bipartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, we are asking you to make the critical issue of our skyrocketing national debt one of your top policy priorities as you seek the presidency.


Our mounting debt is a bipartisan problem, and whoever wins the presidency should confront this challenge within their term. Our publicly held debt will soon surpass the entire size of the U.S. economy, and debt is projected to exceed its previous record, 106% of GDP, in 2027. At a projected cost of $892 billion this year, our nation already spends more on interest on the debt than we do on both national defense and all federal spending on children.


Unfortunately, high and rising debt carries significant repercussions for all Americans, including slower economic growth and higher interest rates. Rising debt also limits our ability to respond to unexpected emergencies like natural disasters and pandemics, and it is a national security threat as well.


Presidential leadership will be absolutely necessary in addressing these challenges. American voters deserve to hear your plans for improving our fiscal trajectory. A robust debate on this issue would not only enrich our democracy, but also equip voters with the necessary information to make informed decisions this fall.


We hope you both will acknowledge the need to address the national debt and that this will be a priority for the next administration.


Sincerely,

Mitch Daniels

Co-Chair, Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

Leon Panetta

Co-Chair, Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

Tim Penny

Co-Chair, Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

Barry Anderson

Former Acting Director, Congressional Budget Office


Erskine Bowles

Former White House Chief of Staff


Saxby Chambliss

Former United States Senator


Jim Cooper

Former United States Congressman


Dan Crippen

Former Director, Congressional Budget Office


Esther George

Former President and CEO, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City


Bill Gradison, Jr.

Former United States Congressman


Keith Hall

Former Director, Congressional Budget Office


Jane Harman

Former United States Congresswoman


Heidi Heitkamp

Former United States Senator


G. William Hoagland

Former Staff Director, Senate Budget Committee


James Jones

Former United States Congressman


John Kasich

Former Governor of Ohio


Lou Kerr

President and Chair, The Kerr Foundation


Ron Kind

Former United States Congressman


Maya MacGuineas

President, Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget


Marjorie Margolies

Former United States Congresswoman


Dave McCurdy

Former United States Congressman


James T. McIntyre, Jr.

Former Director, Office of Management and Budget


Michael Nutter

Former Mayor of Philadelphia


Marne Obernauer, Jr.

Director, The Obernauer Foundation


Rudolph Penner

Former Director, Congressional Budget Office


Franklin Raines

Former Director, Office of Management and Budget


Robert Reischauer

Former Director, Congressional Budget Office


Reid Ribble

Former United States Congressman


Charles Robb

Former United States Senator


Isabel Sawhill

Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution


Alan K. Simpson

Former United States Senator


C. Eugene Steuerle

Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Tax Analysis


David Stockman

Former Director, Office of Management and Budget


John Tanner

Former United States Congressman


Tom Tauke

Former United States Congressman


Carol Cox Wait

Former President, Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

 

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

They voted for Trump before. This year, they support Kamala Harris.

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

Breakfast Club Guest Speaker is Brink Fidler, Addressing Active Violence Mitigation Training. Oct 5

From Lonnie Spivak:

Greetings Breakfast Club Members,

As we enter the final stretch leading up to early voting in Tennessee, I’d like to take a moment to shift our focus from politics to an important topic: protecting our schools and other soft targets. This month, we are honored to welcome Brink Fidler, an expert in active violence mitigation training, as our guest speaker.

Brink Fidler
Brink Fidler is the founder and President of Defend Systems, a life safety and security consulting firm that specializes in physical security and active violence mitigation training. His firm has worked with a wide range of organizations, including schools, corporations, healthcare facilities, law firms, government agencies, houses of worship, and nonprofits. He is also a highly sought-after public speaker on how organizations can respond to active violence situations.

With nearly two decades of law enforcement experience in Nashville, where he retired as Director of the Drug Task Force, Brink brings a unique and extensive understanding of high-risk tactical operations and physical security. His expertise, combined with his in-depth study of active shooter events, gives him an exceptional perspective on this growing issue and how best to respond. Brink is dedicated to empowering individuals to protect themselves and others, embodied in his company’s mission statement: “We empower you to save lives, including your own.”

This 90-minute presentation will be impactful and at times difficult to watch, but I believe it is well worth your time.

We will be meeting on Saturday, October 5th at Plantation Pub, located at 8321 Sawyer Brown Rd. The meeting will begin at 8:30 a.m.

Looking forward to seeing you there. 

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

Wednesday, October 02, 2024

Another Trump Lie: Trump falsely says Georgia's governor was unable to talk to Biden about storm damage

 by Rod Williams, Oct. 2, 2024- How can you tell if Trump is lying? His mouth is moving. 

I cannot believe a single thing he says. Every day is a new outrage or a new lie. He lies so often, that when he tells the truth it should be news. I have reached the point that I just assume everything he says is a lie. It does not good to point out the lies to the Trump cult members, they will simply dismiss it with "Fake News."

Here is the latest Trump lie, assuming he hasn't said anything since.

Trump falsely says Georgia's governor was unable to talk to Biden about storm damage

NBC News,  Sept. 30, 2024- Former President Donald Trump falsely claimed that Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp hasn’t been able to reach President Joe Biden to discuss Hurricane Helene's impacts on his state.

“He has been calling the president, but has not been able to get him,” Trump said at a news conference at a furniture store in Valdosta, Georgia.

Yet earlier in the day Kemp, a Republican, said that he initially missed Biden’s call but that he called back and that the two were able to connect Sunday evening.

“He just said, 'Hey, what do you need?'” Kemp told reporters. “And I told him, you know, we got what we need. We will work through the federal process.” (link)

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

Tuesday, October 01, 2024

This election isn’t about policy—it’s about the future of our democracy.

 


Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

Trump ignores the First Amendment and says those who criticize the Supreme Court should be tossed in jail

by Rod Williams, Oct. 1, 2024- It doesn't matter what Trump says or does, his loyal supporters are sticking with him. I guess if you stuck with him after he attempted a coup, then why get upset when he threatens to suspend the constitution or says any of the other crazy things he says. 

I think some of his supporters simply make excuses for him and don't really think he will suspend the constitution or jail his critics or adopt any of the nutty things he has proposed. That he associates with weird conspiracy theorist and neo-Nazis doesn't bother them. They make excuses. Others do believe him I fear, and they have given up on democracy and want an authoritarian leader who will sit things right. 

I can't imagine what it would take for Trump to lose his supporters if he hasn't lost them yet. If he started saying nice things about Hitler, many of his supporters would rationalize and excuse what he said and say he was just misunderstood and that pointing out what he said was "fake news." Some of them would probably conclude Hitler wasn't such a bad guy. He had his good points, they would say. Tucker Carlson is their favorite pundit, and he has already laid the groundwork for a reconsideration of Hitler, so if Trump started saying nice things about Hitler, I think his cult would nod along and defend Trump and justify Nazism. 

Recently, Trump said those who criticize the Supreme Court should be jailed. Some of his supporters will minimize this and say that is not what he really meant and that he was just expressing a justified frustration; some will agree. 

Trump ignores the First Amendment and says those who criticize the Supreme Court should be tossed in jail

The Independent, Sept. 24, 2024- Donald Trump scolded those who critique the Supreme Court at a rally on Monday, saying people should be jailed for “the way they talk about our judges and our justices” – despite the First Amendment allowing people to criticize the government.

The former president, who has invoked his First Amendment right to launch a bevy of attacks against federal and state judges, suggested it should be “illegal” to rebuke judicial decisions or try and advocate in favor of a certain decision.

“It should be illegal, what happens,” Trump told a crowd in Pennslyvania. (read more)

Trump and our system, &c.

By Jay Nordlinger, National Review, September 26, 2024 - At one of his rallies this week, Donald Trump was talking about Supreme Court justices — actually, about critics of justices. “It should be illegal, what happens,” he said. “These people should be put in jail, the way they talk about our judges and our justices, trying to get them to sway their vote, sway their decision.”

... Because Trump is a fire hose of head-spinning statements, no one pauses to consider any one of them. When he says that critics ought to be jailed, it barely makes the news.

But consider: What if the Democratic nominee had made the same statement? What if Kamala Harris had said that critics of judges and justices ought to be jailed? We would talk of nothing else, right? We would say that she was crazy, that she should not be allowed anywhere near power. (read more)


Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

Bastiat Society of Nashville meets Tue, Oct. 8. Supporting The Freedom Movement Around the World.

 

Dear Rod,


AIER’s Bastiat Society program in Nashville invites you to join us next week on Tuesday at 6:00pm for an event with Brad Lips, CEO of Atlas Network.



The Atlas Network partners with over 500 think tanks worldwide to drive change in ideas, culture, and policy; remove barriers to opportunities; and empower individuals to live a life of choice. Highlights of recent efforts will be presented.


The Bastiat Society of Nashville's speaker series is co-sponsored by The Beacon Center of Tennessee & The Political Economy Research Institute (PERI) (affiliated with Middle Tennessee State University). Our financial sponsor who makes it possible for us to meet at the Richland Country Club is Richard Ina, AAMS® - NewEdge WealthThese sponsorships do not necessarily constitute an endorsement of the speakers' positions on the issues discussed.


Ticket Prices:

$0 for Founding Members

$10 for Annual Members

$20 for Non-Members

$0 for Actively enrolled university students who register with a .edu email address. Those who register with a non- .edu email address will be unregistered and asked to purchase tickets at full price.

Nashville | "Supporting the Freedom Movement Around the World" Tickets, Tue, Oct 8, 2024 at 6:00 PM | Eventbrite

Registration required.

Let us know you're coming!

Register now 

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

Monday, September 30, 2024

Would you rather have eggs at $3.20 a dozen or not have them at $2.30 a dozen?

by Rod Williams, Sept. 30, 2024- The Hill reports that the average price of a dozen large eggs has gone up by 28.1 percent in the last 12 months, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. 

If we had Kamala Harris's price gouging policy in place, would we still be able to buy eggs at $2.30 a dozen. Probably not. Most likely not. I say most likely not, because some store might figure out a way to bring in the same amount of money by spreading out the real cost of eggs over a lot of other goods to bring in the money necessary to sell eggs at a loss. This cost shifting may work for a while leading to other distortions in market prices. More likely than not, there would simply be no eggs available to purchase if prices did not rise.

The reason for the price increase is not price gouging according to the Hill report but is attributed in part to high demand for the product. Also, it is largely due to the bird flu outbreak at chicken farms in Colorado in July. The Hill article quotes Phil Lempert, a grocery industry analyst as saying, “Bird flu is the number one reason for higher prices, absolutely.” 

If Harris's Price Gouging Board was in place, would they accept that explanation and determine that an increase in the price of eggs was justified or would they assume any price increase is price gouging? I don't know. If they take a change in price as proof of price gouging, that would be easier to administer than examining each product that has a price change to determine if a price change was justified. We already have the Consumer Price Index to track price changes. If instead of just assuming a price increase is gouging and instead if the Price Gouging Board must determine if a price change is justified, that will be a lot of work. I doubt they would just accept Phil Lempert's word for it. 

There are dozens of factors, no doubt, that go into the price of a product. If you think about eggs, there is the cost of labor, chicken feed, veterinarian services, packaging, advertising, and transportation, and interest rates on borrowed money, and the list goes on and on. And then you have different kinds of eggs: brown, extra large, jumbo, large, medium, small, cage-free, free-range, GMO-free, and combinations of these like free-range extra-large GMO-free brown eggs. I assume each product price differential would have to be justified. To make their life easier, producers and retailers would probably reduce the number of choices of eggs.

Not only eggs, but everything you buy in the grocery store would have to have the same scrutiny. To determine if every price change was justified would take an army of new bureaucrats. How many? I don't know. The IRS has about 83,000 employees. I think the Price Gouging Board would have to have about ten times that many. And how would this new agency be paid for? A fee could be assessed the grocery stores, which of course, would lead to an increase in the price of eggs. 

Studies to determine if the price increase in eggs was justified, would take time. It could not be done overnight. So, would the study have to be done before the price is increased or after? If before, while waiting, the egg producer with no cash flow could not feed the chickens and they would just have to die. That would lead to fewer eggs and most of us would be unable to buy eggs simply because there would be none for sale.  If a producer had the recourses to absorb the increased cost while waiting for a price approval increase, then that would be more cost to figure into the reason for a price increase. I could explain that, but I assume you know that drawing down cash comes with a cost. 

So, if the grocery store gets their price increase and then the egg industry recovers from the bird flu episode that caused the price increase, the store would lower the price back to what it was before, right? No, not likely. The store would not want to risk losing the right to again raise the price the next time fuel prices went up or labor cost when up, or some other factor in the cost of production, so the store would likely keep the higher price.  

I don't think this price gouging policy idea has been thought out very well. 

 

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

Sunday, September 29, 2024

Former Arizona Senator Jeff Flake most Recent Republican to endorse Kamala Harris for President.

Senator Jeff Flake
Kamala Harris Gets New Republican Endorsement From Critical Swing State

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

Federal judge dismisses challenge to Tennessee law banning boys from using the girl's restrooms at School

 link

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

Governor Winfield Dunn, Rest in Peace

Governor Winfield Dunn
by Rod Williams, Sept. 29, 2024 – Yesterday, Governor Winfield Dunn passed away peacefully surrounded by family. He was 97 years old. 

Born in Meridian, Mississippi, on July 1, 1927, Dunn enlisted in the U.S. Navy during World War II and subsequently served as a reserve lieutenant in the U.S. Air Force. Dunn graduated from the University of Mississippi in 1950 and married his wife, Betty, that same year. He continued his education at the University of Tennessee Medical Units in Memphis, earning his D.D.S. and later practicing dentistry in Shelby County.

Dunn was elected Governor of Tennessee in 1970. Prior to his election, Dunn had never held public office. As Governor, Dunn contributed to Tennessee’s flourishing by creating a statewide kindergarten program, establishing public parks, prioritizing highway construction, and creating the Department of Economic and Community Development. As the first Republican to serve as Governor in 50 years at the time of his election, he is remembered as a Governor who deeply valued civility and unified the Volunteer State. Dunn also served as chairman of both the University of Tennessee Board of Trustees and the Tennessee State Board of Regents.

Governor Dunn’s life is marked by a profound religious faith, a deep love for his family and friends, and unwavering service to the people of Tennessee.

I have had the privilege of meeting Gov. Dunn on a couple of occasions, once visiting his at his home when I accompanied Davidson County GOP chair Kathleen Starnes to his home to discuss some party business. I am honored to have been presented a signed copy of the governor's biography, From a Standing Start, in recognition of my work on behalf of the local party. In addition to the personal interactions with the governor, I have seen him speak several times.  While, I only had these couple of one-on-one interactions with the governor, I felt like I knew him. He was warm and kind and genuine. I think it would be hard to find anyone who was acquainted with him who did not like him. 

Governor Winfield Dunn was a true servant of the people, and he was statesman. He exercised political skills without being mean-spirited. He could disagree without being disagreeable. He was a good man and a gentleman. 

Governor Dunn, rest in peace.

Funeral arrangements are pending. The family’s point of contact is Charles Dunn: chasdunn@gmail.com.

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories