Weblog

Friday, 27 November 2009

  • The REAL Thanksgiving Story... Unknown to Many!

     TRUISM - “Socialism: Fails Every Time It’s Tried!”

     A Happy PC Thanksgiving

    Pilgrims Beat ‘Communism’ With Free Market

    By Mike Franc, Nov 21, 2005

    http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=10414

     

    Recalling the story of the Pilgrims is a Thanksgiving tradition, but do you know the real story behind their triumph over hunger and poverty at Plymouth Colony nearly four centuries ago? Their salvation stemmed not so much from the charitable gestures of local Indians, but from their courageous decision to embrace the free-market principle of private property ownership a century and a half before Adam Smith wrote The Wealth of Nations.

    Writing in his diary of the dire economic straits and self-destructive behavior that consumed his fellow Puritans shortly after their arrival, Governor William Bradford painted a picture of destitute settlers selling their clothes and bed coverings for food while others “became servants to the Indians,” cutting wood and fetching water in exchange for “a capful of corn.” The most desperate among them starved, with Bradford recounting how one settler, in gathering shellfish along the shore, “was so weak … he stuck fast in the mud and was found dead in the place.”

    The colony’s leaders identified the source of their problem as a particularly vile form of what Bradford called “communism.” Property in Plymouth Colony, he observed, was communally owned and cultivated. This system (“taking away of property and bringing [it] into a commonwealth”) bred “confusion and discontent” and “retarded much employment that would have been to [the settlers’] benefit and comfort.”

    Brink of Extermination

    The most able and fit young men in Plymouth thought it an “injustice” that they were paid the same as those “not able to do a quarter the other could.” Women, meanwhile, viewed the communal chores they were required to perform for others as a form of “slavery.”

    On the brink of extermination, the Colony’s leaders changed course and allotted a parcel of land to each settler, hoping the private ownership of farmland would encourage self-sufficiency and lead to the cultivation of more corn and other foodstuffs.

    As Adam Smith would have predicted, this new system worked famously. “This had very good success,” Bradford reported, “for it made all hands very industrious.” In fact, “much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been” and productivity increased. “Women,” for example, “went willingly into the field, and took their little ones with them to set corn.”

    The famine that nearly wiped out the Pilgrims in 1623 gave way to a period of agricultural abundance that enabled the Massachusetts settlers to set down permanent roots in the New World, prosper, and play an indispensable role in the ultimate success of the American experiment.


    A profoundly religious man, Bradford saw the hand of God in the Pilgrims’ economic recovery. Their success, he observed, “may well evince the vanity of that conceit...that the taking away of property... would make [men] happy and flourishing; as if they were wiser than God.” Bradford surmised, “God in his wisdom saw another course fitter for them.”


    Amen to that.


    Thanksgiving Story: 2005

    Plymouth’s Pilgrims may have survived that near-fatal brush with socialism but, sadly, many political leaders remain transfixed by a blind faith in the ability of government to shape and set the course of human behavior.


    Case in point: the tenacious liberal belief that no connection exists between the tax burden we place on capital formation and the economic behavior of those who must shoulder that burden.

    The liberal creed holds that investors will take economic risks and create jobs no matter how punitive the tax regime. To liberals, lowering that burden through reductions in the rate of taxation simply bestows an unwarranted windfall on the “rich” and deprives the government of much-needed tax revenue.


    Of course, incentives matter every bit as much today as they did four centuries ago. The latest proof comes from figures released by the Treasury Department for the fiscal year that ended on Sept. 30. They vindicate the predictions of conservative economists that the 2003 law, which included a number of pro-growth provisions such as cutting the top tax rate on capital gains and dividends to 15 percent, would be a raging success.

    Compared to the previous year:

    • Total federal revenues grew by an astonishing 14.6%.
    • Corporate receipts exploded, increasing by 47%.
    • Payroll tax receipts, an indicator of employment growth, increased by a respectable 8%.

     

    We have much to be thankful for this Thanksgiving season.

     

    Mr. Franc, who has held a number of positions on Capitol Hill, is vice president of Government Relations at The Heritage Foundation.
    To send a question or comment to Mike Franc, email him at: MichaelFranc@heritage.org

     

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     

    What Happened AFTER the Feast - The Rest of the Thanksgiving Story

    By Chuck Colson, Nov 24, 2005
    http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/chuckcolson/2005/11/24/176700.html

     

    Thanksgiving is just about my favorite holiday—a wonderful combination of family, faith, and American-style religious freedom. I love the story of those hardy Pilgrims, and I love eating turkey and pumpkin pie and gathering with family.

     

    Many of us tend to think of the first Thanksgiving feast as the official end to all the Pilgrims’ difficulties. Wrong: Their survival would remain in jeopardy for years to come. And yet, no matter how difficult things became, they never failed to offer thanks to God.

     

    As every school child knows, the Pilgrims arrived in the New World in the winter of 1620. As the freezing weeks passed, nearly half their number died. It was a terrible time, but by spring, things began to improve. Friendly Indians helped the Pilgrims plant their crops. By October 1621, the fields yielded a harvest large enough to sustain the colony in the coming winter. The grateful Pilgrims invited their Indian friends to a three-day feast of thanksgiving to God.

     

    That’s where the story typically ends—for us. But for the Pilgrims, the hardships went on. The next month, a ship arrived with thirty-five new colonists. But to the Pilgrims’ dismay, they brought no provisions. The entire colony was forced to go on half rations that winter. At one point, with food running out, everyone was forced onto a daily ration of just five kernels of corn.

     

    As my friend Barbara Rainey writes in her new book, Thanksgiving: A Time to Remember, by spring, the colony was weakened by hunger and sickness. While the bay and creeks were full of fish, the Pilgrims’ nets had rotted. Were it not for shellfish, which could be dug by hand, they would have perished. Despite the great difficulties, they thanked God for His provision.

     

    More ships arrived that year, usually bringing newcomers with no supplies. Pilgrim father William Bradford wrote in his journal that, given the poor harvest, it “appeared that famine must still ensue the next year also.”

     

    By April 1623, the conditions were desperate. The Pilgrims planted double the corn of the previous year, only to see a drought several weeks long threaten the precious crop. In response, the Pilgrims held a day of fasting and prayer, asking God for rain. Pilgrim father Edward Winslow wrote that by evening, “The weather was overcast, [and] the clouds gathered on all sides.” It was the beginning of two weeks of rainfall. The crop was saved, and that fall, the harvest was abundant. Another Thanksgiving feast was arranged, and again the Indians took part. As Winslow wrote, “Another solemn day was set apart . . . wherein we returned glory, honor, and praise, with all thankfulness to our God who dwelt so graciously with us.”

     

    They prayed this, remember, at the end of two terrible years filled with famine, hard work, and the loss of many loved ones.

     

    As we gather with our families to celebrate our blessings, we ought to remember what happened to the Pilgrims after the feasting was over. Their steadfast trust in God is a reminder that we, too, need to trust in God, even in the most difficult circumstances—and thank Him.

     

    May God bless you and yours this Thanksgiving.

     

    Chuck Colson is founder and chairman of BreakPoint Online, a Townhall.com partner.

     

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     

    How the Pilgrims Progressed
    By Joseph Farah, Worldnetdaily, November 27, 2008
    http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=82052


    As America embarks on a bold leeward lurch toward centralized power and massive redistribution of wealth in addressing its economic problems, it might be time to take a step back and learn a lesson from our forebears, the Pilgrims.

    But first we must familiarize ourselves with the historical truth of their experience – something that has been in short supply in the media and our schools.

    Kids often learn today that the Mayflower gang were pretty incompetent – bad farmers, bad fishermen, bad hunters. They came to the New World unprepared for the hardships they would face in the wilderness.

    They were rescued by the friendly native Americans who taught them the survival skills they would need, so the story goes. The first harvest festival was a time of rejoicing and giving thanks to their saviors – the Indians who befriended them and guided them to a better way of life.

    That picture is totally wrong. Here's the real story.

    Before leaving Europe, the Pilgrims entered into a contract, dated July 1, 1620, that would have them place all profits of their "trade, traffic, trucking, working, fishing, or any other means of any person or persons, remain in the common stock until division."

    In other words, the settlement at Plymouth Bay was the first New World experiment in communism – long before Karl Marx supposedly invented it.

    To say that social experiment was a total failure would be an understatement. The first winter spelled death and disease and hunger for the colony because the Pilgrims had arrived too late in the season to plant crops and build adequate shelters. Half of them died. The following spring, however, they planted and hunted and fished to get by – just barely. They did invite some of the friendly Indians to join them in their first "Thanksgiving" celebration. But they were not thanking the Indians. They were thanking God for pulling them through.

    As William Bradford wrote in his journal: "And thus they found the Lord to be with them in all their ways, and to bless their outgoings and incomings, for which let His holy name have the praise forever, to all posterity."

    Nevertheless, Bradford remained troubled by the colony's inability to prosper. He found the answer by studying the Bible and revisiting the notion of private property and incentized hard work.

    He wrote about it in 1623: "So they began to think how they might raise as much corn as they could, and obtain a better crop than they had done, that they might not still thus languish in misery. At length, after much debate of things, the Governor (with the advice of the chiefest amongst them) gave way that they should set corn every man for his own particular, and in that regard trust to themselves. ... This had very good success, for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been by any means the Governor or any other could use, and saved him a great deal of trouble, and gave far better content. The women now went willingly into the field, and took their little ones with them to set corn, which before would allege weakness and inability, whom to have compelled would have been thought great tyranny and oppression. The experience that was had in this common course and condition, tried sundry years and that amongst Godly and sober men, may well evince the vanity of that conceit of Plato's and other ancients applauded by some of later times, that the taking away of property and bringing in community into a commonwealth would make them happy and flourishing, as if they were wiser than God. For this community was found to breed much confusion and discontent and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort. For the young men, that were most able and fit for labour and service, did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men's wives and children without any recompense. The strong, or man of parts, had no more in division of victuals and clothes than he that was weak and not able to do a quarter the other could, this was thought injustice. … And for men's wives to be commanded to do service for other men, as dressing their meat, washing their clothes, etc., they deemed it a kind of slavery, neither could many husbands brook it. Upon the point all being to have alike, and all to do alike, they thought themselves in the like condition, and one as good as another; and so, if it did not cut off those relations that God hath set amongst men, yet it did at least diminish and take off the mutual respects that should be preserved amongst them."

    In other words, the introduction of the idea of private property saved the Pilgrims – made their experiment successful.

    To coin a phrase, that's how "the Pilgrims progressed."

    They went back to their Bibles and saw that in practicing utopian communism, they were attempting to be "wiser than God." Once they abandoned that deadly economic system, they flourished.

    Do you think we are wise enough to learn a lesson from the Pilgrims' experience today? Or are we doomed to repeat the failures and experience the miseries of socialism, again, for ourselves?

Saturday, 21 November 2009

  • Married Couples Face Extra Tax in Healthcare Bill

     Even MORE ‘good’ news…

     

    Married Couples Face Extra Tax in Healthcare Bill

    By Stephen Dinan & David M. Dickson, The Washington Times, NewsMax, November 20, 2009

    http://www.newsmax.com/us/healthcare_penalty_couple/2009/11/20/288925.html

    Senate Democrats' health care bill would create a new marriage penalty by imposing a tax on individuals who make $200,000 annually but hitting married couples making just $50,000 more.

    That's one of 17 new taxes imposed by the bill, which also creates a levy on elective plastic surgery - some call it "botax" - and places a 40 percent excise tax on those who have generous health care plans.

    "If you have insurance, you get taxed. If you don't have insurance, you get taxed. If you need a life-saving medical device, you get taxed. If you need prescription medicines, you get taxed," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Kentucky Republican, who is leading the fight against the bill.

    The new taxes would be used to fund an expansion of government medical programs and to fund subsidies for lower-income individuals to buy insurance, extending health care coverage to 94 percent of eligible non-elderly Americans.

    Democrats said the bill will offer lower health care costs for small businesses and families, and said the new taxes are aimed at upper-income earners, so costs would not go up for the middle class. They said that makes good on President Obama's campaign pledge not to increase taxes on families making less than $250,000 a year, which explains the reason for the new marriage penalty.

    "We wanted to make this provision consistent with the president's pledge not to increase taxes on singles making under $200,000 and married couples making under $250,000," said Jim Manley, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who wrote the Senate bill.

    "Yes, this structure can create a 'marriage penalty' for some couples. It also creates a 'marriage bonus' for others," he said. "A married couple with one wage earner can earn up to $250,000 without facing this higher tax, whereas a single person in the same job with the same pay would be hit by it."

    But a married couple in which each earner makes $150,000 would be hit with the tax, whereas an unmarried couple living together with the same incomes would not.

    Ryan Ellis, tax policy director at Americans for Tax Reform, said the new marriage penalty comes on top of an existing one that's always been part of the payroll tax, which funds Social Security and Medicare.

    He said when the payroll tax was created to fund Social Security during the New Deal, lawmakers didn't anticipate the freelance of two-income families, so there's always been a sort of marriage penalty for couples whose incomes topped the single-earner income taxation level.

    Such penalties have been thorny issues in the tax codes for years.

    The new tax would rise from 1.45 percent to 1.95 percent for singles making $200,000 a year and couples making $250,000.

    Congress earlier this decade tried to reduce the marriage penalty in the income tax code by adjusting the standard deduction for single taxpayers and married couples and expanding the 15 percent tax bracket for couples filing joint tax returns.

    Mr. Ellis said another problem with Democrats' plan is that the new payroll tax is not indexed for inflation, even though wage growth is about 5 percent a year. That means the tax will capture an ever-larger share of taxpayers.

    "Fifteen years from now, someone who today is earning $100,000, if their wage growth just grows on average, 15 years from now they're going to be paying this tax," Mr. Ellis said.

    The plastic surgery tax could increase the cost of nips and tucks by imposing a 5 percent tax on the cost of such surgeries. The tax is slated to go into effect Jan. 1 and is expected to raise $5.8 billion over 10 years. It would cover all elective procedures, whether covered by insurance or not, but would not be levied on surgeries intended to repair personal injuries.

    Some of the taxes are already running into political trouble with Democrats' core supporters.

    The Teamsters union on Thursday blasted the proposal to impose a 40 percent excise tax on "Cadillac" high-value health insurance plans, saying it would threaten the benefit-rich coverage unions have fought hard to win for their workers.

    "Any claim that it affects only 'Cadillac' plans and thus the wealthy is misleading," said Teamsters President James P. Hoffa Jr. "This tax will fall on one-third of Americans in 10 years. ... The idea that this tax will curtail rising premiums is just dead wrong."

    The tax is slated to go into effect in 2013 and would apply to individual policies worth $8,500 or family policies worth $23,000. A slightly higher threshold would apply for early retirees and those in high-risk professions.

    Budget analysts said they expect that employers and consumers will start to ditch the high-value plans and instead pay the money to workers in higher wages and salaries, so most of the nearly $150 billion in revenue on which Democrats are counting from the provision would come from higher income taxes.

    "Put a tax on my high-premium health plan and suddenly it's not such a good deal," said Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center. "I'd rather have the cash."

    Several relatively small tax increases will be aimed at health savings accounts and medical savings accounts. One will change the definitions for medical expenses that qualify as itemized deductions. Another will raise the penalties for withdrawing funds from these vehicles. A third would limit health-related flexible spending arrangements.

    "All of these changes are designed to make health savings accounts less attractive and cripple consumer-directed health care plans," said Michael Cannon, director of Health Policy Studies at the Cato Institute. Altogether, they would raise about $20 billion through 2019.

Thursday, 15 October 2009

  • Fixing the Faltering US Ecomony... A GREAT Idea!

    Now this might just be a good idea… whadda ya think?  It is surely better than what they have done so far…

     

    "How Would You Fix the Economy?"

    Dear Mr. President and Congress,
    Instead of giving billions and billions and billions of our tax dollars to failed insurance companies, failed car companies, failed banks, political cronies, etc, let’s try the following plan. We will call it the Patriotic Retirement Plan:

    There are about 40 million people over 50 in the work force.

    Pay them $1 million each tax free severance for early retirement with the following stipulations:

    1) They MUST retire. Suddenly 40 million job openings - Unemployment fixed.
    2) They MUST buy a new American CAR. Forty million cars ordered - Auto Industry fixed.
    3) They MUST either buy a house or pay off their mortgage - Housing Crisis fixed.

    4)  They MUST buy their own health insurance. Health Plan for seniors just fixed!!!

    Now, put all of those billions and billions and billions that were taken out for the so-called “stimulus plan” back into the treasury, pass the Fair Tax program, get rid of the IRS, insist on a balanced budget every time, and actually start following the US Constitution.

     

    Nah… it will never work… waaaaaaaayyyyyy too simple!

     

Wednesday, 02 September 2009

  • The L-o-n-g Arm of the Law?

     The Federal Agent and the Farmer…

     

    A DEA agent stops at a farm in rural Ross County, Ohio, flips up his Ray-Bans and then motions to the old farmer to come over to him.

    He tells the farmer, “Hey, hayseed, listen up!  As part of the Obama Administration’s newly organized Domestic Security Task Force, I need to inspect ALL of your ranch for illegal grown drugs and such.”

    The old farmer says, “Well, I guess that’s okay, but just don't go in that thar field over yonder.”

    The agent verbally explodes saying, “Listen, buster, I have the authority of President Obama himself with me.” Reaching into his coat pocket and pulling out his badge. The agent proudly displays it to the farmer. “See this here badge, buddy? This badge means I am allowed to go wherever I wish on any land.  No questions asked or answers given! Have I made myself clear?  Do you understand me?”

    The old farmer looks thoughtful for a moment and then he nonchalantly nods politely and goes back to his chores.

    Later, the old farmer hears horribly loud screams and spots the agent running for his life and close behind is the farmer's prize longhorn bull. With every step the bull is gaining ground on the federal agent. The agent is clearly terrified!

    The old farmer immediately throws down his tools, runs to the fence and yells at the top of his lungs......

    “Your badge! Your badge! Show him your badge Mr. Smarty-pants agent!  And be sure to tell him Obama sent you!”


Tuesday, 13 February 2007

Top Tags - Weblog

[no tags]

Marketspicemeister

  • Visit Marketspicemeister's Xanga Site
    • Name: Marketspice Meister
    • Member Since: 11/19/2004

Weblog Archives

Don't worry - your calendar is here… to see it in action just click "Save" above and refresh the page.

About Me

  • Market Spice Tea is best. Remember… the Spice must flow… he who controls the Spice controls the universe…

Chatboard (1)