November 14, 2008


Government is still the problem

Filed under: Economics, Tax Policy
By Centinel (Email) @ 11:08 am

I know that many of you in SA Land are inherently suspicious of economics (having, as it does, only a limited impact on abortion), but some of us think it’s kind of important. If you are part of this group, I ask your indulgence.

The Heritage Foundation has recently released a brilliant, easy to digest issue backgrounder that reminds us that government does not create jobs or wealth, nor can it provide stimulus to the economy. It can only shift money from productive areas to less-productive areas, which inhibits economic growth. I think this is a must read piece and a reminder that, mandate or no, the Democrats are destined to repeat the failures of the past (with the help of some Republicans).

Bonus: The article also explains why Bush’s “tax rebates” in 2001 were a bad idea.


17 Responses to “Government is still the problem”

  1. Flambeaux says:

    There are those of us who care about both, and fail to grasp an inherent tension between the two.

    Thanks.

  2. Fireduck says:

    I’m inherently suspicious of abortion because it has a limited impact on economics.

  3. BillyHW says:

    I know that many of you in SA Land are inherently suspicious of economics (having, as it does, only a limited impact on abortion), but some of us think it’s kind of important.

    Could you sound any more arrogant and condescending?

    I’m inherently suspicious of abortion because it has a limited impact on economics.

    Ya, 50 million missing people has no effect on things like GDP and economic growth and labour supply and Social Security…

  4. Centinel says:

    Could you sound any more arrogant and condescending?

    Tell you what, boy genius, I’ll work on it while you count up all of the posts on this site about abortion since the election. Use your toes if needed and any branches in that stick you’ve got shoved up there. Deal?

  5. Centinel says:

    There are those of us who care about both, and fail to grasp an inherent tension between the two.

    I don’t see a tension, but I do recognize a connection. It strikes me as strange though, that so many people seem to be ignoring the unprecedented economic upheaval that’s happening right under our feet to re-discuss the abortion issue for the umpteenth time. I’ve even seen blame for the recent electoral debacle placed at the feet of “libertarians” in the party in the comments section.

    It’s no secret that I believe that the GOP will be rebuilt on smaller government and economic liberty, or it is doomed for electoral obscurity. I also think that we need to remember in the wake of the recent thrashing and eight years of Bush that Reagan is still right and we can be the party of ideas.

  6. BillyHW says:

    Feddie, why do you let this abortion-loving Ron Paul jackass post here?

  7. Centinel says:

    Feddie, why do you let this abortion-loving Ron Paul jackass post here?

    Ahhh, his mother’s skirt . . .

  8. Dale Price says:

    The article also explains why Bush’s “tax rebates” in 2001 were a bad idea.

    May have been a bad idea in macroeconomic terms, but it was a godsend when my wife and I needed a new dryer.

  9. Fireduck says:

    “May have been a bad idea in macroeconomic terms, but it was a godsend when my wife and I needed a new dryer.”

    Yeah, too bad that I had to pay for part of that new dryer.

  10. c matt says:

    Some of us are suspicious of economics because so many economists seem to be full of bullshit.

  11. Feddie says:

    I am almost certain that Centinel has never expressed support for abortion here at SA (as that would disqualify him from posting here). Indeed, he has made his pro-life views clear. I think he is simply attempting to highlight economic issues of concern to conservatives.

    I do, however, agree that the tenor of this post invited Billy’s response.

  12. Joel L says:

    OK, apparently it is time for flying pigs to poop on my head.

    I agree with everything that Centinel wrote.

    Everyone,

    Lets not be so sensitive.

  13. Centinel says:

    Who’s being sensitive? I must admit to being at fault here. My comments were uncalled for. In the future, I will endeavor to place emoticons behind my satirical sentences so that the obtuse can recognize my intent. My bad.

    But back to the matter at hand — read it, learn it, live it.

  14. Fireduck says:

    Centinel, you should know that any posts or comments on SA that include the word ‘abortion’ must clearly tie the word ‘abortion’ to ‘bad’ or ‘terrible,’ regardless of your point or the discussion at hand. If you don’t, you are a baby killer. And are going to hell.

  15. Feddie says:

    Ok, folks, let’s all move along. There’s no reason to pick fights for the sake of picking fights. We’re supposed to be on the same team, right?

  16. Crankycon says:

    Centinel tried to provoke a reaction, he did, and now people are focusing on one aspect of a post that is entirely the right message. As Feddie said, move along.

  17. [...] During this election year I blogged daily trying to change the minds and hearts of the American voters. It seems clear to me that God’s purpose would have been better served if Obama would not have won, due mostly to his willingness and what seems a times eagerness to increase the number of abortions in the world. There are many other issues that I have expounded upon for opposing President-elect Obama’s rise to power. One in particular is the types of judges that will be forced upon us during his reign. Even though Obama tends to ride the fence on Gay marriage in America, the types of judges he will place on the Supreme Court and lower courts will be liberal through and through make no mistake about it. These new judges will try and force Gay marriage up Americans. As Christians we must live our lives so that others will change theirs, [...]

Leave a Reply

Powered by WordPress