The American Spectator

Joan| 2.8.09 @ 4:28PM

Mr. McCain, thank you for giving those of us with sound minds a opportunity to read and hear about the false economic theory. Everyone including the politicians should listen to Mr. Schiff. He makes the most sense of anyone I've heard. Get this man on the airwaves some more. We would all be wise to heed his words. We are a country of optimism and productivity, and not the little engine that couldn't. Wake up America!

Mary| 2.8.09 @ 5:14PM

The scariest thing about the first bail-out and all subsequent tinkering is the terror-inducing marketing of it.

I don't see how it's possible to argue against what Mr. Schiff advocates.

How can a Country that thinks a consumption based economy is every bit as salutary as an economy that creates and produces?

Do you remember President Bush telling everybody to go shopping following 9/11? I know that it was important to keep our confidence from failing, but was that really a wise way to lead?

Why and when did we give up on manufacturing? Is it because in order to pay a janitor $17/hr, you've got to pay the engineer $50? And now industry can't make ends meet?

Peter Schiff also easily points out why tagging the government as too complicated as opposed to too big is likely to yield a very low ROI.

Appeal to our stronger angels. Recall past sacrifices and hold them up as honorable and altruistic. Counter Obama's appeal to our weaker angels and to our pathologies.

I'm in love with Senator McCain again. He was marvelous on Hannity's radio show. Would that he had been that articulate and firm in priniciple during his campaign. If he would have had the courage to demand we proceed with the first bailout in a fully open, deliberative way or call it bullshit otherwise, he'd be President right now.

I haven't listened to talk radio in over a decade. I don't know how people sit through a full 3 hours of it. You know what sent me back? General Yellow Cake's scolding of Rush.

If anyone thinks that the axis of fru is going to garner 53% percent of the electorate they're out of their bloody minds.

Say what you want about the Democrats, but they understand loyalty. And no matter how stale or repetitive Rush's take on things may sometimes be, he was a foot soldier. And any movement that that throws its foot soldiers under the bus is worthy of a kick-ass diss.

Giuliani too, was marvelous on Hannity. Smart, funny, serious. He's not an unaccomplished man and he would have been just as likely to pick conservative SC justices as any other candidate.

The infant who was born alive and thrown in a red bio-hazard bag is Nixon and Blackmun's baby too.

Linda D| 2.8.09 @ 7:25PM

Brilliant man. This video needs to be spread far and wide. Government is so bloated already and is going to get much bigger. It will take decades to get out of this mess, assuming our citizens one day wake up and decide they want "to change." Once dependent on the government, we'll have generations who will know no other option.

General Liggum| 2.8.09 @ 8:53PM

"I have an issue, don't confuse me with the facts"...that's the mantra of the Left....

The Dems pasted all the feathers on the rubber chicken and knew some would fall off..but they would still have the chicken...the Reps are only trying to whittle the chicken down...they should sream loud enough so the chicken is thrown out.

Interloper| 2.9.09 @ 1:04AM

Peter Schiff is a third rate 'financial adviser,' not an economist. His last pre-Fox gig was advising Ron Paul, who favors a return to the gold standard and a flat tax. Anyone who takes Schiff seriously must be equally clueless. Indeed, he says nothing substantive in that video clip whatsoever. However, I understand Robert Stacy McCain's desperation. The experts agree with President Obama about the stimulus package, so he cited a nobody, hoping readers are too ignorant to know the difference.

The goal of the stimulus plan is to save around four million jobs, while providing improvements that need to made anyhow, for example to the infrastructure and digitization of medical records. If the package helps stabilize the economy through 2012 or so, it will have succeeded.

jack| 2.9.09 @ 6:35AM

Obama delay of banking bill to concentrate on stimulus today is a huge mistake. If the stimulus fails,the bank bill will look like an afterthought when it is more important that getting any stimulus passed. Wall Street and our financial world must know the rules of the game and right now we dont.
Its obvious Obama and Emanuel are clueless and have no idea what they are doing. Geithner has screwed up every step of the way the past four years so we cant expect much from him. If you are gonna hire tax cheats at least hire competent ones. this guy was a total failure in his last job.
the economy must readjust and this stimulus just prolongs the process and creates new problems. a disaster on ever level.

Bob| 2.9.09 @ 8:04AM

This is again a triumph of belief over reason. It's easy to talk about government being so large, but idiots like Schiff never get to the next level. Social Security and Medicare are 53% of the budget, defense is 20% of the budget, interest is 8% of the budget, and ALL other spending is less than 20% which includes things like the FDA, FTC, national parks, the capital, the white house, etc., etc., etc. So where are you going to get significant cuts? Those of you that believe this guy lack logic and reason -- and like Sarah Palin -- knowledge.

He talks about losing our manufacturing base, but in a global economy that will happen because wages are always going to be lower in third world countries. Again, the idiots here don't think about what it would take to be competitive with manufacturing again. First, we'd need to take health care out of your paychecks. Next, we'd need to reduce any safety, pollution, and worker restrictions. Certainly, we could not have things like severance pay. Next, we'd have to limit public education and you'd have to take the trash to the dump yourselves. Is that the kind of world you want to live in? Not me. And if you lose your job, there would be no unemployment insurance, social security, or medicare.

Now, as many of you know, I think government should be smaller, but that means reducing social security and medicare and also to limit our interventionalist foreign policy to limit military spending. Reducing discretionary spending is good, but cannot make a huge difference.

Interloper, actually a flat tax is a good idea. Do you really want the limited minds of our legislators trying to manage society? Under a flat tax, upper income people would actually pay more and lower income people less and the need for accountants and tax lawyers would be dramatically reduced.

Interloper| 2.9.09 @ 8:36AM

I expect the stimulus package to pass and be reasonably successful. The naysayers are largely the same people who have been in that mode all along. They said Obama would lose the primary. Then they said he would lose the election. Now they say the stimulus package won't pass. Some are saying it will pass but fail to work at least two years before its effects can be examined. The naysayers must take a perverse pleasure in naysaying.

I, on the other hand, take pleasure in the machinery of government working as it should some of the time, with a competent leader like President Obama at the helm.

A flat tax is inherently regressive because the middle and lower-income need to keep more of their income.

Basil Plumley| 2.9.09 @ 9:34AM

@ Bob

Actually, less than 10% of the budget is discretionary spending. IIRC, that is down from 50% in 1990.

BTW, can anyone (I will include Interloper) explain to us exactly where this 4Million jobs is coming from? What sectors will be increased or "saved"?
It is kind of asking "What is a non-essential worker?" What are they and why do we need them?

Now Bob, your second paragraph is quite embarrassing. In fact, I believe you actually exhibit far less knowledge than Sarah Palin. Do you even realize the biggest drawback to manufacturing? A hint: taxes!

Explain to all of your adoring fans why anyone in their right mind would spend the money to build a factory in the US of A, when it is cheaper to build elsewhere? You can write off all of your costs outside the US border yet if you build here, you have to write down a portion(depreciation). In essence, you are giving the government a loan which you get to write off in 20+ years.
Only a nitwit would think that is a great idea. Throw in the environmental regulations which can result in long delays and you have an environment hostile to business. Perhaps, you can explain to us why the Japanese, Koreans, and the Germans are building their factories here instead of the third world nations. Of course, the enticement is tax breaks.

I prefer a Fair Tax but I doubt there will be any changes in the tax code. As long as Congress has the power to give and take favors (loopholes), things will not change.

You could certainly do us all a favor a stop the gratuitous cheap shots on Palin when you and couple others are the epitome of intellectual disingenuousness.

Bob| 2.9.09 @ 10:11AM

Basil, I see you know almost as much as Sarah Palin. Do you know that the World Bank rated the U.S. the third most friendly place for business? We have a higher tax rate, but we are not anywhere near the bottom. Because you and Sarah lack the knowledge, here is the link for the total report.

http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/IW3P/IB/2007/12/26/000310607_20071226165245/Rendered/PDF/41949optmzd0OE1High1Income01PUBLIC1.pdf

Thus, your lack of knowledge actually embarrases you. Hint: You don't know what you are talking about. Again, there are lots of factors that affect business formation. Taxes are part of them, but they are not the main item. Basil, you need to stop drinking the KoolAid and start doing some research and analysis. By the way, if it was cheaper to build elsewhere, why would Honda, Toyota, BMW and Mercedes build here? You lack logic in your answer.

My shots at Palin are not gratuitous, they are factual.

Interloper - a flat tax with an exemption for the first 15-30K of income is not regressive. If you've read my comments, I believe this tax should INCLUDE ALL TAXES, including social security and medicare.

daboss| 2.9.09 @ 10:15AM

Watch America BOOM!!

Do this:

Eliminate IRS/14th Amendment. Replace ALL taxes with a consumption tax. Rich would pay more because they buy more. Manufacturing will come back because the 35% corporate tax rate is gone. Underground economy will start to pay taxes on what they buy.

And YOU have control over your tax bill. Don’t like the government policy? Curtail spending and save. Good for you and good for investments. It’s so simple its pure genius!!

That’s ACTUAL REAL change. Not the typical tax cuts from Repubs and spending increases from the Dems. We have tried it all before. Let’s try something NEW!

What say you?

Interloper| 2.9.09 @ 11:04AM

ROFL @daboss! That is so simple that the person saying it must be a simpleton.

The part about repealing the Fourteenth Amendment is particularly wacky. Obviously, you do not know what the Fourteenth Amendment does. Suffice it to say anarchy would not solve anything.

I get annoyed with many of writers at AS because they treat their audience as if it consists of stupid people. But....

daboss| 2.9.09 @ 11:24AM

Sorry - wrong amendment- repeal the 16th amendment.

so interloper ... that’s the best you got? if i am so stupid, how about a debate about the issue of a consumption tax?

Bring it on.

Holly| 2.9.09 @ 11:56AM

I have an idea. Beginning 01 Mar 09 delay collection of federal taxes paid on wages from both employers and employees until 31 Dec 09. Then if 100% of those taxes are deemed due (across the board) the employers would be responsible for paying their liability generated through the period and the employees would be responsible for paying their liability generated through the period. 01 Jan 10 resume federal tax collection on wages with each party paying their own taxes due. Just a different perspective, Holly

Interloper| 2.9.09 @ 12:08PM

Hmm. How would the many federal and state programs that must be funded by tax revenues continue to exist during a year-long tax holiday? Inquiring minds would like to know.

Basil Plumley| 2.9.09 @ 2:04PM

Dear Bob

Thank you for the gratuitous cheap shot. Of course your whole attack was bolstered by a report from the World Bank? Are you serious Clark? The World Bank?

Wait a moment .... the World Bank says we are #3 and yet all our jobs go elsewhere. And you say I have a problem with logic?

I was addressing this condescending comment of yours:
"Again, the idiots here don't think about what it would take to be competitive with manufacturing again. First, we'd need to take health care out of your paychecks. Next, we'd need to reduce any safety, pollution, and worker restrictions. Certainly, we could not have things like severance pay. Next, we'd have to limit public education and you'd have to take the trash to the dump yourselves. Is that the kind of world you want to live in? Not me. And if you lose your job, there would be no unemployment insurance, social security, or medicare."

Ask yourself one question (and try to answer honestly if you can); if the business owner could write off 100% of their costs in year one in America, would they still prefer to build their factories outside of the US?
A hint: The American worker is still the best worker in the world.

This isn't rocket science Bob, it is common sense. Then again, perhaps you can see the new factories being built from your backyard.

BTW 1) how do you know that your Palin cheap shots are factual?
2) Can you prove to us that you are smarter than Palin? You seem to be having great difficulty proving something that should be relatively easy.

Take your time ... I'll check back for your response.

ruth| 2.9.09 @ 3:07PM

Pretty soon Intergroper will be chanting, "Dear Leader President Obama." What a mind-numbed tool.

Bob| 2.9.09 @ 4:38PM

Basil, I love cheap shots.... I spent my entire career in new business development in both domestic and international roles in manufacturing and financial services. Tax rates are only one factor used in the ROI analysis. Normally, you'd do several proformas with sensitivity analyses and then make a risk based decision. I've never seen tax rates be the most important factor in the decision process.

Perhaps the most important factor in making plant decisions is the money you get from the state. Honda, Toyota, Mercedes, and BMW all got sweetheart deals with the local economies. Furthermore, building a plant is a 15-20 year decision and the acceleration of depreciation does not change the ROI substantially. I'm sure you've gone through a lot of these analyses yourself. Right?

Unfortunately, Basil, for a large, multinational company it is ROCKET SCIENCE. We used fairly sophisticated capex models designed specifically for these types of decisions.

As for the Palin proof, I'd be happy to compare my education and intelligence tests against hers. However, I could never be a politician -- I couldn't hold my tongue or prevent myself from looking down on idiocy or over-simplistic models.

Please let me know what kind of ROI model you've had experience with and how you decided on sensitivity levels.

Basil Plumley| 2.9.09 @ 7:18PM

Tres bien Bob

This is the kind of analysis I would expect from my Brother-in-law; Stanford Business School grad and past YPO president. Of course, he has not stayed with a company long enough to become part of its fabric. He does extremely well and has no regrets.

In some ways, he and his ilk are part of the problem. Everything is ROI, ROI, ROI. That is nice but what of common sense and the long term health of the company.
Yes, build the bottom line, hit your targets, and make your big bonuses, yet what of the future? Of the company workers?
The "I got mine, you worry about tomorrow" logic does not appeal to me. I daresay it does not appeal to many small family-run businesses like mine. Folks like me make those 15-20 year decisions because we are future oriented. An immediate write-off would help tremendously. I can see folks like you and my BiL not willing to make those choices. It is the difference between having a vision for the future and maintaining a disciplined ROI. The former is dynamic thinking, the latter ...... not so much.

Do you ever wonder what Henry Ford would say about the gang currently running his company? Do you think the current folks running FMC would even care?
You see, folks like you think of Henry Ford as an old fossil with no current value. In your world, the ivory tower ROI takes precedence over common sense, experience, and lessons learned. You were taught by presumably the best and brightest. They instilled in you an ego filled with your awesomeness as well as contempt for the regular person. Thus, when you max out your ROI potential with a company, you move on. I wonder how many times you have said "aprés moi, le'dejuge".

As for this comment:
"As for the Palin proof, I'd be happy to compare my education and intelligence tests against hers."

That is the kind of elitist thinking that does not take into account common sense. You and your ilk have no appreciation for the journey taken by Sarah Palin. You have no appreciation for the lessons she learned from the school of hard knocks. Your education is from an Ivory Tower. It is your life, the very essence of your being.

Your present idea of roughing it is going to a hotel with no room service. Her idea of roughing it is going out to the wild, killing a moose, and dressing said moose.

I seem to recall your posting that you were once in Vietnam as part of the military plan. I have quite a few friends of mine who were there on the same plan. Many faced death and still have an aura of humility and humanity. They are outstanding folks.
They have told me on many occasions that those who served in the military and lacked humility and humanity were frauds and/or never faced death. A couple of them have gone on to teaching at the War College.

Therefore, comparison tests for education and intelligence is ridiculous. There is not any reason to take your word that you are smarter than Palin. Based on what you have written, your lack of humility, and your general lack of decency, I would be extremely wary before I take what you say about Palin at face value.

You may have the last word, sil vous plait.

ruth| 2.9.09 @ 7:56PM

Bob's funny. He proudly and repeatedly announces his superiority over Governor Palin, and expects us to take his word for it. For all we know, he's a bum living under a freeway overpass, using the computer at the local homeless shelter. Doesn't matter, though, because it's obvious Sarah Palin is a gifted, intelligent woman who has already risen to career heights beyond most of us. Bob could never attain Sarah's professional position because he doesn't have her people skills or her integrity. He is quite envious of the Governor, and it doesn't recommend him. Did girls beat you up on the playground when you were little, Bob? Did one of them look like Sarah Palin?

Basil Plumley| 2.10.09 @ 12:35AM

@Ruth

Bob makes plenty of assumptions about the intelligence of folks. He assumes he is smarter than folks without any empirical data. What is odd about Bob is that he is not just content with smugness. Bob's antagonism towards Palin crosses the line into hatred. Such antagonism has been known as a sympton of insecurity and weakness. That is a common thread with many of those bleaters who constantly exhibit their hatred towards Palin. Oddly, they never compare their intelligence to Obama/Biden et al. I wonder why.

A lot of folks like Bob are plenty smart to invest all their money with Bernie Madoff. Bob shows more respect for those investment fools than he does for Palin. That's too bad; many never got their ROI.

Basil Plumley| 2.10.09 @ 12:38AM

Oh, as to my sentence;

A couple of them have gone on to teaching at the War College.

I meant to say that a couple of my friends who saw combat in Vietnam went on to teach at the War College.
Upon re-reading, it looked as if I were saying that a couple of the frauds went on to teach at the War College. That was not the intent. Mea culpa.

Bob| 2.10.09 @ 8:18AM

Basil, you should learn something from your brother instead of feeling inferior to him because you don't understand business. If you really had common sense, you'd also consider this argument.

Would you go to a surgeon who did not have knowledge about your anatomy but had common sense? Of course not. Running a business or running a government is the same thing. The surgeon has studied different techniques, reads the latest JAMA articles, goes to conferences, and then has experience. The business executive of a multinational corporation needs to know about how ROI works and what it means or he can't understand the result or the weaknesses of what is given him/her. In my mind, there are two areas where a President needs knowledge in order to judge their decisions -- economics, the way Congress works and military history and how it relates to the presidency. Reagan worked for a number of years to develop these things. Palin has proven she knows virtually nothing about these things. Common sense doesn't work for your surgeon and would not alone make a good President. If YOU had any common sense you'd understand that.

Basil, you need to stop being jealous of your brother and stop making excuses.

Bob| 2.10.09 @ 8:27AM

Ruthie, you insist that Palin is intelligent, but where is ANY proof? Pelosi is Speaker of the House -- a position much higher than Governor of Alaska -- and nobody thinks she is highly intelligent. Certainly I don't. Palin couldn't answer lots of questions put to her and refused to answer question in debate. She has no record of outstanding achievement in school or any specific discipline. Saying that she is intelligent without any proof shows YOUR lack of intelligence, Ruthie.

Basil Plumley| 2.10.09 @ 10:20AM

Ya know Bob

Reading comprehension is fundamental. It is my Brother-in-law not my brother. I am not jealous at all; my sister married a great guy. Lastly, your analogy proves you haven't a clue what I was talking about.

I posted of thinking for the future versus thinking of the present. Thus, your analogy does not come close to addressing my concerns.

As for Reagan, when do you think he was ready to L-E-A-D? 1964? 1968? 1976? 1980?

What Reagan brought to the table was positive ideas and inspiration. He gave us honest choices and not fear. Yet, you and your ilk took to calling him an "amiable dunce".

Let's face it Bob, what you desire most is total control. Your contempt for what you can not control is assuaged by the need for name-calling. You and your ilk will never understand why Sarah Palin connects with many Americans. Most of them are not a bunch of yahoos and nitwits as you would think.

Oddly, what you, the smartest one, embrace most is mediocrity and incompetence. It is a classic fear of reality. If you subjected Obama-Biden-Reid-Pelosi-any Democrat to the same standards and scorn that you subject Palin, you would have nothing to cling to. However, at least you would have an honest opinion about life.

To address this screed of yours:

"Palin couldn't answer lots of questions put to her and refused to answer question in debate. She has no record of outstanding achievement in school or any specific discipline. Saying that she is intelligent without any proof shows YOUR lack of intelligence, Ruthie."

There you go again Bob. You do realize that much of her interview answers were left on the cutting room floor. You do realize that you are parroting the DNC talking points which shows a lack of original thought on your part. You do realize that it was Biden who consistently lied throughout the debate.
Palin is refreshingly original and not plagiarized. Those with sense, common and uncommon, realize that ......

Bob| 2.10.09 @ 12:43PM

Basil, I guess reading comprehension is something you should learn. I've always said I liked Reagan, voted for him, and thought he was one of the better Presidents. For that matter, Clinton was just average in my opinion. I also liked Bush1 and voted for him.

Regarding Reagan, it is well documented that he had an intellectual curiosity about government and constantly read and studied various authors. Palin, it seems, has no intellectual curiosity about government.

Please show me some evidence of what was left on the cutting room floor of some of those interviews if you are going to make a claim like that.

I am not a fan of Biden and thought he was a terrible VP pick, almost as bad as Palin. But Obama was clearly intelligent, understood history, and knew a lot more than McCain about economics. Plus, he had an even temperament. Romney was my first choice as I've said many times before assuming you can read.

Palin is surely original -- and so is the construction guy down the street. You can't make good decisions without a good knowledge base, and she has practically none.