Back in 2010, I crunched the numbers from the Congressional Budget Office and reported that the budget could be balanced in just 10 years if politicians exercised a modicum of fiscal discipline and limited annual spending increases to about two percent yearly.
Well, the new CBO 10-year forecast was released this morning. I’m going to give you three guesses about what I discovered when I looked at the numbers, and the first two don’t count.
Yes, you guessed it. As the chart illustrates (click to enlarge), balancing the budget doesn’t require any tax increases. Nor does it require big spending cuts (though that would be a very good idea).
Even if we assume that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts are made permanent, all that is needed is for politicians to put government on a modest diet so that overall spending grows by about two percent each year. In other words, make sure the budget doesn’t grow faster than inflation.
Tens of millions of households and businesses manage to meet this simple test every year. Surely it’s not asking too much to get the same minimum level of fiscal restraint from the crowd in Washington, right?
At this point, you may be asking yourself whether it’s really this simple. After all, you’ve probably heard politicians and journalists say that deficits are so big that we have no choice but to accept big tax increases and “draconian” spending cuts.
But that’s because politicians use dishonest Washington budget math. They begin each fiscal year by assuming that spending automatically will increase based on factors such as inflation, demographics, and previously legislated program changes.
This creates a “baseline,” and if they enact a budget that increases spending by less than the baseline, that increase magically becomes a cut. This is what allowed some politicians to say that last year’s Ryan budget cut spending by trillions of dollars even though spending actually would have increased by an average of 2.8 percent each year.
Needless to say, proponents of big government deliberately use dishonest budget math because it tilts the playing field in favor of bigger government and higher taxes.
There are two important caveats about these calculations.
2. We should be focusing on the underlying problem of excessive government, not the symptom of too much red ink. By pointing out the amount of spending restraint that would balance the budget, some people will incorrectly conclude that getting rid of deficits is the goal.
Last but not least, here is the video I narrated in 2010 showing how red ink would quickly disappear if politicians curtailed their profligacy and restrained spending growth.
___________________________
Other than updating the numbers, the video is just as accurate today as it was back in 2010. And the concluding message—that there is no good argument for tax increases—also is equally relevant today.
P.P.S. Some people will say that the CBO baseline is unrealistic because it assumes the sequester will take place. They may be right if they’re predicting politicians are too irresponsible and profligate to accept about $100 billion of annual reductions from a $4,000 billion-plus budget, but that underscores the core message that there needs to be a cap on total spending so that the crowd in Washington isn’t allowed to turn America into Greece.
The Fed fails to grasp that an interest rate is a price, the price of time. Attempting to manipulate that price is as destructive as any other government price control.
To know what is wrong with the Federal Reserve, one must first understand the nature of money. Money is like any other good in our economy that emerges from the market to satisfy the needs and wants of consumers. Its particular usefulness is that it helps facilitate indirect exchange, making it easier for us to buy and sell goods because there is a common way of measuring their value. Money is not a government phenomenon, and it need not and should not be managed by government. When central banks like the Fed manage money they are engaging in price fixing, which leads not to prosperity but to disaster.
WSJ’s Danny Yadron discusses Ron Paul’s proposal for $1 trillion in budget cuts with “Mean Street” host Evan Newmark. Paul’s cuts would come in large part as a result of cutting several cabinet positions. AP Photo.
The Federal Reserve has caused every single boom and bust that has occurred in this country since the bank’s creation in 1913. It pumps new money into the financial system to lower interest rates and spur the economy. Adding new money increases the supply of money, making the price of money over time—the interest rate—lower than the market would make it. These lower interest rates affect the allocation of resources, causing capital to be malinvested throughout the economy. So certain projects and ventures that appear profitable when funded at artificially low interest rates are not in fact the best use of those resources.
Eventually, the economic boom created by the Fed’s actions is found to be unsustainable, and the bust ensues as this malinvested capital manifests itself in a surplus of capital goods, inventory overhangs, etc. Until these misdirected resources are put to a more productive use—the uses the free market actually desires—the economy stagnates.
The great contribution of the Austrian school of economics to economic theory was in its description of this business cycle: the process of booms and busts, and their origins in monetary intervention by the government in cooperation with the banking system. Yet policy makers at the Federal Reserve still fail to understand the causes of our most recent financial crisis. So they find themselves unable to come up with an adequate solution.
In many respects the governors of the Federal Reserve System and the members of the Federal Open Market Committee are like all other high-ranking powerful officials. Because they make decisions that profoundly affect the workings of the economy and because they have hundreds of bright economists working for them doing research and collecting data, they buy into the pretense of knowledge—the illusion that because they have all these resources at their fingertips they therefore have the ability to guide the economy as they see fit.
Nothing could be further from the truth. No attitude could be more destructive. What the Austrian economists Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich von Hayek victoriously asserted in the socialist calculation debate of the 1920s and 1930s—the notion that the marketplace, where people freely decide what they need and want to pay for, is the only effective way to allocate resources—may be obvious to many ordinary Americans. But it has not influenced government leaders today, who do not seem to see the importance of prices to the functioning of a market economy.
The manner of thinking of the Federal Reserve now is no different than that of the former Soviet Union, which employed hundreds of thousands of people to perform research and provide calculations in an attempt to mimic the price system of the West’s (relatively) free markets. Despite the obvious lesson to be drawn from the Soviet collapse, the U.S. still has not fully absorbed it.
The Fed fails to grasp that an interest rate is a price—the price of time—and that attempting to manipulate that price is as destructive as any other government price control. It fails to see that the price of housing was artificially inflated through the Fed’s monetary pumping during the early 2000s, and that the only way to restore soundness to the housing sector is to allow prices to return to sustainable market levels. Instead, the Fed’s actions have had one aim—to keep prices elevated at bubble levels—thus ensuring that bad debt remains on the books and failing firms remain in business, albatrosses around the market’s neck.
The Fed’s quantitative easing programs increased the national debt by trillions of dollars. The debt is now so large that if the central bank begins to move away from its zero interest-rate policy, the rise in interest rates will result in the U.S. government having to pay hundreds of billions of dollars in additional interest on the national debt each year. Thus there is significant political pressure being placed on the Fed to keep interest rates low. The Fed has painted itself so far into a corner now that even if it wanted to raise interest rates, as a practical matter it might not be able to do so. But it will do something, we know, because the pressure to “just do something” often outweighs all other considerations.
What exactly the Fed will do is anyone’s guess, and it is no surprise that markets continue to founder as anticipation mounts. If the Fed would stop intervening and distorting the market, and would allow the functioning of a truly free market that deals with profit and loss, our economy could recover. The continued existence of an organization that can create trillions of dollars out of thin air to purchase financial assets and prop up a fundamentally insolvent banking system is a black mark on an economy that professes to be free.
Mr. Paul, a congressman from Texas, is seeking the Republican presidential nomination
In the clip above you will see comments from Ron Paul from the December 2011 Iowa debate and below you will read what Paul plans to do if elected President of the United States.
Presidential candidate Ron Paul has released a fiscal reform plan that would dramatically cut spending and rein in the size and scope of the federal government. My reaction to the proposal can be summed up in one word: hallelujah.
Republican policymakers – including the current GOP field of presidential candidates – talk a good game about reducing spending, but very few are willing to spell out exactly what they’d cut. As NRO’s Kevin Williamson puts it in the title of his write-up on the plan, “Ron Paul Dropping a Reality Bomb on the GOP Field.”
The following are some of the plan’s highlights:
Paul would immediately eliminate five cabinet-level departments: Commerce, Education, Energy, HUD, and Interior.
Paul says his plan would cut spending by $1 trillion in the first year alone, and balance the budget in three years without increasing taxes.
Funding for the wars would end. That’s not isolationism – it’s a common sense position that also reflects popular opinion. In addition, foreign aid spending would be zeroed out.
On entitlements, younger people would be given the freedom to opt out of Social Security and Medicare. Spending would be frozen for Medicaid and other welfare programs and they would be converted to block-grant programs.
That’s an ambitious agenda to say the least, and one that the press is likely to dismiss as a pipe-dream. Then again, Paul has managed to single-handedly turn the Federal Reserve into a campaign issue, which nobody could have foreseen just several short years ago. In fact, several of Paul’s fellow candidates for the GOP nod have taken to echoing his anti-Federal Reserve sentiments. Hopefully, the other candidates will copy Paul again by getting specific on what they’d cut. If not, they should be prepared to explain to the electorate why taxpayers should keep funding the departments that Paul would ax.
Two very wise men below: Milton Friedman – Illegal Immigration – PT 1 (1 of 2) Professor Friedman looks at the dynamics of illegal immigration. See part two: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfU9Fqah-f4http://Libertypen.com _______________________________________ Back in 1980 I read the book “Free to Choose” by Milton and Rose Friedman. I noticed that Milton made it clear both in […]
Max Brantley in the Arkansas Times Blog reports that Ron Paul is leading in Iowa. Maybe it is time to take a closer look at his views. In the above clip you will see Chistopher Hitchens discuss Ron Paul’s views. In the clip below you will find Ron Paul’s latest commercial. Below is a short […]
Below is a portion of an article I read concerning Ron Paul’s social views. Ron Paul (Cheryl Senter/AP) Saint Paul: Inside Ron Paul’s effort to convince Christian conservatives that he’s their man By Chris MoodyPolitical Reporter By Chris Moody | The Ticket – Fri, Dec 9, 2011 ‘Does it take some explanation? Yes. Can it be […]
Uploaded by ronpaul on Oct 12, 2011 http://www.RonPaul2012.com – Congressman Ron Paul’s new ad titled “Life” _________________________ Below is a portion of an article I read concerning Ron Paul’s social views. Ron Paul (Cheryl Senter/AP) Saint Paul: Inside Ron Paul’s effort to convince Christian conservatives that he’s their man By Chris MoodyPolitical Reporter By Chris […]
Recently heard Timothy Goeglein on American Family Radio and he shared this story that is in the video clip above. Below is a review of Goeglein’s book which on Bush’s values. The Man in the Middle by Timothy S. Goeglein An Inside Account of Faith and Politics in the George W. Bush Era Timothy Goeglein spent […]
Uploaded by IowaWatch on Mar 8, 2011 Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, on the University of Iowa campus on Monday, March 7, 2011. Video by Adam B Sullivan More: http://caucus.iowawatch.org _________________________________ Below is a portion of an article I read concerning Ron Paul’s social views. Ron Paul (Cheryl Senter/AP) Saint Paul: Inside Ron Paul’s effort […]
Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich appears at a news conference before a tea party rally in New York Saturday. (AP Photo/Craig Ruttle) Who would have thought that the mainstream candidate Mitt Romney would fall to third in the polls in Iowa behind Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul? I am not too happy with Newt because […]
DES MOINES, IOWA– Ron Paul’s presidential campaign released a comparitvely edgy new ad Monday that will air on local and cable networks across Iowa and New Hampshire. The spot touts Paul’s call to cut a trillion dollars from federal budget in his first year in office. Played over a rock track, a man’s voice in the […]
Ron Paul’s Pro-life view Ron Paul’s Pro-Life Speech in Ames, Iowa Uploaded by RonPaul2008dotcom on Aug 13, 2011 Free email updates: http://www.RonPaul.com/welcome.php Please like, share, subscribe & comment! http://www.RonPaul.com 08/13/2011– Ron Paul is America’s leading voice for limited, constitutional government, low taxes, free markets, sound money, and a pro-America foreign policy. ___________________________________ Related posts: Crowd […]
Ron Paul on healthcare (Republican debate of 10-18-11 part 3) Ron Paul sets the liberals straight on the solution for our healthcare problem in this video clip above during one of the presidential debates. Despite Flaws, U.S. Health Care the Best by Michael D. Tanner Michael Tanner is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, […]
I really like Ron Paul a lot. OCTOBER 20, 2011 Blame the Fed for the Financial Crisis The Fed fails to grasp that an interest rate is a price, the price of time. Attempting to manipulate that price is as destructive as any other government price control. By RON PAUL To know what is wrong with […]
I really like Ron Paul a lot and the reasons I like him are in this article below and in the clip above. Ron Paul’s Success Posted by David Boaz The Washington Post reports that Ron Paul “is enjoying a surge in support and the most high-profile campaign of his life. ” Paul’s unwavering ideals […]
Classic Ron Paul: “We have not seen any sincere effort to cut any spending” I really like Ron Paul. Ron Paul’s ‘Plan to Restore America’ Posted by Tad DeHaven Presidential candidate Ron Paul has released a fiscal reform plan that would dramatically cut spending and rein in the size and scope of the federal government. My reaction to […]
Ron Paul speaking at Values Voter Summit In this speech above Ron Paul repeats his view that we should not have a Dept of Education and the article below does the same thing. Beating Back Big (Ed.) Brother? Posted by Neal McCluskey It certainly seems quixotic to try to reverse the federal invasion of American […]
http://www.heritage.org/index Is the American Dream dead? How free is America’s economy? Check out the 2011 Index of Economic Freedom for all the answers.
______________________
Economic freedom is not heading the right direction in the USA. My son Wilson has been asking me if there are any other countries that are less socialistic then us and I have been painting a pretty bleak picture out there for him. This article and chart below show there are some countries heading the right direction. Unfortunately, the USA is not one of them.
by James D. Gwartney, Robert Lawson and Joshua Hall
James Gwartney is a professor at Florida State University. Robert Lawson is a professor at Southern Methodist University. Joshua Hall is a professor at Beloit College. They are co-authors of the Economic Freedom of the World report, which can be found at http://www.freetheworld.com, and is co-published by the Cato Institute.
Economic freedom in the United States is on the wane. Historically a standard bearer for freer markets, the United States has seen its economic freedom rating fall in the last decade according to the latest Economic Freedom of the World index, published by a world-wide network of institutes. In 2000, the U.S. was ranked 3rd in the world behind only Hong Kong and Singapore, but in the most recent report, the U.S. is ranked 10th behind countries like Canada, Chile, Australia, and the United Kingdom.
The index measures the degree to which people in a nation are free to pursue their own economic objectives without government taxes and regulations, as well as the extent to which government protects property rights and provides a sound monetary environment. The decline of the U.S. is the result of massively higher government spending and borrowing, increased regulation, and especially less secure property rights. Ballooning budget deficits are crowding out private credit causing the rating in this component to fall to 0.0 from 9.3 (out of 10) since 2000. Asset forfeiture laws, eminent domain abuse, the wars on drugs and terrorism, TSA, and warrantless wiretaps have apparently taken their toll on the security of property rights.
The so-called Washington Consensus of the 1990s — free trade, stable money, and privatization — appears dead. The housing bubbles, financial crises, bankruptcies, bailouts, stimulus, debt crises, and erratic markets of the past few years seem to have led to a new consensus. Policymakers now tell us that markets have failed, and government stimulus, subsidies and new regulations are needed to set things right.
James Gwartney is a professor at Florida State University. Robert Lawson is a professor at Southern Methodist University. Joshua Hall is a professor at Beloit College. They are co-authors of the Economic Freedom of the World report, which can be found at http://www.freetheworld.com, and is co-published by the Cato Institute.
When evaluating such claims, it is important to remember the fundamental truth of economic life: Markets work. When people are free to buy, sell, produce, trade, and move they do a pretty good job of bettering themselves and others in the process. This is not just common sense or idle theory — there is tons of evidence.
Nations that score higher on the index tend to be richer, grow faster, have less poverty, live longer, be more educated, and on and on. On virtually every measure of the good life, we find that more economic freedom yields better results. Other research finds economic freedom corresponds with less warfare, greater human rights, more gender equity, less unemployment, improved democracy, more trust, and less corruption. The results of the Economic Freedom of the World project and the scholarly analysis it has facilitated are simply overwhelming. Economic freedom works.
Over the past decade, the rating of the United States has fallen almost a full point on the economic freedom scale. Prior research indicates that a decline of this magnitude will reduce a country’s long-term growth rate by at least a full percentage point. In the case of the United States, this will mean future average annual growth of real GDP of 2 percent rather than our 3 percent historical average.
While economic freedom has fallen in the United States, there is good news in the former communist world. A number of formerly centrally planned economies have made remarkable progress toward freer markets during the past decade. Eight of them, Slovakia, Estonia, Hungary, Lithuania, Bulgaria, Albania, Mongolia, and Georgia, now rank in the top 40. By way of comparison, only three Latin American countries, Chile, Panama, and Peru, place in the top 40. All of these countries now rank higher than Sweden and France, for example.
With economic freedom, profits and losses direct resources toward socially beneficial activities. When too many resources are allocated by politics, a system of crony capitalism emerges where politicians can reward the politically powerful. Unlike true entrepreneurs, crony capitalists do not create wealth; instead they plunder wealth from taxpayers and other citizens.
America has prospered historically because we have chosen economic freedom rather than political allocation and crony capitalism. To the extent we move away from economic freedom, our future prosperity will be diminished.
This is the second of two posts. Here is the link to the first post. In this second post I will show that the pro-life Republicans hold the the Biblical pro-life view that Jesus would embrace if he were here today and the pro-choice view would be rejected (a minority of Republicans are pro-choice though and some Democrats are pro-life).
It seems Democratic Rep. Garry Smith of El Dorado stepped into a bit of a mess this week when speaking to the newly formed Union County Democratic Club. Perhaps he wasn’t aware that intrepid cub reporter Heather Hawley of the El Dorado News-Times was in the room taking notes when he promptly stuck both feet firmly in his mouth.
He began with saying how proud he was to be a Democrat going so far as to say “if Jesus were here today, he would be a Democrat because he tried to help everybody and he still does.”
He then offered praise for the head of his party, President Obama, saying he is “proud of his leadership ability and his tenacity” and hopes he gets elected to a second term.
This article first appeared in the Viewpoint column of the Christian Research Journal, volume 27, number 1 (2004). For further information or to subscribe to the Christian Research Journal go to:http://www.equip.org.
Scott Klusendorf has presented several excellent pro-life arguments in his feature article in this issue of the Journal based upon the hypothetical “given” that Scripture is silent on the issue of abortion. Many scholars, however, believe Scripture does, in fact, address the issue, even if not explicitly. Scripture provides us with principles that, through the exercise of godly wisdom, can be applied to the wide variety of situations we encounter in modern culture. In the realm of human behavior, there is “nothing new under the sun,” and the Bible, written by One who knows the human heart intimately, does indeed speak to every aspect of human life, including our thoughts, our actions, and our beliefs.
The value of human life as something special, a gift from God, is found throughout Scripture. The commandment not to murder carries with it the corollary responsibility to save and honor life. Many today dismiss the influence of God’s moral law on the nations of the West. The laws of most of those nations, nevertheless, are steeped in the recognition of such things as “inalienable rights” — inalienable because they are derived from our Creator. One such inalienable right is life.
The story of how Western civilizations have departed from a high view of human life to the current view that justifies infanticide is sad and complex; indeed, modern Western culture has sanctified a form of infanticide. Abortion is internal infanticide: the murder of a child at the most vulnerable time of life — those precious months when the child develops and grows while sheltered in the womb. There is no medical, philosophical, theological, or rational difference between the violent murder of an infant who has lived long enough to travel down the birth canal and the same infant separated by a small period of time or a space measurable in inches. Undeniable facts, knowable to anyone who inquires into the subject, establish the humanity and personhood of the infant in the womb. Modern society, however, preferring sexual license to truth and morality, has sanctioned infanticide under the more palatable term “abortion” and the even more wishful phrase “termination of pregnancy.” So committed are the proponents of intrauterine infanticide that the procedure known as “partial-birth abortion,” an act comparable to the mass murders the Nazis committed at Auschwitz and Dachau, is unashamedly protected and defended at all political and moral cost by many of the highest leaders in government.
The passage of time has only added to the guilt of destroying our young. Our advancing technology now allows us to peer directly into the womb and observe the wonder of the developing child. We now know, beyond question, that the preborn child is an individual human being who possesses a unique genetic code. Anyone who uses terms like “mass of tissue” to describe the preborn child is engaging in sophistry, for the facts demonstrate beyond all doubt his or her humanity and individuality. These facts are so compelling on any logical, scientific, or forensic level that the proponents of abortion, in general, seek to avoid, at all costs, direct and fair debate with those who oppose abortion and who are well prepared to make their case.
The immorality of abortion is also easily discerned by a review of the biblical facts, and Klusendorf has laid out the case along a number of lines. Scripture is the firmest foundation upon which to condemn this heinous act. The Bible provides no basis on which anyone can possibly build a case for the murder of unborn children, and the few attempts that have been made to do so are so easily refuted that it is easy to understand why their originators hide from serious interaction with biblical scholars and apologists. The biblical case against the taking of life is, in fact, full and robust, even though the specific action of abortion (since it utilizes modern technological procedures) is not explicitly addressed. Human technology progresses; yet humans remain unchanged. The principles of Scripture, therefore, remain applicable today.
God differentiates Himself from all false gods primarily by claiming to be the Creator of all things. His greatest creation is humankind, which is created in His image (Gen. 1:27). Humans are the special workmanship of God, different from all the rest of His creation. Listen to these words of the psalmist:
For You formed my inward parts;
You wove me in my mother’s womb.
I will give thanks to You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made;
Wonderful are Your works,
And my soul knows it very well.
My frame was not hidden from You,
When I was made in secret,
And skillfully wrought in the depths of the earth;
Your eyes have seen my unformed substance;
And in Your book were all written
The days that were ordained for me,
When as yet there was not one of them.(Ps. 139:13–16 NASB1995 ed.)
The Bible knows nothing of humanity as a random-chance result of natural processes. Humanity is the specific creation of God, and clearly the existence of a person can be traced from the very first stages of development prior to birth. John the Baptist, for example, experienced the ministry of the Holy Spirit while yet unborn, for when Mary greeted John’s mother, Elizabeth, the child leaped in the womb at the sound of Mary’s voice (Luke 1:41). Inanimate objects and “masses of tissue” do not respond to the ministry of the Spirit, nor do they leap at the sound of the voice of the Lord’s mother. How can the personhood of the preborn child be denied in such a situation as this? Are we seriously to make John an exception? If so, on what basis?
One of the most important passages on this topic is found in Exodus 21:22–25. The passage reads:
And if men fight and hit a pregnant woman and her child is born prematurely [ESV: “her children come out”], but there is no serious injury, he will surely be punished in accordance with what the woman’s husband will put on him, and he will pay what the court decides. But if there is serious injury, then you will give a life for a life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise. (NET)
Many attempts have been made to confuse this passage and strip it of its clarity. Some ancient translators inserted their own interpretation into the passage, and many have followed their understanding over the years. One could claim that a “majority” of commentators have taken the passage to refer only to a miscarriage; yet, the text is far less obscure than many would have us believe. Consider the following: the term yeled in the original text is translated “child” with reference to a living human being the vast majority of the times it is used in the Old Testament. This is joined with the verb yasa, “to come out,” which is never used in the Bible to refer to a miscarriage. Only once in all the uses of this verb regarding birth is it found in a passage that speaks of something other than a live birth, that being an obvious case of stillbirth (Num. 12:12). There is no reason, however, to think that anything other than the live birth of a human being is in view inExodus 21:22 — a live birth that is brought on prematurely by men striking a pregnant woman while fighting with each other. In more than 1,075 uses of this word in the Hebrew Bible, it is never translated “miscarriage.” This is clearly a live, but premature, birth.1
The man who strikes the woman is to be punished for bringing on the premature birth. The phrase “if there is no serious injury” refers to both the mother and the child born of her; to say otherwise is to ignore the normative use of yeled and yasa. The phrase “if there is serious injury,” therefore, would likewise refer to both the mother and the child. What follows, then, is the lex talionis, which indicates that the punishment in the case of more serious injury should be “life for life,” literally “soul for soul.” This text identifies the yeled, the child born prematurely, as a nephesh, a soul, a living human being. It then applies the death penalty in the case of the death of either the mother orthe child.
The testimony of Scripture is compelling: Life is a sacred gift, and we are to protect and honor it. Taking the life of a child in the womb differs not at all from taking the life of the mother, or anyone else. All the platitudes and politically correct phrases will not change the verdict of God: Abortion is infanticide, and it is an abomination in His eyes.
_________________
This is where I would caution a fellow Christian like Garry Smith. We have to let the Bible be our guide in our lives and that means being pro-life or else we will just be like the world. I have often wondered why we got to this point in our country’s life and we allow abortion. The answer is found in the words of Francis Schaeffer.
Philosopher and Theologian, Francis A. Schaeffer has argued, “If there are no absolutes by which to judge society, then society is absolute.” Francis Schaeffer, How Shall We Then Live? (Old Tappan NJ: Fleming H Revell Company, 1976), p. 224.
Below is a clip from the film series “How Then Shall We Live?”
ABORTION – THE SILENT SCREAM 1 / Extended, High-Resolution Version (with permission from APF). Republished with Permission from Roy Tidwell of American Portrait Films as long as the following credits are shown: VHS/DVDs Available American Portrait Films Call 1-800-736-4567 http://www.amport.com The Hand of God-Selected Quotes from Bernard N. Nathanson, M.D., Unjust laws exist. Shall we […]
Dr. Bernard N. Nathanson, a leading pro-life advocate and convert to Catholicism, died at the age of 84 on Monday a week ago in his New York home, after a long struggle with cancer. The Hand of God-Selected Quotes from Bernard N. Nathanson, M.D., Chapter 12 is titled To The Thanatoriums, an allusion the Walker […]
The pro-life position is very important to a great many of the freshmen members of the House of Representatives. As you can see above in the clip from the film series Whatever Happened to the Human Race? by Francis Schaeffer and C. Everett Koop, the unborn baby is a child, but we are treating many […]
When I think of the things that make me sad concerning this country, the first thing that pops into my mind is our treatment of unborn children. Donald Trump is probably going to run for president of the United States. Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council recently had a conversation with him concerning the […]
Friedman: Once all of this was a swamp, covered with forest. The Canarce Indians who lived here traded the 22 square miles of soggy Manhattan Island to the Dutch for $24.00 worth of cloth and trinkets. The newcomers founded a city, New Amsterdam at the edge of an empty continent. In the years that followed, it proved a magnet for millions of people from across the Atlantic; people who were driven by fear and poverty; who were attracted by the promise of freedom and plenty. They fanned out over the continent and built a new nation with their sweat, their enterprise and their vision of a better future.
For the first time in their lives, many were truly free to pursue their own objectives. That freedom released the human energies which created the United States. For the immigrants who were welcomed by this statue, America was truly a land of opportunity.
They poured ashore in their best clothes, eager and expectant, carrying what little they owned. They were poor, but they all had a great deal of hope. Once they arrived, they found, as my parents did, not an easy life, but a very hard life. But for many there were friends and relatives to help them get started __ to help them make a home, get a job, settle down in the new country. There were many rewards for hard work, enterprise and ability. Life was hard, but opportunity was real. There were few government programs to turn to and nobody expected them. But also, there were few rules and regulations. There were no licenses, no permits, no red tape to restrict them. They found in fact, a free market, and most of them thrived on it.
Many people still come to the United States driven by the same pressures and attracted by the same promise. You can find them in places like this. It’s China Town in New York, one of the centers of the garment industry __ a place where hundreds of thousands of newcomers have had their first taste of life in the new country. The people who live and work here are like the early settlers. They want to better their lot and they are prepared to work hard to do so.
Although I haven’t often been in factories like this, it’s all very familiar to me because this is exactly the same kind of a factory that my mother worked in when she came to this country for the first time at the age of 14, almost 90 years ago. And if there had not been factories like this here then at which she could have started to work and earn a little money, she wouldn’t have been able to come. And if I existed at all, I’d be a Russian or Hungarian today, instead of an American. Of course she didn’t stay here a long time, she stayed here while she learned the language, while she developed some feeling for the country, and gradually she was able to make a better life for herself.
Similarly, the people who are here now, they are like my mother. Most of the immigrants from the distant countries __ they came here because they liked it here better and had more opportunities. A place like this gives them a chance to get started. They are not going to stay here very long or forever. On the contrary, they and their children will make a better life for themselves as they take advantage of the opportunities that a free market provides to them.
The irony is that this place violates many of the standards that we now regard as every worker’s right. It is poorly ventilated, it is overcrowded, the workers accept less than union rate __ it breaks every rule in the book. But if it were closed down, who would benefit? Certainly not the people here. Their life may seem pretty tough compared to our own, but that is only because our parents or grandparents went through that stage for us. We have been able to start at a higher point.
Frank Visalli’s father was 12 years old when he arrived all alone in the United States. He had come from Sicily. That was 53 years ago. Frank is a successful dentist with a wife and family. They live in Lexington, Massachusetts. There is no doubt in Frank’s mind what freedom combined with opportunity meant to his father and then to him, or what his Italian grandparents would think if they could see how he lives now.
Frank Visalli: They would not believe what they would see __ that a person could immigrate from a small island and make such success out of their life because to them they were mostly related to the fields, working in the field as a peasant. My father came over, he made something for himself and then he tried to build a family structure. Whatever he did was for his family. It was for a better life for his family. And I can always remember him telling me that the number one thing in life is that you should get an education to become a professional person.
Friedman: The Visalli family, like all of us who live in the United States today, owe much to the climate of freedom we inherited from the founders of our country. The climate that gave full scope to the poor from other lands who came here and were able to make better lives for themselves and their children.
But in the past 50 years, we’ve been squandering that inheritance by allowing government to control more and more of our lives, instead of relying on ourselves. We need to rediscover the old truths that the immigrants knew in their bones; what economic freedom is and the role it plays in preserving personal freedom.
That’s why I came here to the South China Sea. It’s a place where there is an almost laboratory experiment in what happens when government is limited to its proper function and leaves people free to pursue their own objectives. If you want to see how the free market really works this is the place to come. Hong Kong, a place with hardly any natural resources. About the only one you can name is a great harbor, yet the absence of natural resources hasn’t prevented rapid economic development. Ships from all nations come here to trade because there are no duties, no tariffs on imports or exports. The power of the free market has enabled the industrious people of Hong Kong to transform what was once barren rock into one of the most thriving and successful places in Asia.
I am glad that Petrino got more defensive players than offensive players but time will tell if he can develop these three star players like he did in 2008 when that class later turned the hogs into a national contender in 2011. Below is an article from http://www.ajc.com
Alabama (26): The national champs added to their bounty by signing the No. 1 recruiting class, according to ESPN, and No. 2, according to Scout. Highly regarded defensive back Landon Collins, receiver Eddie Williams and running back T.J. Yeldon were expected to sign, but so did top defensive tackles Dalvin Tomlinson (Henry County) and Korren Kirven, who choose Alabama over Virginia Tech. Including Tomlinson, the Tide signed eight Georgians, including linebacker Dillon Lee (Buford), defensive back Geno Smith (St. Pius) and running back Kenyan Drake (Hillgrove).
Arkansas (24): Bobby Petrino loves receivers, so he signed four, going into Mississippi to get D’Arthur Cowan (6-foot-3, 180) and into Oklahoma to nab Keon Hatcher (6-2, 195), to help make up for missing out on Dorial Green-Beckham, who signed with Missouri, and Courtney Gardner, who signed with Oklahoma. That doesn’t include Jeremy Sprinkle (6-6, 220), who played tight end and defensive end at White Hall, Ark. Defensive back Ray Buchanan Jr., the son of former Falcon Ray Buchanan, signed out of Peachtree Ridge.
Auburn (20): Auburn survived losing both coordinators to sign a class headlined by offensive tackle Avery Young (6-6, 292) out of Palm Beach Gardens, Fla., the ninth-rated tackle according to Rivals. However, the Tigers missed on defensive back Ronald Darby, who went to Florida State. Jovon Robinson (6-1, 220) was the only running back the Tigers signed, but they plucked five players out of Georgia, including speedy defensive back Jonathan Jones (Carrollton) and 6-7, 280-pound tackle Will Adams and receiver JaQuay Williams (6-4, 204) of Sandy Creek.
Florida (23): The Gators grew along the defensive front with the addition of Dante Phillips (6-6, 270), Jonathan Bullard (6-3, 263), Dante Fowler (6-3, 261), who had committed to Florida State, and Stephenson’s Jafar Mann (6-4, 293). The Gators also signed defensive lineman Quinteze Williams (Sandy Creek) and kicker Austin Hardin (Marist). Florida is No. 4 in ESPN’s rankings and No. 5 according to Scout.
Kentucky (26): Coach Joker Phillips nabbed linebacker Khalid Henderson (Pebblebrook), who committed to Tennessee in June, and three-star running back Justin Taylor (North Atlanta), who was going to Alabama before being told that he would have to grayshirt. Taylor gives Kentucky three Atlanta-area backs, joining Josh Clemons (Whitewater) and Marcus Caffey (Grady), who were freshmen last season. Henderson and Taylor were two of eight Georgians who signed with Kentucky.
LSU (22): Three players, including Gunner Kiel, the No. 1 quarterback in the nation, backed out their commitments to LSU in the past few weeks, but the Tigers still signed five players in the ESPNU 150. Les Miles grabbed linebacker Kwon Alexander out of Oxford, Ala., signing him despite the fact that Alexander missed most of his senior year with a torn ACL. Buford’s Vadal Alexander (6-6, 315) and Reid Ferguson (6-2, 235) already are enrolled.
Mississippi (17): Trae Elston (6-0, 183), who looked at LSU and Oklahoma State, gives new coach Hugh Freeze a top safety. He wants to build his offense around quarterback Bo Wallace, the junior college player of the year, who threw for 4,604 yards and 53 touchdowns to lead East Mississippi Community College to the 2011 national title. Channing Ward and Issac Gross should contribute on the defensive line, and Freeze likes running backs Jaylen Walton, I’Tavius Mathers and Kenno Loyal (Columbia).
Mississippi State (23): It was a balanced class with 11 defensive players, 11 offensive players and a specialist. Coach Dan Mullen likes versatile quarterback Nick Schuessler (6-4, 190), who led Grayson to the Class AAAAA state title, saying: “He’s going to do whatever it takes to win. As a coach, that’s what you want in the quarterback.” Linebacker Richie Brown (6-2, 225) of Long Beach, Miss., said he wants to play on offense and defense, and Nick James (6-4, 330) is the biggest of eight linemen, a group that includes Jordan Washington (North Gwinnett).
Missouri (19): The Tigers will begin life in the SEC with the No. 1 recruit in the nation and one of the top guards in the country after signing state products Dorial Green-Beckham (6-6, 220) and Evan Boehm (6-3, 290). Green-Beckham’s impressive stats include holding the national career receiving yards mark with 6,447 after a season in which he caught 119 passes for 2,233 yards and 24 touchdowns. Despite Green-Beckham’s presence, Missouri’s class is ranked 33rd by Rivals and No. 20 by ESPN.
South Carolina (25): Steve Spurrier signed Mr. Football in South Carolina for the fourth consecutive when he got receiver Shaq Roland, a 6-1, 173-pound receiver out of Lexington, S.C. The Gamecocks, as always, did well in Georgia, signing 12 players from the Peach State, including safety Chaz Elder (Banneker), running back Mike Davis (Stephenson), who had once been committed to Florida, defensive end Darius English (McEachern) and guard Joe Harris (Lithonia).
Tennessee (21): Derek Dooley didn’t sign any offensive linemen, but got three junior college players — defensive linemen Darrington Sentimore (6-2, 273) and Daniel McCullers (6-6, 380), and receiver Cordarrelle Patterson (6-3, 205) — who should make immediate contributions. Sentimore played 11 games at Alabama in 2010. Dooley on McCullers: “When you see him, he looks like two people. It’s like a circus act.” Four Georgians — including Rivals four-star receiver Jason Croom (Norcross) — are in the class.
Texas A&M (19): The Aggies’ class includes 15 Texans, including Trey Williams (5-8, 175), considered the No. 5 running back in the country, and Thomas Johnson (5-11, 180), the No. 3 receiver, who originally committed to Texas. They provide weapons for first-year coach Kevin Sumlin, who was hired by Texas A&M from Houston in December. Quarterback Matt Davis and cornerback De’Vante Harris add to a class that was hurt when receiver Bralon Addison of Missouri City, Texas, went with Oregon.
Vanderbilt (21): The Commodores were hurt by Tucker defensive end Josh Dawson, who signed with Georgia after committing to Vanderbilt, but they signed versatile Brian Kimbrow (5-8, 170) out of Memphis and Andrew Jelks (6-6, 270), a Rivals four-star offensive lineman out of Paris, Tenn. Linebackers Jake Sealand (Tucker) and Darreon Herring (Stephenson), defensive back Paris Head (Buford), defensive end Stephen Weatherly (Shiloh) and defensive tackle LaDarius Banks (East Paulding) signed.
I am glad that Petrino got more defensive players than offensive players but time will tell if he can develop these three star players like he did in 2008 when that class later turned the hogs into a national contender in 2011. Below is an article from http://www.ajc.com Alabama (26): The national champs added to their […]
In the article below you can see that the player who lived in Texas that switched to Texas could be explained away and the one that lived in Virginia that switched to VA Tech could also but the Vols don’t have an explanation for why the 4 star linebacker Otha Peters switched from his commitment […]
I disagree with the article below that says that Vandy did not do well in recruiting. There is no way they are number 13 out of 14. National Signing Day around the SEC. 247Sports ranked the SEC team’s recruiting in this order: 1 Alabama, 2 Florida, 3 Georgia, 4 LSU, 5 Texas A&M, 6 South Carolina, […]
I have noticed that Arkansas never seems to have great recruiting years like Tennessee and Florida and Alabama do. However, the 2008 class that will graduate in 2012 for Arkansas included some great players like Joe Adams and has been re-ranked as the 5th best performing class. That class led Arkansas to a final ranking […]
It seems to me that there are a few surprises in the recruiting game this year. Below is a rivals article and the one below it is an article from 3 months ago. January 27, 2012 Rivals.com analyst Chris Neereviews recent rising and falling in the 2012 team rankings as National Signing Day nears. Five […]
It is true that USC’s Lane Kiffin has had two great recruiting classes at USC, but that was because he signed 25 players both in 2010 and 2011. He delayed “Judgement Day” by getting permission to avoid the 15 scholarship limits (imposed for 3 years) while the school appealed the NCAA’s decision. Therefore, all these […]
This Center for Freedom and Prosperity Foundation video shows how the flat tax would benefit families and businesses, and also explains how this simple and fair system would boost economic growth and eliminate the special-interest corruption of the internal revenue code. www.freedomandprosperity.org
Roby Brock’s Talk Business has a good report on Republican Rep. Davy Carter’s plan, as chair of the House Revenue and Tax Committee, to hold hearings next year on income tax reform in Arkansas.
Unlike many others in his party, Carter understands sensible reform isn’t all about cutting. He’d like to reshape income tax brackets in a “revenue neutral” way.
That can’t be done through income tax brackets alone, as a practical political matter. It would mean a new higher bracket for the wealthy or dramatic shifting of the overall income tax burden to higher income people. That’s not what Carter has in mind, however.
TAX REFORM TALK: From Rep. Davy Carter.
I am glad that Davy Carter is a conservative and will not consider raising the highest tax rate in Arkansas above 7%. That is crazy for several reasons but I will mention one of the most harmful. In 1970 when Dale Bumpers raised the top income tax rate in Arkansas to 7% it did not affect many people but as time has gone by now many are having to pay that top rate. That will happen again if the liberals are allowed to raise the top rate. It is a bait and switch operation. They promised in 1970 that not many would have to pay the 7% but that is not the case now!!!!
If you start ranking the great governors of Arkansas, you talk about Win Rockefeller on seminal reform and on brave advancements in race relations. You talk about Dale Bumpers on raising income taxes and reorganizing government and advancing free textbooks and child immunizations and two-year community colleges.
Mike Huckabee recently moved to Florida? Why? The answer is easy. Huckabee wants to avoid Arkansas’ high state income tax. Max Brantley of the Arkansas Times wants to call Huckabee a tax fugitive, but who can blame him.
Liberals like Brantley and Ernie Dumas want to praise former Arkansas governor Dale Bumpers for raising the state income tax to 7%, but that is the reason our state has the highest state income tax in the area (all bordering states have either lower state income taxes or no state income tax).
Is it any surprise that during the last census that the seven states that do not have an income tax grew in population?Arkansas has suffered from bracket creep and in 1929 you had to make 5 times the average wage to pay any state income tax at all, but now over 66% of tax payers in Arkansas pay at least some of their income at the 7% level.
Until Gov. Dale Bumpers raised income-tax rates and other taxes in 1971, Arkansas had by far the lowest per-capita state and local taxes in the United States. Afterward, we were still 50th but within shouting distance of 49th.
(June 2006) Democratic Gov. Dale Bumpers and the General Assembly raised Arkansas’ top income tax rate to “broaden the tax base” in 1971(1). Yet Arkansas’ per capita income, expressed as a percentage of the U.S. total, has barely improved, moving from 71 (1971) to 77.7 percent (2005) over the 34-year period, according to data from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. The 1971 income tax increase reversed a decades-long strong growth trend and left Arkansas with the highest income tax rate among bordering states (Mississippi, Missouri, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Texas).
Income Stagnation: The 1930s
One has to turn to the 1930s-the decade of the Great Depression-to find weaker income growth than in recent years.
Arkansas per capita personal income was 44 percent of the U.S. in 1929, the first year data was compiled in the BEA time series. The Great Depression started that year, and by the time it ended in 1933 Arkansas per capita income had fallen to 41 percent of the U.S. By decade’s end (1939) it had returned to 44 percent.
Growth Decades: The 1940s, 1950s & 1960s
Arkansas per capita income increased as a percentage of the U.S. in the next three decades.
In 1941, at the onset of World War II, Arkansas per capita income was 47 percent of the U.S. It was 59 percent at war’s end in 1945 and again in 1949. It was 56 percent in 1950, 62 percent a decade later in 1960, and 68 percent in 1969. If this growth rate had continued Arkansas would have exceeded 100 percent of the U.S. average in the current decade (2000-2009).
To summarize, Arkansas per capita income increased from 44 to 71 percent of the U.S. total between 1939 and 1971.
Anemic Income Growth (1971-2005)
The trend in recent decades is anemic growth in Arkansas per capita personal income. Fiscal policy changes affect economic behavior with a time lag. Arkansas per capita income was 71 percent of the U.S. in 1971 and 76 percent in 1973. Income growth stagnated for the rest of the decade, reaching 77 percent of the U.S. in 1979. It fell to 75 percent in 1989, and was 76 percent in 1999. Today, Arkansas per capita income, at 77.7 percent of the U.S., is barely above its high point of the 1970s.
Since its introduction in 1929, Arkansas‘ statutory incometax structure has changed very little. However, due to changes in the economy and in inflation, the real effects of that tax structure have changed substantially. This report looks at the effects that rising incomes and inflation have had on the Arkansasincometax structure. In addition, the report looks at the changing profile of Arkansas taxpayers in recent years, and provides a brief comparison ofArkansas taxes in relation to other states and the federal tax system.
Arkansas‘ IncomeTax Structure: Original and Revised
In 1929 Arkansas became 12th among the states to adopt an individual incometax. The structure contained five rates and net income brackets with a top rate of five percent applying to net income over $25,000. That original structure remained in place until 1971 when a new middle-income bracket was added and the rate on net income over $25,000 was increased to 7.0 percent. The rates and brackets revised in 1971 remain in place today. The 1929 original and the revised current tax structure are shown in Table 1.
Table 1 Arkansas Individual IncomeTax Structure
1929 Original Net Income Rate first $3,000 1.0% next$3,001 to $6,000 2.0% next$6,001 to $11,000 3.0% next $11,001 to $25,000 4.0% over $25,000 5.0% 1971 Revision (Current) Net Income Rate first $2,999 1.0% next$3,000 to $5,999 2.5% next$6,000 to $8,999 3.5% next$9,000 to $14,999 4.5% next $15,000 to $24,999 6.0% over $25,000 7.0%
Source: Arkansas Legislative Tax Handbook, 1992, Bureau of Legislative Research.
In 1975, the earliest year for which records on income tax collections by income group is available, only the top 4.0 percent of Arkansas taxpayers would have had any of their income subjected to the top 7.0 percent rate. By 1991, around 66.0 percent of the state’s taxpayers would have had some of their income subjected to this top rate–a rate once reserved for only the highest income earners.
The 1929 tax structure provided for exemptions of $1,500 for a single person and $2,500 for married individuals. In 1947 the state raised the exemption to $2,500 for singles and $3,500 for married persons. In 1957 the personal exemption was converted to a credit of $17.50 for singles and $35.00 for married persons. In 1987 the credits were increased to $20 per person. Finally, in 1991, low income Arkansans were exempted from paying incometax if their gross income did not exceed $5,500 for an individual or $10,000 for a married couple. For most taxpayers, the $20.00 credit remains in effect today.
The Value of Exemptions as a Share of Per Capita Income
Table 2 shows how the value of the personal tax exemption or credit has diminished over time. The figures shown represent the personal exemption or credit for a single individual as a ratio of the per capita personal income in the year in which the credit was first enacted. In 1929, for instance, an individual would have been exempted from any tax until their income reached a level which was equal to 490 percent of the Arkansas per capita income for that year. In 1947 with the first statutory change in the exemption, that individual would have still been exempted up to an amount equal to 340 percent of the per capita income level. By 1957 the value of the exemption (which was changed to a tax credit that year) had declined substantially, falling to 130 percent of per capita income. At the time of the next change in the personal credit (1987), the value of that credit was only 17 percent of the per capitaincome level. For most taxpayers (all those not officially classified as low income) in 1992, the value of the personal credit was only 13 percent of per capita income.
Table 2 Personal Exemptions and Credits As a Percent of Per Capita Income
Arkansas Year of Value of Per Capita Enactment ExemptionIncome Ratio 1929 $1,500 $ 308 490% 19472,500 737 340% 19571,6001,247 130% 19872,000 11,980 17% 19922,000 15,439 13%
Source: Arkansas Legislative Tax Handbook, 1992, Bureau of Legislative Research; Per capita personal income data is from the Bureau of Economic Analysis, unpublished data, April, 1993.
In other words, whereas in the first year of enactment of the incometax, the personal exemption would have allowed an Arkansan to earn almost five times the average per capita income before paying any tax.
Arkansas wide receiver Joe Adams breaks tackles to return a punt for a touchdown against Tennessee at Donald W. Reynolds Razorback Stadium in Fayetteville on Nov. 12, 2011. UT lost the game 49-7. (AMY SMOTHERMAN BURGESS/NEWS SENTINEL)
In the article below you can see that the player who lived in Texas that switched to Texas could be explained away and the one that lived in Virginia that switched to VA Tech could also but the Vols don’t have an explanation for why the 4 star linebacker Otha Peters switched from his commitment to the Vols to sign with the Hogs. (I have another post on this too.) Rick Schaffer told me that it was John Adams who wrote in 1992 that the visiting Hogs did not have a chance against the #4 ranked Vols in Knoxville, but it did not turn out that way.
John Adams: Recruiting reveals state of UT program
By John Adams
Originally published 08:48 p.m., February 1, 2012
Updated 09:18 p.m., February 1, 2012
Tennessee signed 21 football recruits Wednesday. If you want to know what that means to the future of UT football, you have come to the wrong place.
But I can venture an opinion on what the class says about the current state of UT football. The opinion was formulated by recognizing a handful of recruiting hits and taking note of a couple of misses.
Bottom line: UT is more desperate than prosperous.
First, the misses — the most telling of which were linebacker commitment Otha Peters, and defensive tackle Korren Kirven, who entered the stretch run of recruiting seemingly torn between UT and Virginia Tech.
Peters opted for Arkansas the day before signing. Kirven backed off the Vols and Hokies for national champion Alabama.
Those were not-so-subtle reminders that when you have suffered through three losing seasons in the last four years, you can be as vulnerable in recruiting battles with more successful programs as you are on the field.
Losing long-standing linebacker commitment Dalton Santos to Texas wasn’t as significant. He grew up a Texas fan. When the Longhorns finally expressed interest, he couldn’t resist.
But neither Peters nor Kirven had a childhood infatuation with the program they chose. They were out-of-state signees who picked top-10 teams over a team that just went 5-7 and lost six assistant coaches.
As for the hits, the standout signee is obvious. His name is Deion Bonner, a cornerback from Columbus, Ga.
I don’t know Bonner’s 40 time or vertical jump. I just know he was charged with a crime while visiting Georgia’s campus.
How’s that for standing out?
He stands out further since second-year coach Derek Dooley and his staff have talked so much about recruiting “high-character” players in rebuilding UT’s program.
“When I say bringing in high character (players), that doesn’t mean I’m never going to bring in guys who have made mistakes,” Dooley said at Wednesday’s media gathering. “Because I’ve made as many mistakes in my life as anybody.
“We did a lot of diligence on the situation. Deion was incredibly truthful and incredibly remorseful.”
No matter what glowing attributes the Vols might have uncovered in their recruitment of Bonner, does that outweigh a police report? He was one of three people arrested by University of Georgia police following the theft of iPods and iPhones from the unsecured lockers of seven Georgia players.
Recruiting interest in Bonner waned elsewhere after the incident, but not at UT, reminding you that the pursuit of high-character players sounds better in theory than in the reality of back-to-back losing seasons.
Dooley needs a talent upgrade. Fast. So he’s willing to take a chance on a player who can’t resist the temptation of an unlocked locker but might be a lock-down corner.
Given UT’s immediate needs, junior college players are more alluring than ever, which brings up encouraging news for UT fans. When you check out the resumes of this class, three of the most impressive are from the junior college ranks.
Never mind what defensive lineman Darrington Sentimore accomplished at Mississippi Gulf Coast Community College. I remember him as a backup lineman at Alabama. I also remember that he looked like an Alabama lineman. That’s high praise for a UT signee.
Daniel McCullers looks like a former Alabama lineman. McCullers, who last played at Georgia Military Institute, is in the Terrence Cody weight division at 6-foot-6, 380 pounds. As the 3-4 alignment becomes more prominent in UT’s defensive plans, it’s helpful to have someone towering over center who, as Dooley put it, is like “two people.”
Cordarrelle Patterson is a consensus five-star wide receiver coming to a program that can benefit enormously from a five-star anybody. So even if Patterson falters at the major-college level, his signing flashes neon bright for now — just as Kenny O’Neal’s once did.
UT signed O’Neal as a junior college five-star wide receiver five years ago. He had two career catches at Tennessee.
But the Vols can’t think about potential recruiting busts now. They have to hope that Patterson plays up to his billing, McCullers becomes the next Mt. Cody, and Sentimore plays like what he once was — an Alabama lineman.
I was disappointed that Vandy had a better class than Arkansas but I was glad that we got a chance to get a quality linebacker to switch to the Hogs at the last moment. Otis Kirk’s Recruiting 360: Arkansas’ Peoples Key In Landing Otha Peters by Otis Kirk, Hawgs247.com 2/2/2012 at 1:06pm Arkansas struck late in […]
I am glad that Petrino got more defensive players than offensive players but time will tell if he can develop these three star players like he did in 2008 when that class later turned the hogs into a national contender in 2011. Below is an article from http://www.ajc.com Alabama (26): The national champs added to their […]
In the article below you can see that the player who lived in Texas that switched to Texas could be explained away and the one that lived in Virginia that switched to VA Tech could also but the Vols don’t have an explanation for why the 4 star linebacker Otha Peters switched from his commitment […]
I disagree with the article below that says that Vandy did not do well in recruiting. There is no way they are number 13 out of 14. National Signing Day around the SEC. 247Sports ranked the SEC team’s recruiting in this order: 1 Alabama, 2 Florida, 3 Georgia, 4 LSU, 5 Texas A&M, 6 South Carolina, […]
I have noticed that Arkansas never seems to have great recruiting years like Tennessee and Florida and Alabama do. However, the 2008 class that will graduate in 2012 for Arkansas included some great players like Joe Adams and has been re-ranked as the 5th best performing class. That class led Arkansas to a final ranking […]
It seems to me that there are a few surprises in the recruiting game this year. Below is a rivals article and the one below it is an article from 3 months ago. January 27, 2012 Rivals.com analyst Chris Neereviews recent rising and falling in the 2012 team rankings as National Signing Day nears. Five […]
It is true that USC’s Lane Kiffin has had two great recruiting classes at USC, but that was because he signed 25 players both in 2010 and 2011. He delayed “Judgement Day” by getting permission to avoid the 15 scholarship limits (imposed for 3 years) while the school appealed the NCAA’s decision. Therefore, all these […]
Senate Republicans tonight defeated the payroll tax break for working Americans. President Obama’s statement:
Tonight, Senate Republicans chose to raise taxes on nearly 160 million hardworking Americans because they refused to ask a few hundred thousand millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair share. They voted against a bill that would have not only extended the $1,000 tax cut for a typical family, but expanded that tax cut to put an extra $1,500 in their pockets next year, and given nearly six million small business owners new incentives to expand and hire. That is unacceptable.It makes absolutely no sense to raise taxes on the middle class at a time when so many are still trying to get back on their feet. Now is not the time to put the economy and the security of the middle class at risk. Now is the time to rebuild an economy where hard work and responsibility pay off, and everybody has a chance to succeed. Now is the time to put country before party and work together on behalf of the American people. And I will continue to urge Congress to stop playing politics with the security of millions of American families and small business owners and get this done.
Now the Republicans will offer their plan to give a cut by screwing working people.
___________________-
Brantley does not explain why the economy has not been stimulated at all by ANYTHING THAT PRESIDENT OBAMA HAS TRIED SO FAR!!! Then we should this payroll tax holiday be extended?
This article below from the Cato Institute does a good job of showing the Republicans were right to vote against Obama’s plan.
In his September 8 lecture to Congress, President Obama promised that “every proposal I’ve laid out tonight will be paid for.” How? By raising tax rates on “the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations.” In other words, the President is proposing a $447 billion tax increase.
When the details are revealed on September 19, the President will be proposing large and permanent increases in the highest income tax rates − mainly to “pay for” a small and temporary cut in payroll taxes (which accounts for 54 percent of his $447 billion package). The plan is likely to contain elements of the September 7 proposal of Congressional Democrats to the super-committee — such as a draconian “super-Pease” phase-out and cap on itemized deductions, and a top marginal tax rate of 48.8 percent in 2013.
Temporary payroll tax cuts and extended unemployment benefits are bait the President set out to trap House Republicans with their own debt ceiling demands.
“The agreement we passed in July,” said the President, “will cut government spending by about $1 trillion over the next 10 years. It also charges this Congress to come up with an additional $1.5 trillion in savings by Christmas. Tonight, I am asking you to increase that amount so that it covers the full cost of the American Jobs Act.” But the $447 billion budgetary hit can’t be spread over 10 years without triggering another debt ceiling calamity. Either the debt ceiling has to be promptly raised by an extra $447 billion or tax receipts somehow raised by that amount in fiscal 2012-2013. Any “modest adjustments to health care” will be too distant and nebulous to help.
Using permanently higher tax rates on income to pay for temporarily lower tax rates on payrolls is no “stimulus” under either Keynesian or empirical economics. Neither is a tax-financed extension of unemployment benefits, which clearly raises the unemployment rate by 0.8 to 1.8 percentage points. Yet the one-year extension of payroll tax cuts and 99-week unemployment benefits is being held out as irresistible bait to gullible legislators.
By inviting House Republicans to stumble into this trap, the president is also hoping to preempt the congressional super-committee’s option of reducing deficits by trimming tax loopholes. President Obama is trying to lay claim to any potential revenues from cutting loopholes (or legitimate deductions) for his own pet projects, which include grants to hire more state and local government workers and extended unemployment benefits for the private sector.
This is no “jobs plan.” It’s a tax-and-spend plan, and a bad one.
Amy Smotherman Burgess, ©KNS/2011
Amy Smotherman Burgess, ©KNS/2011
The Daily Hatch 