Andy Roddick has impressive stats “Tennis Tuesday”

Juan Carlos Ferrero vs Andy Roddick Final US Open 2003 Highlights Pt. 1

Andy has some impressive stats:

Serve records:

  • Fastest serve in Australian open: 148 mph .
  • Fastest serve in Dubai: 150 mph.
  • Fastest average in first serve: 134 mph.
  • Fastest serve in Beijing: 148 mph.
  • Fastest serve in San Jose: 150 mph.
  • Fastest serve in Madrid: 151 mph.
  • Fastest serve in Washington: 151 mph.
  • Fastest serve in Queens :153 mph.
  • Fastest serve in Lyon: 142 mph.
  • Fastest serve in Roland Garros: 144 mph (2006–2010).
  • Fastest serve in Wimbledon: 143 mph (2011)

[edit] Records and achievements

Tournament 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 SR W–L
Grand Slam tournaments
Australian Open A A 2R SF QF SF 4R SF 3R SF QF 4R 2R 0 / 11 38–11
French Open A 3R 1R 1R 2R 2R 1R 1R A 4R 3R A   0 / 9 9–9
Wimbledon A 3R 3R SF F F 3R QF 2R F 4R 3R   0 / 11 39–11
US Open 1R QF QF W QF 1R F QF QF 3R 2R QF   1 / 12 40–11
SR 0 / 1 0 / 3 0 / 4 1 / 4 0 / 4 0 / 4 0 / 4 0 / 4 0 / 3 0 / 4 0 / 4 0 / 3 0 / 1 1 / 43  
Win–Loss 0–1 8–3 7–4 17–3 15–4 12–4 11–4 13–4 7–3 16–4 10–4 9–3 1–1   126–42
  • These records were attained in Open Era of tennis.
Championship Years Record accomplished Player tied
Wimbledon 2009 39 games won in a Grand Slam final Stands alone
ATP World Tour 2000–12 176 tiebreaks lost[46] Stands alone
ATP World Tour 2000–12 469 tiebreaks played[46] Stands alone
ATP World Tour 2007 18 consecutive tie-breaks won Stands alone
US Open 2004 Fastest serve in a Grand Slam tournament (152 mph) Stands alone

[edit] Major finals

[edit] Grand Slam finals

[edit] Singles: 5 (1–4)

Outcome Year Championship Surface Opponent in the final Score in the final
Winner 2003 US Open Hard Spain Juan Carlos Ferrero 6–3, 7–6(7–2), 6–3
Runner-up 2004 Wimbledon Grass Switzerland Roger Federer 6–4, 5–7, 6–7(3–7), 4–6
Runner-up 2005 Wimbledon Grass Switzerland Roger Federer 2–6, 6–7(2–7), 4–6
Runner-up 2006 US Open Hard Switzerland Roger Federer 2–6, 6–4, 5–7, 1–6
Runner-up 2009 Wimbledon Grass Switzerland Roger Federer 7–5, 6–7(6–8), 6–7(5–7), 6–3, 14–16

[edit]

June 5, 2012 – 1:04 am Categories: Current Events | Post a comment

Should the 10 Commandments be banned from public life?(Part 4, David Barton’s Affidavit in support on 10 Commandments)

 

I read back on Dec 8, 2011 that Tony Perkins, president of Family Research Council, a social conservative advocacy organization, said in 2011 that President Obama has been “hostile” and “disdainful” toward Christianity. Rick Perry actually said President Obama had a war on religion. One of the most basic things that our founding fathers did is base our laws on the ten commandments. At the Supreme Court there is one depiction showing Moses sitting, holding two blank stone tablets. There is one depiction showing Moses standing holding one stone tablet. There are two stone tablets depicted with Roman Numbers I-X carved in the oak doors.

David Barton has studied the history of the founding of our country for many years and I wanted to share a portion of adocument he wrote concerning the 10 Commandments:
David Barton – 01/03/2001
(View the footnoted version on Liberty Council’s website)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY

LONDON DIVISION

SARAH DOE and THOMAS DOE, on behalf

of themselves and their minor child, JAN DOE

Plaintiffs,

v Civil Action No. 99-508

HARLAN COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT;

DON MUSSELMAN, in his official capacity

as Superintendent of the Harlan Country

School District,

Defendents.

______________________________________________

AFFIDAVIT OF DAVID BARTON IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CONTEMPT, OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR SUPPLEMENTAL PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

STATE OF TEXAS

COUNTY OF PARKER

HOW THE TEN COMMANDMENTS ARE EXPRESSED

IN CIVIL LAW IN AMERICAN HISTORY

Have no other gods.

20. This first commandment of the Decalogue is incorporated into the very first written code of laws enacted in America, those of the Virginia Colony. In 1610, in a law enacted by the Colony leaders, it was declared:

[S]ince we owe our highest and supreme duty, our greatest and all our allegiance to Him from whom all power and authority is derived, and flows as from the first and only fountain, and being especially soldiers impressed in this sacred cause, we must alone expect our success from Him who is only the blesser of all good attempts, the King of kings, the Commander of commanders, and Lord of hosts, I do strictly command and charge all Captains and Officers of what quality or nature soever, whether commanders in the field, or in town or towns, forts or fortresses, to have a care that the Almighty God be duly and daily served, and that they call upon their people to hear sermons, as that also they diligently frequent morning and evening prayer themselves by their own example and daily life and duties herein, encouraging others thereunto.

21. A subsequent 1641 Massachusetts legal code also incorporated the thrust of this command of the Decalogue into its statutes. Significantly, the very first law in that State code was based on the very first command of the Decalogue, declaring:

1. If any man after legal conviction shall have or worship any other god but the Lord God, he shall be put to death. Deut. 13.6, 10, Deut. 17.2, 6, Ex. 22.20.

22. The 1642 Connecticut law code also made this command of the Decalogue its first civil law, declaring:

1. If any man after legal conviction shall have or worship any other god but the Lord God, he shall be put to death (Duet. 13.6 and 17.2, Ex. 22.20).

23. There are numerous other examples affirming that the first commandment of the Decalogue indeed formed an historical part of American civil law.

Have no idols.

24. Typical of the civil laws prohibiting idolatry was a 1680 New Hampshire idolatry law that declared:

Idolatry. It is enacted by ye Assembly and ye authority thereof, yet if any person having had the knowledge of the true God openly and manifestly have or worship any other god but the Lord God, he shall be put to death. Ex. 22.20, Deut. 13.6 and 10.

25. Additional examples from colonial codes demonstrate that the second commandment also was historically a part of American civil law.
June 5, 2012 – 1:00 am Categories: David Barton, Founding Fathers | Post a comment

Charles Murray: Do we need the Dept of Education? (Part 1)

Another great article from Hillsdale College. Today we look at the Dept of Education. This is a three part series from Charles Murray. Here is part one:

January 2012

Charles Murray
American Enterprise Institute

Do We Need the Department of Education?

Charles Murray is the W.H. Brady Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. He received his B.A. in history at Harvard University and his Ph.D. in political science from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He has written for numerous newspapers and journals, including the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, the Weekly Standard, Commentary, and National Review. His books include Losing Ground: American Social Policy 1950-1980, What It Means to Be a Libertarian, and Real Education: Four Simple Truths for Bringing America’s Schools Back to Reality. His new book, Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010, will be published at the end of January.

The following is adapted from a speech delivered in Atlanta, Georgia, on October 28, 2011, at a conference on “Markets, Government, and the Common Good,” sponsored by Hillsdale College’s Center for the Study of Monetary Systems and Free Enterprise.

THE CASE FOR the Department of Education could rest on one or more of three legs: its constitutional appropriateness, the existence of serious problems in education that could be solved only at the federal level, and/or its track record since it came into being. Let us consider these in order.

(1) Is the Department of Education constitutional?

At the time the Constitution was written, education was not even considered a function of local government, let alone the federal government. But the shakiness of the Department of Education’s constitutionality goes beyond that. Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution enumerates the things over which Congress has the power to legislate. Not only does the list not include education, there is no plausible rationale for squeezing education in under the commerce clause. I’m sure the Supreme Court found a rationale, but it cannot have been plausible.

On a more philosophical level, the framers of America’s limited government had a broad allegiance to what Catholics call the principle of subsidiarity. In the secular world, the principle of subsidiarity means that local government should do only those things that individuals cannot do for themselves, state government should do only those things that local governments cannot do, and the federal government should do only those things that the individual states cannot do. Education is something that individuals acting alone and cooperatively can do, let alone something local or state governments can do.

I should be explicit about my own animus in this regard. I don’t think the Department of Education is constitutionally legitimate, let alone appropriate. I would favor abolishing it even if, on a pragmatic level, it had improved American education. But I am in a small minority on that point, so let’s move on to the pragmatic questions.

June 5, 2012 – 12:30 am Categories: Current Events | Post a comment

“The Failure of Socialism” episode of Free to Choose in 1990 by Milton Friedman (Part 1)

Milton Friedman: Free To Choose – The Failure Of Socialism With Ronald Reagan (Full)

Published on Mar 19, 2012 by

Milton Friedman’s writings affected me greatly when I first discovered them and I wanted to share with you. We must not head down the path of socialism like Greece has done.

Ronald Reagan introduces this program, and traces a line from Adam Smith’s “The Wealth of Nations” to Milton Friedman’s work, describing Free to Choose as “a survival kit for you, for our nation and for freedom.” Dr. Friedman travels to Hungary and Czechoslovakia to learn how Eastern Europeans are rebuilding their collapsed economies. His conclusion: they must accept the verdict of history that governments create no wealth. Economic freedom is the only source of prosperity. That means free, private markets. Attempts to find a “third way” between socialism and free markets are doomed from the start. If the people of Eastern Europe are given the chance to make their own choices they will achieve a high level of prosperity. Friedman tells us individual stories about how small businesses struggle to survive against the remains of extensive government control. Friedman says, “Everybody knows what needs to be done. The property that is now in the hands of the state, needs to be gotten into the hands of private people who can use it in accordance with their own interests and values.” Eastern Europe has observed the history of free markets in the United States and wants to copy our success. After the documentary, Dr. Friedman talks further about government and the economy with Gary Becker of the University of Chicago and Samuel Bowles of the University of Massachusetts. In a wide-ranging discussion, they disagree about the results of economic controls in countries around the world, with Friedman defending his thesis that the best government role is the smallest one.
___________
Below is a portion of the transcript of the program and above you will find the complete video of the program:
 

Ronald Reagan: In 1980, a friend of mine did something of rare importance that some historians might miss. Dr. Milton Friedman, a scientist, a careful thinker, and a great teacher first presented his TV series Free to Choose. His TV series was about choices, risks, freedom, equality, and making a better future for all of us.

In 1976, the 200th birth of our nation, Milton Friedman won the Nobel Peace Prize in economics. Two hundred years earlier, in the same year as the Declaration of Independence, Adam Smith, the Scotsman, published a book entitled The Wealth Of Nations. The United States was the first country to apply the ideas in Adam Smith’s book. Those ideas have led to our prosperity and given us our freedom.

In Free to Choose, Milton Friedman shows us how those ideas can help us today. In this program, Milton and his wife Rose, take us on a brief tour of Eastern Europe. They wanted to see if the Czechs, Hungarians and Poles were taking the steps needed to achieve prosperity and a lasting freedom. In fact, a member of the Polish Parliament has said that Milton Friedman’s Free to Choose was a major influence on the Polish drive for freedom.

I find it exciting to watch the rebirth of freedom in Eastern Europe. Being free to choose should be every person’s birthright. Everywhere in the world, and especially here in the United States, we need to keep government on the sidelines. Let the people develop their own skills, solve their own problems, better their own lives. I don’t think it is an exaggeration to call Milton Friedman’s Free to Choose, a survival kit for you, for our nation and for freedom.

Friedman: Those are the parliament buildings. This is the river Danube and I am in Budapest, the capitol of Hungary. Over there somewhere is Czechoslovakia, over there Poland, and farther away yet, the Soviet Union. Socialist states that started out with the very best of intentions, intending only to improve the lots of their citizens, they all ended up making the people poor, miserable and into slaves. And every one of them has been learning that lesson that socialism is a failure. They are all trying to move in the direction of a free, private market.

What happened here in Eastern Europe was a major event. The first time in history that the totalitarian countries decided to move toward free markets. Will they succeed? That is a question that brought my wife Rose and me here. As economists, we wanted to witness the most exciting experiment in political and economic organization that is likely to occur in our lifetime.

In the center of Prague, there is a famous cafe, a relic from the days when Czechoslovakia was one of the wealthiest countries in the world. Today, we find only faded elegance, a pale echo of a productive past that was created by market incentives. What happened? Communist central control __ that is what happened. The same culture, the same people, the same resources who wanted different outcomes of vastly lower standard of living, the result of substituting orders from the top for incentives from below. Who says economic institutions don’t matter?

A year ago, right outside that cafe, hundreds of thousands of Czechs massed in Wensisloss Square to demand their freedom. This is where it all happened. In three days they got political freedom. The hopes were high. They thought economic miracles would follow quickly. Yet now it is a year later and almost nothing has happened. Political freedom can be achieved rapidly; economic freedom and prosperity is a very different thing. That’s what is beginning to dawn on these people. In reality they are not yet free. They are still the victims of thousands of controls the communists put in place.

If the newly elected governments are going to keep the support of the people, they must give them real freedom and they’ve got to do it fast. That was the secret of Margaret Thatcher’s success in England. She had a well worked out program and she put it into effect right after coming into office. It was the secret of Ronald Reagan’s program. On the other hand, Manahem Began in Israel came in without any plans whatsoever, and he ended up a failure. If Czechoslovakia is going to achieve the objectives of its revolution, it must move rapidly to put into effect the economic institutions which alone can convert political freedom into economic and human freedom. Those institutions are the institutions of free, private markets.

There are examples all over the place of both the opportunities and the problems. Yuri Malick wants to publish a magazine for people who are trying to set up their own private businesses in Czechoslovakia. He runs it from his living room. It’s a small family enterprise. The magazine is packed with information for would-be businessmen on how to thread their way through the jungle of bureaucratic regulations that still exist. The irony is that some of those very regulations are preventing him from getting his business off the ground. For a start, he needs to obtain 15 separate government licenses before he can distribute the magazine. After nearly a year, he still hasn’t got them. He has had to come here again and again to this government licensing bureau to try to persuade a bureaucrat to allow him to do business.

Yet again, it’s not his lucky day. Yuri Malick doesn’t give in easily, but things are not looking too hopeful. The man he has got to see is not available and no one else is interested in his problem. The Cheque government owns all the newsstands, the book shops, the nationwide distribution system which is controlled from here. There is one way, and only one way, to put an end to all this nonsense, the government must get out of business and stay out. It must transfer these assets into private hands.

These are the kinds of forms you have to fill out in this country in a place like that if you want to start a business or get anything done. But if you think that only happens here, tell me when was the last time you stood in line to get a driver’s license or a registration plate, or do you know anybody in Britain, France, Germany or the United States who has built a house sometime in the last 10 years. Ask him what he went through.

June 4, 2012 – 1:59 pm Categories: Milton Friedman, Ronald Reagan | Post a comment

“Razorback” name because it sounded intimidating

Uploaded by on Jul 21, 2009

Arkansas held a celebration on Dickson Street in Fayetteville to commemorate the start of the 100th year of the school’s Razorbacks mascot on July 21. Coaches, administrators and even a Hugo Bezdek impersonator, were on hand at the event. The Razorbacks debuted a historical maker near the old train station on Dickson Street, where Bezdek called the Arkansas Cardinals a “wild bunch of razorback hogs” after they defeated LSU 16-0 on Nov. 13, 1909. Just this week I saw the Hatfields and McCoys on the History Channel and they got in a fight over the ownership of a “razorback hog.”

_________________

Most college football teams are named after animals but all of them. Tennessee is named after the state nickname as other some other teams.  Why the name “Razorback” chosen for Arkansas. Hugo Bezdek tells us why below.

Facts About College Football Team Names

By: Maeve RichCollege football team names are unique, ranging from the Hurricanes to the Corn Huskers to the Buckeyes. Sometimes the origin of college football team names is uncertain; other times a lively explanation accompanies the team’s name.One of college football’s most popular and a widely recognized team is the Notre Dame Fighting Irish. There are a few theories as to where the name came from, but the most widely accepted explanation is that the press labeled Notre Dame’s team based on Irish stereotypes as well as the toughness and tenacity of the legendary Coach Knut Rockne’s teams. Other teams have taken on the name of popular stereotypes as well as local professions and Native American peoples. The Nebraska Corn Huskers are named as a nod to the well-known local crop and those that work on the farms. The Florida State Seminoles, though a bit controversial, were named after the Native American tribe that lived in and around the Tallahassee area. The Oklahoma Sooners’ nickname is a reference to the Oklahoma settlers who staked a claim to the land sooner than they were supposed to. Though it initially had a negative connotation, the school’s fans proudly call themselves Sooners today. The armed forces pay their respects to their soldiers with obvious nicknames of Midshipmen (Navy), Falcons (Air Force) and Black Knights (Army).Other schools have taken on the name of animals that populate the region surrounding the school. The Texas Longhorns are named after the cattle that evolved from those brought over from Spain by Columbus. They were one of the few species of cattle that could survive Texas’s harsh conditions.  The Colorado Buffaloes and Kentucky Wildcats follow in this tradition.Another tradition is to name teams after state nicknames The Sooners are a good example of this. Other examples include the Ohio State Buckeyes, Michigan Wolverines, Tennessee Volunteers and Wisconsin Badgers.

Other schools choose names to sound intimidating and in hopes that their players will exhibit the characteristics of those names. The Arkansas Razorbacks are a prime example of this. Arkansas coach Hugo Bezdek is said to have told a crowd that his team would play “like a wild band of Razorback Hogs.” Both the Clemson Tigers and LSU Tigers follow this line of thought.

Although team names may be colorful and intimidating, they do little to help the team win. At the same time, a team name may provide enough pride to motivate a team to play a little harder than their opponent.

June 4, 2012 – 11:06 am Categories: Current Events | Post a comment

Videos by Cato Institute on failed stimulus plans

In this post I have gathered several videos from the Cato Institute concerning the subject of failed stimulus plans.

_____

Government Spending Doesn’t Create Jobs

Uploaded by on Sep 7, 2011

Share this on Facebook: http://on.fb.me/qnjkn9 Tweet it: http://tiny.cc/o9v9t

In the debate of job creation and how best to pursue it as a policy goal, one point is forgotten: Government doesn’t create jobs. Government only diverts resources from one use to another, which doesn’t create new employment.

Video produced by Caleb Brown and Austin Bragg.

___________________________

Keynesian Catastrophe: Big Money, Big Government & Big Lies

Uploaded by on Jan 19, 2012

The Cato Institute’s Dan Mitchell explains why Obama’s stimulus was a flop! With Glenn Reynolds.

See more at http://www.pjtv.com and http://www.cato.org

___________________

Keynesian Economics Is Wrong: Bigger Gov’t Is Not Stimulus

Uploaded by on Dec 15, 2008

Based on a theory known as Keynesianism, politicians are resuscitating the notion that more government spending can stimulate an economy. This mini-documentary produced by the Center for Freedom and Prosperity Foundation examines both theory and evidence and finds that allowing politicians to spend more money is not a recipe for better economic performance.

___________________

Obama’s So-Called Stimulus: Good For Government, Bad For the Economy

Uploaded by on Jan 26, 2009

President Obama wants Congress to dramatically expand the burden of government spending. This CF&P Foundation mini-documentary explains why such a policy, based on the discredited Keynesian theory of economics, will not be successful. Indeed, the video demonstrates that Obama is proposing – for all intents and purposes – to repeat Bush’s mistakes. Government will be bigger, even though global evidence shows that nations with small governments are more prosperous.

____________

Big Government Is Not Stimulus: Why Keynes Was Wrong (The Condensed Version)

Uploaded by on Jan 13, 2009

The CF&P Foundation has released a condensed version of our successful mini-documentary explaining why so-called stimulus schemes do not work. Based on a theory known as Keynesianism, politicians are resuscitating the notion that more government spending can stimulate an economy. This mini-documentary produced by the Center for Freedom and Prosperity Foundation examines both theory and evidence and finds that allowing politicians to spend more money is not a recipe for better economic performance.

_________________

Eight Reasons Why Big Government Hurts Economic Growth

Uploaded by on Aug 17, 2009

This Center for Freedom and Prosperity Foundation video analyzes how excessive government spending undermines economic performance. While acknowledging that a very modest level of government spending on things such as “public goods” can facilitate growth, the video outlines eight different ways that that big government hinders prosperity. This video focuses on theory and will be augmented by a second video looking at the empirical evidence favoring smaller government.

___________________

Keynesian Economics Is Wrong: Economic Growth Causes Consumer Spending, Not the Other Way

Uploaded by on Nov 29, 2010

Politicians and journalists who fixate on consumer spending are putting the cart before the horse. Consumer spending generally is a consequence of growth, not the cause of growth. This Center for Freedom and Prosperity video helps explain how to achieve more prosperity by looking at the differences between gross domestic product and gross domestic income. www.freedomandprosperity.org

_____________

Deficits, Debts and Unfunded Liabilities: The Consequences of Excessive Government Spending

Uploaded by on May 10, 2010

Huge budget deficits and record levels of national debt are getting a lot of attention, but this video explains that unfunded liabilities for entitlement programs are Americas real red-ink challenge. More important, this CF&P mini-documentary reveals that deficits and debt are symptoms of the real problem of an excessive burden of government spending. www.freedomandprosperity.org

___________

Now that I have been critical of the Democrat President, I wanted to show that I am not concerned about taking up for Republicans but looking at the facts. President Clinton did increase government spending at a slower rate than many other presidents. Here are two  videos that praise both Reagan and Clinton for both accomplished this feat.

Spending Restraint, Part I: Lessons from Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton

Uploaded by on Feb 14, 2011

Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton both reduced the relative burden of government, largely because they were able to restrain the growth of domestic spending. The mini-documentary from the Center for Freedom and Prosperity uses data from the Historical Tables of the Budget to show how Reagan and Clinton succeeded and compares their record to the fiscal profligacy of the Bush-Obama years.

______________

Spending Restraint, Part II: Lessons from Canada, Ireland, Slovakia, and New Zealand

Uploaded by on Feb 22, 2011

Nations can make remarkable fiscal progress if policy makers simply limit the growth of government spending. This video, which is Part II of a series, uses examples from recent history in Canada, Ireland, Slovakia, and New Zealand to demonstrate how it is possible to achieve rapid improvements in fiscal policy by restraining the burden of government spending. Part I of the series examined how Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton were successful in controlling government outlays — particularly the burden of domestic spending programs. www.freedomandprosperity.org

______________

It seems that liberals will never wake up. On 3-8-12 a Arkansas Times blogger pointed out that Obama’s stimulus in 2009 was not made up of just increased but also tax cuts. That is true but the real truth is that there have been about 1/2 dozen stimulus efforts by President Obama and all of them have failed.  Over and over they have tried stimulus plans but they don’t work. Take a look at this excellent article from the Cato Institute:

Keynesian Policies Have Failed

by Chris Edwards

Chris Edwards is the director of tax policy studies at the Cato Institute and the editor of Downsizing Government.org.

Added to cato.org on December 2, 2011

This article appeared on U.S. News & World Report Online on December 2, 2011

Lawmakers are considering extending temporary payroll tax cuts. But the policy is based on faulty Keynesian theories and misplaced confidence in the government’s ability to micromanage short-run growth.

In textbook Keynesian terms, federal deficits stimulate growth by goosing “aggregate demand,” or consumer spending. Since the recession began, we’ve had a lot of goosing — deficits were $459 billion in 2008, $1.4 trillion in 2009, $1.3 trillion in 2010, and $1.3 trillion in 2011. Despite that huge supposed stimulus, unemployment remains remarkably high and the recovery has been the slowest since World War II.

Policymakers should ignore the Keynesians and their faulty models, and instead focus on reforms to aid long-run growth…

Yet supporters of extending payroll tax cuts think that adding another $265 billion to the deficit next year will somehow spur growth. That “stimulus” would be on top of the $1 trillion in deficit spending that is already expected in 2012. Far from helping the economy, all this deficit spending is destabilizing financial markets, scaring businesses away from investing, and imposing crushing debt burdens on young people.

For three years, policymakers have tried to manipulate short-run economic growth, and they have failed. They have put too much trust in macroeconomists, who are frankly lousy at modeling the complex workings of the short-run economy. In early 2008, the Congressional Budget Office projected that economic growth would strengthen in subsequent years, and thus completely missed the deep recession that had already begun. And then there was the infamously bad projection by Obama’s macroeconomists that unemployment would peak at 8 percent and then fall steadily if the 2009 stimulus plan was passed.

Chris Edwards is the director of tax policy studies at the Cato Institute and the editor of Downsizing Government.org.

 

More by Chris Edwards

Some of the same Keynesian macroeconomists who got it wrong on the recession and stimulus are now claiming that a temporary payroll tax break would boost growth. But as Stanford University economist John Taylor has argued, the supposed benefits of government stimulus have been “built in” or predetermined by the underlying assumptions of the Keynesian models.

Policymakers should ignore the Keynesians and their faulty models, and instead focus on reforms to aid long-run growth, which economists know a lot more about. Cutting the corporate tax rate, for example, is an overdue reform with bipartisan support that would enhance America’s long-run productivity and competitiveness.

If Congress is intent on cutting payroll taxes, it should do so within the context of long-run fiscal reforms. One idea is to allow workers to steer a portion of their payroll taxes into personal retirement accounts, as Chile and other nations have done. That reform would feel like a tax cut to workers because they would retain ownership of the funds, and it would begin solving the long-term budget crisis that looms over the economy.

Related posts:

Stimulus plans do not work (part 2)

Dan Mitchell discusses the effectiveness of the stimulus Uploaded by catoinstitutevideo on Nov 3, 2009 11-2-09 When I think of all our hard earned money that has been wasted on stimulus programs it makes me sad. It has never worked and will not in the future too. Take a look at a few thoughts from […]

Stimulus plans do not work (Part 1)

Government Spending Doesn’t Create Jobs Uploaded by catoinstitutevideo on Sep 7, 2011 Share this on Facebook: http://on.fb.me/qnjkn9 Tweet it: http://tiny.cc/o9v9t In the debate of job creation and how best to pursue it as a policy goal, one point is forgotten: Government doesn’t create jobs. Government only diverts resources from one use to another, which doesn’t […]

Dumas thinks we don’t need Balanced Budget Amendment but should balance it on our own

In his recent article Ernie Dumas sticks to his guns that we should balance the budget without being forced to with a “Balanced Budget Amendment,” but I wonder how well that has worked so far? I have made this a key issue for this blog in the past as you can tell below: Dear Senator […]

Maybe the “Occupy Wall Street” crowd should be angry at Obama

(Picture from Arkansas Times Blog) When I think about all the anger and hate coming from the Occupy Wall Street crowd, I wonder if they have read this story below? Solyndra: Crooked Politics or Just Bad Economics? Posted by David Boaz Amy Harder has a good take on the Solyndra issue in National Journal Daily […]

Dear Senator Pryor, why not pass the Balanced Budget Amendment? (Part 13 Thirsty Thursday, Open letter to Senator Pryor)

Dear Senator Pryor, why not pass the Balanced Budget Amendment? (Part 13 Thirsty Thursday, Open letter to Senator Pryor) Office of the Majority Whip | Balanced Budget Amendment Video In 1995, Congress nearly passed a constitutional amendment mandating a balanced budget. The Balanced Budget Amendment would have forced the federal government to live within its […]

Mark Pryor not for President’s job bill even though he voted for it

Andrew Demillo pointed this out  and also Jason Tolbert noted: PRYOR OPPOSES THE OBAMA JOBS BILL THAT HE VOTED TO ADVANCE  Sen. Mark Pryor has been traveling around the state touting a six-part jobs plan that he says “includes a number of bipartisan initiatives, is aimed at creating jobs by setting the table for growth, encouraging new […]

Is a lack of money the problem for our public schools?

Is a lack of money the problem for our public schools? Everything You Need to Know About Public School Spending in Less Than 2½ Minutes Posted by Adam Schaeffer Neal McCluskey gutted the President’s new “Save the Teachers” American Jobs Act sales pitch a good while back, as did Andrew Coulson here. Thankfully, it seems […]

June 4, 2012 – 8:02 am Categories: Cato Institute, President Obama, spending out of control, Taxes | Post a comment

Great coach of the past:Bowden Wyatt

 

 Arkansas has had some great coaches over the years and Bowden Wyatt is one of them. When you think of the great football tradition that Arkansas has today one could argue that it all got started in the 1950’s with Bowden Wyatt.  

Bowden Wyatt

Career Record: 16 Years, 99-56-5, .634 W-L% (Major Schools)
Bowl Record: 4 Bowls, 2-2, .500 W-L% (Major Bowls)
Major Schools: Wyoming (39-17-1), Arkansas (11-10) and Tennessee (49-29-4)

Coaching Record

or hold your mouse over the header”>Glossary  · output HTML, CSV, or a shareable link”>SHARESHARE [X]  · Embed  · CSV  · PRE  · LINK  · ?
Year School G W L T W-L% SRS SOS AP Pre AP High AP Post Bowl
1947 Wyoming 9 4 5 0 .444 -10.63 -7.12        
1948 Wyoming 9 4 5 0 .444 -5.22 -8.66        
1949 Wyoming 10 9 1 0 .900 5.07 -10.19        
1950 Wyoming 10 10 0 0 1.000 12.97 -5.37   12 12 Gator Bowl–W
1951 Wyoming 10 7 2 1 .750 6.40 -3.58        
1952 Wyoming 9 5 4 0 .556 -5.68 -6.03        
1953 Arkansas 10 3 7 0 .300 5.56 9.88        
1954 Arkansas 11 8 3 0 .727 13.47 7.32   4 10 Cotton Bowl–L
1955 Tennessee 10 6 3 1 .650 7.79 2.73   17    
1956 Tennessee 11 10 1 0 .909 23.26 7.53 12 1 2 Sugar Bowl–L
1957 Tennessee 11 8 3 0 .727 15.18 8.32 5 5 13 Gator Bowl–W
1958 Tennessee 10 4 6 0 .400 1.97 6.22        
1959 Tennessee 10 5 4 1 .550 9.17 8.77   8    
1960 Tennessee 10 6 2 2 .700 11.64 4.63 18 8    
1961 Tennessee 10 6 4 0 .600 10.41 7.10        
1962 Tennessee 10 4 6 0 .400 3.67 3.04        
  Overall 160 99 56 5 .634 6.56 1.54        
  Wyoming 57 39 17 1 .693 0.49 -6.83        
  Arkansas 21 11 10 0 .524 9.51 8.60        
  Tennessee 82 49 29 4 .622 10.38 6.04        

Consensus All-America Selections: Bud Brooks (1954-L) and Johnny Majors (1956-B)

June 4, 2012 – 7:21 am Categories: Current Events | Post a comment

Some Tea Party heroes (Part 4)

What future does our country have if we never even attempt to balance our budget. I read some wise words by Congressman Jeff Landry (R, LA-03) regarding the  debt ceiling deal that was passed on August 1, 2011:”Throughout this debate, the American people have demanded a real cure to America’s spending addiction – a Balanced Budget Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Unfortunately, today’s Washington deal transforms last week’s strong Balanced Budget requirement into a toothless suggestion.”

If we are going to get the budget to balance it will take a Balanced Budget Amendment to force us to do so. There is no other way around that fact!!!

Ted DeHaven noted his his article, “Freshman Republicans switch from Tea to Kool-Aid,”  Cato Institute Blog, May 17, 2012:

This week the Club for Growth released a study of votes cast in 2011 by the 87 Republicans elected to the House in November 2010. The Club found that “In many cases, the rhetoric of the so-called “Tea Party” freshmen simply didn’t match their records.” Particularly disconcerting is the fact that so many GOP newcomers cast votes against spending cuts.

The study comes on the heels of three telling votes taken last week in the House that should have been slam-dunks for members who possess the slightest regard for limited government and free markets. Alas, only 26 of the 87 members of the “Tea Party class” voted to defund both the Economic Development Administration and the president’s new Advanced Manufacturing Technology Consortia program (see my previous discussion of these votes here) and against reauthorizing the Export-Import Bank (see my colleague Sallie James’s excoriation of that vote here).

One of those Tea Party heroes was Congressman Jeff Landry (R, LA-03). Last year I posted this below concerning his conservative views and his willingness to vote against the debt ceiling increase:

Congressman Landry’s Statement on Today’s Debt Ceiling Deal

Millard Mulé
 

WASHINGTON, DC – Congressman Jeff Landry (R, LA-03) issued the following statement regarding today’s debt ceiling deal:

“I’m sure by Washington standards, today’s deal is a great accomplishment; but by American standards, it comes up short. Throughout this debate, the American people have demanded a real cure to America’s spending addiction – a Balanced Budget Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Unfortunately, today’s Washington deal transforms last week’s strong Balanced Budget requirement into a toothless suggestion. And today’s Washington deal puts at risk the security and pay of our brave men and women in uniform. It’s disheartening that Washington continues skirting the problem, instead of passing long-term solutions to end it. As evident by my decision today, I stand with the American people and choose to put the next generation above my next election.”

June 4, 2012 – 7:19 am Categories: spending out of control, Taxes | Post a comment

“Music Monday” Meaning of the song “Up on Cripple Creek”

Up on Cripple Creek

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
“Up on Cripple Creek”
Single by The Band
from the album The Band
B-side “The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down“
Released November 29, 1969
Recorded 1969
Genre Roots rock, americana
Length 4:34
Label Capitol Records
Writer(s) Robbie Robertson
Producer John Simon

“Up on Cripple Creek” is the fifth song on The Band‘s eponymous second album, The Band. It was released as a (edited) single on Capitol 2635 in November 1969 and reached #25 on the Billboard Hot 100.[1] “Up on Cripple Creek” was written by Band guitarist and principal songwriter Robbie Robertson, with drummer Levon Helm singing lead vocal.

A live performance of “Up on Cripple Creek” appears in The Band’s live concert film The Last Waltz, as well as on the accompanying soundtrack album. In addition, a live version of the song appears on Before the Flood; a live album of The Band’s various concerts and shows with Bob Dylan while touring together in 1974.

“Up on Cripple Creek” is notable as it is one of the first accounts of a Hohner Clavinet being played with a wah-wah pedal. The riff can be heard after the chorus of the song. The Clavinet, especially in tandem with a wah pedal was a sound that became famous in the early to mid ’70s especially in funk music, and continues to be popular to this day.

Contents

[hide]

[edit] Lyrics

Drawing upon three of The Band’s favorite themes — The American South, American folk music, and alcoholism — the song tells the story of a miner who goes to Lake Charles, Louisiana to stay with a local girl who he knows will put him up for free while he blows his money on drinks. Although he admits to having some feelings for his “little Bessie”, he uses her hospitality to drink himself to oblivion. At the end of the song, he pushes off once more for greener pastures, although with the stated intention of coming back to his Bessie.

[edit] Chart performance

Chart (1969-70) Peak
position
Canadian RPM Singles Chart 10
U.S. Billboard Hot 100 25

[edit] Personnel

June 4, 2012 – 7:16 am Categories: Current Events | Post a comment

Senator Pryor asks for Spending Cut Suggestions! Here are a few!(Part 150)

Senator Mark Pryor wants our ideas on how to cut federal spending. Take a look at this video clip below:

Senator Pryor has asked us to send our ideas to him at cutspending@pryor.senate.gov and I have done so in the past and will continue to do so in the future.

On May 11, 2011,  I emailed to this above address and I got this email back from Senator Pryor’s office:

Please note, this is not a monitored email account. Due to the sheer volume of correspondence I receive, I ask that constituents please contact me via my website with any responses or additional concerns. If you would like a specific reply to your message, please visit http://pryor.senate.gov/contact. This system ensures that I will continue to keep Arkansas First by allowing me to better organize the thousands of emails I get from Arkansans each week and ensuring that I have all the information I need to respond to your particular communication in timely manner.  I appreciate you writing. I always welcome your input and suggestions. Please do not hesitate to contact me on any issue of concern to you in the future.

Here are a few more I just emailed to Senator Pryor myself:

Government auditors spent the past five years examining all federal programs and found that 22 percent of them—costing taxpayers a total of $123 billion annually—fail to show any positive impact on the populations they serve.

  • Each month, taxpayers provide $40,000worth of office space, cell phones, staff, and an SUV for former House Speaker Dennis Hastert, who currently works as a lobbyist for private corporations and foreign governments.
  • House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her staff have charged taxpayers $101,000 for “in-flight services”—including food and liquor—during trips on Air Force jets over the last two years. Charges reportedly include “Maker’s Mark whiskey, Courvoisier cognac, Johnny Walker Red scotch, Grey Goose vodka, E&J brandy, Bailey’s Irish Crème, Bacardi Light rum, Jim Beam whiskey, Beefeater gin, Dewars scotch, Bombay Sapphire gin, Jack Daniels whiskey, and Corona beer.”
  • The Legal Services Corporation, which is supposed to provide legal services to the poor, has repeatedly ignored warnings to stop spending its money on alcohol. It also funds limousines, first-class airfare, and “death by Chocolate” pastries for its executives.
  • The Department of Energy spent nine years and $153 millionon an obsolete cyber-security project that was supposed to safeguard America’s nuclear weapons information.
June 4, 2012 – 7:14 am Categories: spending out of control | Post a comment