This is awesome – I’m pretty sure it’s accurate as well. While Obama’s side might look “fair” to many people, I think it will encourage the affluent to leave the country or move their businesses offshore, as well as their investments. It is a plan that will force our exports to decrease and our imports to necessarily increase since there will be less domestic industry. It is Rand’s nightmare realized. This will lead to a dramatic cost of living increase, and eventually another depression. It’s a question of whether we want a nation of workers who get a little more money per year but are massively unemployed, therefore increasing the tax burden on other workers over a period of time, or whether we want to continue borrowing tons of money from foreign nations, not paying down the debt, fighting increasingly expensive wars (which, of course, Obama wants to do as well), and decreasing our taxation, which is also unrealistic in the long term.

Obama’s plan to saturate the professional market with highly educated people, yet force the owners of businesses away from the country through very large increases in personal income tax, capital gains, and corporate taxes will either lead to massive unemployment or a population of outsourced labor a bit similar to what we’re seeing in India at the moment. While I do not support cutting taxes and increasing spending, I actually concede that John McCain’s plan is slightly more reasonable than Obama’s fiscally, mostly because of the opposition to push a ridiculous amount of funds into things like Americorps, his “Civilian National Security Force that is … just as well funded” as the military, and, last but not least, healthcare. I have a feeling that when Obama’s taxation plan fails to live up to the cost of the social programs he proposes to create, we will see even more increases of taxation of corporations and the rich, giving them even more reason to leave. I believe McCain’s plan will fail in an entirely different way, relying upon even more borrowing and foreign investment, eventually leading us into the same fate many other countries have faced – not being able to pay even the interest on their loans from afar. If McCain were to have to raise taxes to responsibly pay down the debt, I believe he would do it in a much more sane way than we see on the right side of the above figure.

Now, the Obama campaign has addressed this very concern, but it mostly addresses earmarks. McCain also primarily denounces earmarks when he talks about “cutting spending.” Earmarks have been demonized into being the worst wasteful spending possible, but the real problem is the number of social programs Obama will create, build upon, or perpetuate. For instance, he is a proponent of building low-income housing, which has created crime-ridden neighborhoods for years. He and McCain support the mortgage bailout that is happening right before our eyes, which will save the irresponsible house-flippers who made bad investments in their homes or obtained mortgages with terrible terms, as well as save the organizations that made this possible, Fannie and Freddie. The lenders themselves, while marketing bad loan products, are simply the middlemen, and the guarantee that Fannie and Freddie would buy any mortgage-backed-security-bundle they created is what has caused this mess. But, instead of those people having to stimulate the rental property industry and “lose” their homes (which just means the banks lose, housing prices go down, and people who don’t own homes currently have access to cheap property), we’ve decided to punish all the people of America for the mistakes of the few.

I still believe that my taxes will increase when the people most able to leave the country decide they don’t want to lose an extra $700.000 per year, and when the top 1% leave, we will be left with 28% more tax burden. All that needs to happen is for 3,000,000 people to leave.

Update

Obama laid out some of the things I said in a speech yesterday by the looks of it.

The ideal candidate according to America

Here is a screenshot of what Google News says:

And here is a screenshot of the article:

Contact them to tell them to add Ron Paul back into their results. This distortion is unacceptable. How could they have screwed up their results so much? I mean, confusing McCain as 19% rather than 11%? Weird…

Update

After a little more detective work, I managed to reconstruct most of the original paragraph. Most of it is the same as the new one. It looks like they just removed a section about the Echo Boomers, who are supporting Ron Paul 18%. Here it is:

Rudy Giuliani is still the top choice for Echo Boomers followed by Mike Huckabee (28% and 21% respectively), but John McCain moves into third place (19%) and Ron Paul jumps into 4th place with 18 percent of this generation’s support.

So, tell Cherry Creek News to put back in its Echo Boomer results, which are apparently the generation of people between 18 and 30.

Update 2

They told me to “get a life.” Wow – what a fair and honest publication. I don’t know why they won’t add Dr. Paul back into their article after these amazing polling results that obviously show he is neck and neck with Huckabee with young people. Boycott Cherry Creek News.

Instead of “Good, Good!” he says “Christ, Christ!”

Let’s not make this true.

So, I keep seeing people posting comments around that say Ron Paul is a racist, and most of them refer to a 1992 mailing list post he allegedly wrote. First of all, the author was apparently a ghost writer, which Paul admitted during an interview.

This posting was controversial because it portrayed inner city Blacks in a bad light. It was protesting against the lack of police action against rioting, the Rodney King scandal, and inner city crime committed by Blacks. Now, I don’t think the author was inferring that only black people commit crime, or are predisposed to it by their race; quite the contrary in fact. He was admitting what Bill Cosby has admitted. Alvin Poussaint has also admitted it, as he put here:

The statistics are kind of mind-blowing and enough to alert you that we have serious problems here. You have more than 50 percent of black males in most urban areas are high school dropouts. You have black males committing over 50 percent of the homicides. We’re 13, 12 percent of the population and we make up [about] 45 percent of the prison population.

So, is Alvin, a professor of psychology at Harvard, prejudiced against his own race? NO! He’s just pointing out the facts! This is exactly what the author was doing!

Here are some of the quotes that are in question:

Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the “criminal justice system,” I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in [Washington D.C.] are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.

We don’t think a child of 13 should be held responsible as a man of 23. That’s true for most people, but black males age 13 who have been raised on the streets and who have joined criminal gangs are as big, strong, tough, scary and culpable as any adult and should be treated as such.

What else do we need to know about the political establishment than that it refuses to discuss the crimes that terrify Americans on grounds that doing so is racist? Why isn’t that true of complex embezzling, which is 100 percent white and Asian?

If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be.

This last one is interesting, and it is probably the most cited one. I, personally, do not see too much of a problem with this. I’ll turn it around here using some current events:

If you’ve ever been shot with a shotgun by a white senior-citizen male, you know how unbelievably well they can shoot.

Idea taken from here. Now, if the newsletter was about how much white Texan males liked guns, and how it was a danger to the community for them to take the law into their own hands, would it be racist? If I were to say that 95% of white Texan males wouldn’t mind shooting to kill without giving the target a fair trial, would that be racist? NO! It’s just a stupid statistic I made up on the spot, since 93% of statistics are made up on the spot!

So, saying that at least a few black teenage males rob people is not racist, because you are not claiming that their race predisposes them to this activity. Saying black people run fast could be construed as racist, which is the intent of most people who post this quote, but it’s not. In fact, there is massive empirical evidence to back this up. The 200 fastest times recorded in the 100-meter dash all belong to blacks! The book Taboo discusses this very subject. Is it racist to say that certain races have predisposed physical abilities that are superior to many members of other races? NO! It’s just the way it is! It’s like the fact the some white people are blond. If anything, saying black teenage males run fast on average is pretty close to a compliment if you ask me.

I’ve also heard that he takes money from racist people. It’s a good thing he doesn’t do business with folks who protect terrorists like Rudy Giuliani does. This is just flat out stupid. Criticizing a candidate based on who is donating to them is like criticizing Wal-Mart for its clientele. You can’t say that Wal-Mart is racist because racist people shop there – they just want low prices like the rest of us! I’m tired of these worthless arguments. Find something of substance if you’re going to argue against Dr. Paul. The other GOP candidates have a new debacle every day! Huckabee flows them constantly: women should obey their husbands unquestioningly, people with AIDS should be quarantined, etc. Do we want 4-8 more years of restriction of our liberties?

The author does not believe that Black people are naturally any different than Whites, but he does believe that the urban culture (hateful rap, materialism, race-driven comedy, etc.) is ruining American society as a whole. I tend to agree. I respect people of all races who don’t adhere to that nonsense.

The cause of the riots is plain: barbarism. If the barbarians cannot loot sufficiently through legal channels (i.e., the riots being the welfare-state minus the middleman), they resort to illegal ones, to terrorism.

He calls rioters barbarians, which rioters of all races essentially are. And doesn’t current inner-city Black culture generally pin Whites as the enemy? Ever heard the statement that Whites are “keeping the black man down?” So, really, he is angry at their culture just like Bill Cosby and Alvin Poussaint are.

Our country is being destroyed by a group of actual and potential terrorists – and they can be identified by the color of their skin.

The part about identifying them by the color of their skin is damning when taken out of context. The rest of that paragraph and the following paragraph expound on that statement, saying that there is indeed a small percentage of Blacks who adhere to beliefs in individual liberty and free market. It also describes them as “decent people.” Therefore, the all-encompassing identification by the color of their skin has been thwarted by context. It’s a bad style of writing (making declarative statements and rebutting them), but it was the style used here.

Being afraid of black men had its basis in statistics, sadly enough, especially in larger cities in the early 90’s. In the context of the article, when rioting was occurring, it was a legitimate fear given the racial prejudices of the culture involved. Anyone should fear for their lives when confronted with a racially charged mob of a different race. The consecutive sentence makes a valid point:

Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings, and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers.

The information found here gives a good recent example of this. It’s a terrible fact, but it has nothing to do with their race and everything to do with their culture.

Even though Ron Paul didn’t write this newsletter, people still attack him as if he did. I’ve read a few places that the person who did was immediately fired, and never wrote them again, but I have no idea if that’s true. Even though I defend the quotes here, I think the newsletter was a little more scathing than it needed to be. It should have discussed culture more to prevent arguments like this from happening.

Now, another accusation is that he is an anti-Semite for being opposed to the Israeli lobby. If he was opposed to the Mexico lobby would that automatically make him racist against Mexicans? NO! It’s all politics. He believes that Israel has a right to sovereignty just like Palestine does! Why can’t we have it both ways? Am I an anti-Semite for looking into the statistics behind the conflict between the two countries rather than blindly getting behind Israel because I don’t want to sound racist for criticizing them? NO! I’m not criticizing their race at all, and criticizing their lobby also has nothing to do with their race or their politics. Here is an interesting site purporting that the American mainstream media is distorting the facts of the conflict, and that about 7 times more Palestinian children have died than Israeli children since it began. I don’t know how credible their data is, but apparently Palestinian children who die don’t get as much MSM airtime as Israeli kids.

Ron Paul has said many things that irk people, and I think that’s exactly what we need more of in this country. The fact is that Dr. Paul will not impose his personal views on the country, which is contrary to every other Republican candidate, and many of the Democrats. He is personally opposed to gay marriage for instance, but when Jon Stossel asked him what he thought about it, he said that they had the right to do whatever they wanted and that the state should have no say in it. He believes the same thing about abortion – it should be up to the individual states whether they want to allow it or not, which leaves it up to the voters in those states. If he believed in aliens like Kucinich does, I really wouldn’t care! If the man is not going to impose his beliefs on me as president, then he is free to believe whatever he wants. I personally do not think Ron Paul is a racist. He may or may not have said that black people can run fast, or that 95% of the blacks in Washington D.C. were criminal or semi-criminal (defining semi-criminal is also difficult – you are semi-criminal for not paying your taxes or jaywalking for instance). Speaking out against riots, gang violence, and childhood gang indoctrination is not racist. It’s stating the facts, which no one else seems to want to do. He also states the facts about the economy, which everyone including Bernanke does not want to hear.

Respecting the Constitution and eliminating the power the presidency has obtained is the key. No more wars without declaration, no more signing statements, lower taxes, and an emphasis on personal responsibility and freedom is what I desire in our next president.

I’ll leave you with a nice quote by Bierce:

“Conservative, n. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others.” Ambrose Bierce, Devil’s Dictionary, 1911

Oh, and VOTE FOR RON PAUL!

• Ron Paul
• Dennis Kucinich
• Barack Obama
• Hillary Clinton
• Rudy Giuliani
• Mitt Romney
• Mike Huckabee
• Fred Thompson
• John Edwards
• Mike Gravel
• John McCain

Now, you would think that the number of hardcore supporters should correlate nicely with the number of voters turning out in the primaries since one should think that anyone in a Meetup group would go vote come primary day. But, sadly, by the looks of it very few of the supporters of the “top-tier” Republican candidates are enthusiastic enough to join a Meetup group. I wonder why since this would help their campaigns immensely. Here’s the result:

Maybe they’re all just using a different site? Let me know what you think.

It’s based on this table of the candidates views on popular issues, and how strong your feelings are on each one. A good tool indeed, and it should be publicized as a guideline for voters by our caring media since we all want voters to make informed decisions…

The graph led to this:

I have no explanation for this picture.

I started trading options about a week ago, and made a little profit on Boeing. Redhat started taking off today, and I might buy a call on that. Watch Redhat!