Orwell predicted truth would be called lies and people would concur. I found it hard to believe. Now, however, I see the orwellian future coming into the focus as the left gains more and more power. There is no doubt democrats have destroyed major cites. They had also destroyed new york until guilianni helped bring it back from the brink of bankruptcy. Sacramento democrats are currently destroying our once great state. We are living the dream in CA and watching it turn into a leftist nightmare. All I can say is a feel sorry for future generations. https://www.investors.com/politics/...cratic-rule-ruined-some-of-our-finest-cities/ Urban Blight: A few days ago, filmmaker Michael Moore tweeted, “Flint has voted for Dems for 84 straight yrs” and wanted to know, “What did it get us?” He’s actually on to something. Don’t drink the water in Flint, Mich. Federal and state officials botched a water supply switch there and ended up contaminating the city’s drinking water with lead. It’s a sad and infuriating story that has gone on far too long. It’s not quite a humanitarian crisis -- blessedly, we don’t see many of those in this country -- but it is a mess. Of course blame has been liberally tossed around. Republican Gov. Rick Snyder has been sued. Moore wants him arrested. (Obviously there's a limit to Moore's ability to think clearly, and he reached it with his Flint tweet.) Some are convinced that the private sector is the villain, because, after all, isn’t it always? The loopy left even says that the Koch brothers are at fault. But let’s backtrack to Moore’s tweet. Flint is indeed a Democratic Party bastion. Don’t its decades of Democratic dominance deserve some of the blame? It’s the city’s "Democratic rulers," Reason magazine’s Robby Soave reminds us, who have "robbed city residents blind to pad the pockets of public sector unions." They’ve also been in charge as Flint has become one the country’s poorest cities (the second poorest, says the Census Bureau, for a city of its size), and a haven for criminals -- it’s the most dangerous city in America, according to Business Insider. Flint is not alone, though. America is awash with troubled, dysfunctional cities that have been electing Democratic mayors for decades. Detroit last elected a Republican mayor in 1957. It is now the model of urban failure -- it’s recognized more for its poverty, crime, rot and bankruptcy than the great cars that it turned out into the early 1970s. It is the poorest big city in the nation, with almost 40% of the population living below the poverty line. The website Law Street actually ranks Detroit ahead of Flint as the country's most dangerous city. Either way, it’s clear that both cities have institutionalized crime problems. Detroit is also a pit of political corruption. Just in recent years, one mayor, Kwame Kilpatrick, was convicted of corruption and sent to federal prison for 28 years, while building inspectors have been indicted on federal felony bribery charges and a former city council member was investigated in a bribery and kickback scandal. Chicago’s last GOP mayor was elected in 1927. The nation’s third-largest city is home to some of the worst inner-city violence imaginable. More than 2,300 people were shot there last year, and nearly 400 lost their lives to homicides. Its finances are just as grim. "Chicago is so broke," IBD contributor Stephen Moore explained months ago, "that its bonds are junk status, and Mayor Rahm Emanuel had to go hat in hand last week to the state capital, Springfield, for bailout money to pay the bills." Things have been rotten enough, Moore said, to send "a record number of people ... fleeing Cook County, home to Chicago." Only a little more than half of the city's pension liabilities are funded. St. Louis has been electing Democratic mayors since 1949. The Gateway to the West has become the gateway for crime. Law Street says that it’s the fourth most dangerous city in the country, Forbes says it’s the second. It had the sixth-highest poverty rate among big cities in 2014. The last GOP mayor of Philadelphia left office in 1952. A few years ago, Moore identified it as a favorite to follow Detroit into bankruptcy. Both Baltimore and Oakland had Republican mayors as late as the 1960s. In the era of Democratic rule, both are now more well known for their crime and poverty problems than for their charm and character. Newark, N.J., hasn't had a GOP mayor in more than a century. It was ranked as the fifth-worst city to live in in 2015. Detroit, of course, was first. When Democrats are in control, cities tend to go soft on crime, reward cronies with public funds, establish hostile business environments, heavily tax the most productive citizens and set up fat pensions for their union friends. Simply put, theirs is a Blue State blueprint for disaster.
Yeah, New York and California are real shit holes compared to Alabama and Mississippi. No offense, but blue states have a much higher quality of living than red states.
and when i moved to CA it was libertarian with governors like Reagan and pete wilson. I have watched he virus of leftism coming down the state for about 30 years. More income theft, more theft of freedom..more divisive politics each year. When I moved to San Diego it was as close to a free place.. it was almost a utopia. No lines at the dmv. Great beaches. Open trails. No helmet laws. low prices and taxes... It was awesome. The govt has contributed to many changes and almost none for the better. Mayor john lindsay started new york city's slide into an over taxed shit hole with a lot of help from Koch and dinkins. by the late 70s the big apple was bankrupt. Giuliani and the tech boom/wall street.... gave it a new lease for about a decade. But, it will start sliding soon if its not already under De Blasio.
Reagan tripled the deficit and Bush41 raised taxes and served a single term. Clinton the rapist balanced the budget and erased the deficit. Bush43 again with the tax cuts and took us from a surplus (some say $5T, but I don't believe that) to an $11T deficit. Obama and the Fed added $9T more. Roughly half of federal spending is is SS, Medicare and defense. So you want a strong military, your SS check and 80/20 healthcare, but you want to push those off your balance sheet? Let's just sell more ten year notes and print more cash?
I despise the perv Clinton, but the dude was smart. He was so tuned into the macro picture that the guy carried a Metriplex 4-line pager quoting GovPX cash Treasuries.
1. in principle I am for a balanced budget. 2. the republican congress is was just as responsible for Clinton's (pseudo) balance as clinton. But, Clinton governed to the right of today's establishment republicans. I would take many of his policies over what the establishment republicans are doing now. (not glass steagall though) 3. unfortunately, since we have no idea how much money the FED reserve and the banks are creating each year... we have no idea how much of a problem our deficit is creating. The idea of borrowing money is to prevent inflation. So why do we have 700 percent inflation the last 50 years even though world wide demand for the dollar is massive.... it must at least in great part be due to the fact the FED and the banks have created trillions of dollars. So.. I am not currently concerned about a balanced budget. (nor was I under the last few years of Obama and I said so many times) Tell me how much the FED is creating and I will tell you how big a problem Reagan's spending was. I voted for Perot... because Bush Sr. raised taxes so I wont be defending him. 4. I would agree the military spending is too large if our goal is balance. I would like to see a balance budget amendment and no income taxes. We will inflate into balance. And then instead of spending more our politicians will have to vote on budgeting priorities. All of sudden we will really find out if we are a guns or butter society. I think we would be a lot better off if the choices our politicians were campaigning upon were guns vs butter and real votes... vs this bullshit of taxes vs spending but getting both once they are elected. 5. I don't really disagree with any of your implicit or explicit points. Our govt and system is not even close to optimal right now. i would rather we have better left or better right (in terms of spending not freedom) vs what we have.