Believe It or Not: A Communist Nation Is the World’s Most Pro-Capitalist Country...

Believe It or Not: A Communist Nation Is the World’s Most Pro-Capitalist Country by Dan Mitchell Every so often, I share polling data from other nations that is either encouraging or puzzling. Looking through the archives, here are some memorable examples. *Americans are more libertarian than Europeans. *On the other hand, the French support spending cuts by a 4-1 margin. *More than 90 percent of Greeks and Italians see government as an obstacle to business. *Nearly 70 percent of Labor voters in the United Kingdom would favor class-warfare tax policy even if tax revenues didn't increase. *People in 20 out of 21 nations preferred Obama over Romney. *Italians supposedly are more fiscally conservative than Americans. As are Germans. *But Americans are more likely than anybody else to think there is too much red tape. Some of those results make sense, while others were a big surprise. But nothing was as surprising as the results we're looking at today. First, some background. According to Wikipedia, Vietnam "is one of the world's four remaining single-party socialist states officially espousing communism." Yet according to a global public opinion survey from Pew Research, citizens of that communist nation are the world's most pro-capitalist people. Asked to agree or disagree with the statement that people are better off in a free market economy, 95 percent of them chose capitalism. And the nation with the third-highest level of support for capitalism is...drum roll please...China. So another communist-run nation has pro-capitalist citizens (as well as a few secretly capitalist officials). Here's a table with more amazing polling data showing the degree to which people in other countries support free markets. The worst country, if you're looking at overt support for free markets is Argentina. Only 33 percent of respondents agreed that a free market economy was best (gee, I'm shocked). And Japan, Spain, and Jordan are the most anti-capitalist nations based on the share of respondents who disagreed with that notion. Now let's look at some more numbers. Here's an equally fascinating table of polling dataon which policies are seen as being most effective in lowering the gap between the rich and poor. Who would have guessed that the Italians, Brazilians, and Ugandans would be most supportive of low taxes? Or that the Germans, Jordanians, and Salvadorans would be most in favor of high taxes? The German results are particularly odd. They have very high support for free markets, while also supporting class-warfare taxation. By the way, the people of the United States also are confused. They support free markets, yet they also give a plurality to class-warfare tax policy. We're not as mixed up as the Germans, but it still doesn't make sense. But Americans kicked you-know-what in one part of the Pew Survey. In questions designed to measure the role of individual achievement, respondents from the United States were far more likely than most to demonstrate a belief in the work ethic and the spirit of upward mobility. Though there are some anomalies in this data. The Venezuelans (62 percent) surpassed America on the top chart, for instance, and the Colombians and Argentinians (78 percent) beat America on the bottom chart. For what it's worth, I suspect the Swiss actually are the most sensible people. Dan Mitchell | October 11, 2014 at 8:57 am | Tags: Polling Data, Public Opinion | Categories: Polling Data, Public Opinion | URL: http://wp.me/przCm-7pP Comment    See all comments    Like Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:  http://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2014/10/11/believe-it-or-not-a-communist-nation-is-the-worlds-most-pro-capitalist-country/

What Happens When Too Many Voters Support Redistribution?...

What Happens When Too Many Voters Support Redistribution? by Dan Mitchell Back in 2010, I shared some wise words from Walter Williams and Theodore Dalrympleabout how society can become unstable when people figure they can "vote themselves money." On a related note, I shared the famous "riding in the wagon" cartoons in 2011 and the "Danish party boat" image in 2014. Both of these posts highlighted the danger that exists when societies reach a tipping point, which occurs when too many people vote themselves into dependency and expect (and vote) for never-ending handouts. Indeed, this is why I'm very pessimistic about the future of welfare states such as Greece. And, depending what happens in an upcoming run-off election, I probably won't be very optimistic about Brazil. Investor's Business Daily has shared some fascinating - and disturbing - data from that country's recent election. A Brazilian economist has shown a near-exact correlation between last Sunday's presidential election voting choices and each state's welfare ratios. Sure enough, handouts are the lifeblood of the left. ...Neves won 34% of the vote, Rousseff took 42% and green party candidate Marina Silva took about 20% — and on Thursday, Silva endorsed Neves, making it a contest of free-market ideas vs. big-government statism. But what's even more telling is an old story — shown in an infographic by popular Brazilian economist Ricardo Amorim. ...Amorim showed a near-exact correlation among Brazil's states' welfare dependency and their votes for leftist Workers Party incumbent Rousseff. Virtually every state that went for Rousseff has at least 25% of the population dependent on Brazil's Bolsa Familia welfare program of cash for single mothers... States with less than 25% of the population on Bolsa Familia overwhelmingly went for Neves and his policies of growth. ...Fact is, the left cannot survive without a vast class of dependents. And once in, dependents have difficulty getting out.So Brazil's election may come down to a question of whether it wants to be a an economic powerhouse — or a handout republic. Here's the map from IBD showing the close link between votes for the left-wing candidate and the extent of welfare dependency. It's not a 100 percent overlap, but the relationship is very strong. Sort of like the maps I shared on language and voting in Ukraine. That being said, I'm a policy wonk who wants economic liberty, not a political hack with partisan motives. So let's look at the implications of growing dependency. As IBD explains, the greatest risk is that people get trapped in dependency. We see that in advanced nations like the United States and United Kingdom (and the Nordic nations) so is it any surprise that it's also a problem in a developing country like Brazil (or South Africa)? Problem is, "some experts warn that a wide majority cannot get out of this dependence relationship with the government," as the U.K. Guardian put it. And whether it's best for a country that aspires to become a global economic powerhouse to have a quarter of the population — 50 million people — dependent on welfare and producing nothing is questionable. I especially appreciate the last part of this excerpt. Economic output is a function of how capital and labor are productively utilized. In other words, a welfare state imposes a human cost and an economic cost. Now let's consider possible implications for the United States. A few years ago, I put together a "Moocher Index" to show which states had the highest percentage of non-poor households receiving some form of redistribution. Do the moocher states vote for leftists? Well, it we use the 2012 presidential election as a guidepost, 7 of the top 10 moocher states voted for Obama.  That suggests that there is a relationship. But if you look at the states with the lowest levels of dependency, they were evenly split, with 5 for Obama and 5 for Romney. So perhaps there aren't any big lessons for America, though Obama's margins in Ohio, Florida, Virginia, Colorado, and Nevada were relatively small. For what it's worth, I'm far more worried about these economic numbers, not the aforementioned political numbers. P.S. I probably shouldn't assume that a leftist victory automatically means more statism in Brazil. After all, keep in mind that we got more economic freedom during the Clinton years and bigger government during the Bush years. Moreover, it was a left-leaning Brazilian president who had the wisdom to acknowledge that you can't redistribute unless someone first produces. P.P.S. At least one honest leftist admits there is a heavy cost to government dependency. P.P.P.S. If you live in a nation that already has passed the tipping point of too much dependency and you want to live more freely, you can always escape. As reported by the U.K.-based Independent. Up to 2.5 million French people now live abroad, and more are bidding “au revoir” each year. ...the “lifeblood” of France are leaving because of “the impression that it’s impossible to succeed”... There is “an anti-work mentality, absurd fiscal pressure, a lack of promotion prospects, and the burden of debt hanging over future generations,” he told Le Figaro. ...while the figure of 2.5 million expatriates is “not enormous”, what is more troubling is the increase of about 2 per cent each year. “Young people feel stuck, and they want interesting jobs. Businessmen say the labour code is complex and they’re taxed even before they start working. Pensioners can also pay less tax abroad,” she says. France’s unemployment rate is hovering around 10 per cent. As for high-earners, almost 600 people subject to a wealth tax on assets of more than €800,000 (£630,000) left France in 2012, 20 per cent more than the previous year. The good news is that some people escape. The bad news is that the political environment becomes even worse for those remaining. P.P.P.P.S. And don't forget that the Obama campaign celebrated dependency during the 2012 campaign

11 Odd Facts About Marijuana

11 Odd Facts About Marijuana

Cameras Were Placed In A Remote Area In Greenland. What They Captured Is Stunning And Terrifying

Cameras Were Placed In A Remote Area In Greenland. What They Captured Is Stunning And Terrifying

Rights groups had warned that demand for photo ID in Texas and Wisconsin would cause confusion at November’s elections.......Bovine Excrement!

Rights groups had warned that demand for photo ID in Texas and Wisconsin would cause confusion at November’s elections

• Wisconsin will enact ID law denounced as ‘recipe for chaos’
  
• Call for armed militia to confront voters at polls alarms voters

Zoe Sullivan in Madison

Friday 10 October 2014

The Guardian

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/oct/10/voter-id-law-blocked-us-supreme-court-wisconsin-texas

----

The US supreme court has blocked a controversial voter ID law in Wisconsin that had theatened to cause chaos at the polls, as a federal court struck down a similar requirement in Texas.

The surprise move by the supreme court on Thursday restored a lower court ruling that postponed the introduction of the Wisconsin new law, pending a full trial. On 12 September, an appeals court had unexpectedly lifted a stay, meaning the law would be implemented with just weeks to go before the November elections.

The court wrote that it based its decision to stop implementation of the law due to the “proximity of the upcoming general election”. The order added: “It is particularly troubling that absentee ballots have been sent out without any notation that proof of photo identification must be submitted.” Three conservative justices – Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas – dissented.

The action means the Wisconsin law, which requires voters to present photo identification when they cast ballots, will not be in effect in the runup to the elections next month.

“Today’s order puts the brakes on the last-minute disruption and voter chaos created by this law going into effect so close to the election,” said Dale Ho, director of the American Civil Liberties Union voting rights project. The ACLU and other groups said the law would cause confusion at the polls and reduce votes.

The Wisconsin attorney general said he would explore alternatives to address the court’s concerns regarding absentee ballots. “I believe the voter ID law is constitutional and nothing in the court’s order suggests otherwise,” JB Van Hollen said.

In Texas on Thursday, a federal judge struck down a law requiring voters to show identification at polls, saying it was unconstitutional and discriminated against minorities.

The ruling followed a two-week trial in Corpus Christi that challenged the controversial law. The US district judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos also found that it amounted to an unconstitutional poll tax.

Political science professor Katherine J Cramer of the University of Wisconsin-Madison said she was surprised by the supreme court’s decision in the Wisconsin case. It could have national implications, she said, given that Wisconsin is not the only state to have implemented voter ID laws. “If we can step back from the fact that voter ID legislation disadvantages voters, it’s an important statement about how we think about democracy,” Cramer said. 

Voter ID rules have become a political and racial flashpoint across the US. Proponents of the laws argue they need such rules to prevent voter fraud. Their opponents say they are designed to suppress and disenfranchise poor and minority communities, who are most likely to vote Democrat.

On Wednesday, the US Government Accountability Officepublished a report that warned of the deleterious effects on turnout of voter ID laws. It compared turnout in Kentucky and Tennessee, both of which changed their voter ID requirements between the 2008 and 2012 elections, with four other states (Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware and Maine) that did not. “Our analysis suggests that decreases in general election turnout in Kansas and Tennessee from 2008 to 2012 beyond decreases in comparable states are attributable to changes in voter ID requirements.”

“In both Kansas and Tennessee we found that turnout was reduced by larger amounts among African American registrants as compared with Asian American, Hispanic and white registrants.” The GAO stated that turnout among African Americans, in Kansas turnout fell by 3.7% more than among whites while in Tennessee the drop was in Kansas and 1.5% more.

The report also estimated that turnout in Kansas dropped by 3%, while in Tennessee it fell by 2.7% – and these decreases persisted even when controlling for variables for factors such as family income, employment status, marital status and race. The effect on 18-year-olds in Kansas in 2008 was 7.1% larger than on people between the ages of 44 and 53, for example. 

While the study found that ID issues led to a relatively small number of provisional ballots being cast in Kansas and Tennessee, it also noted that fewer than half these ballots were counted. In close races such as the Wisconsin gubernatorial race, each ballot makes a difference.

In the supreme court decision, Alito’s dissenting opinion wrote that although it was “particularly troubling” that absentee ballots had been sent before the election without notifying voters of the identification requirements, there was no legal justification for blocking the law.

Reuters contributed to this report.

If you have any questions about this email, please contact the guardian.co.uk user help desk: userhelp@guardian.co.uk.

guardian.co.uk Copyright (c) Guardian News and Media Limited. 2014 Registered in England and Wales No. 908396 Registered office: PO Box 68164, Kings Place, 90 York Way, London N1P 2AP

Obama Luxury Travel Costs Taxpayers, Weakens Secret Service...

Obama Luxury Travel Costs Taxpayers, Weakens Secret Service

This week saw an astonishing report from the Washington Post that described how the Obama White House and other Obama officials lied and suppressed embarrassing information about the Secret Service and White House officials implicated in a prostitution scandal:

As nearly two dozen Secret Service agents and members of the military were punished or fired following a 2012 prostitution scandal in Colombia, Obama administration officials repeatedly denied that anyone from the White House was involved.

But new details drawn from government documents and interviews show that senior White House aides were given information at the time suggesting that a prostitute was an overnight guest in the hotel room of a presidential advance-team member - yet that information was never thoroughly investigated or publicly acknowledged.

 

For the Obama gang, election year politics took precedence over the truth and the safety of the president and the White House.  This is no surprise to us, but you can see how the Secret Service is at the breaking point because of the abuses of this presidency.

 

We announced this week that our investigators obtained more records from the U.S. Secret Service and the U.S. Department of the Air Force revealing the security costs for the Obama Family's 2013 vacation in Honolulu and Martha's Vineyard, and the flight cost for the First Lady's 2014 ski trip to Aspen, CO, came to $972,450.24 in taxpayer-paid vacation expenses. The cost to taxpayers includes:

• Security for the Obamas' 2012-2013 Hawaii Christmas vacation cost taxpayers $566,093.09
• Security for the Obamas' 2013 vacation to Martha's Vineyard cost taxpayers $371,394.85
• Transportation for the First Lady's 2014 ski-trip in Aspen, CO cost taxpayers $34,962.30 (Judicial Watch is still awaiting security costs for the Aspen trip.)

 

In February 2014, Judicial Watch released flight expense records from the U.S. Department of the Air Force revealing that President Obama incurred $5,250,624 in flight expenses alone for his 2013 vacations to Hawaii and Martha's Vineyard. Adding in the newly released expense records, that brings total cost to the taxpayers for the two Obama family 2013 vacations and the First Lady' 2014 Aspen ski trip to $6,223,074.24, not including the Aspen security costs.

 

From December, 21, 2012, to January, 5, 2013, the Obama family spent their Christmas vacation in Honolulu, Hawaii, where they stayed at the luxurious 6,000 square-foot, $7.9 million Kailua home they had rented in 2011. From August 11 - 17, 2013, the Obama family spent an extended week vacationing in Martha's Vineyard, Massachusetts, where they stayed at the plush $7.6 million home of David Schulte, founder of the private equity firm Chilmark Partners and major contributor to Obama's campaigns. These two vacations cost a total of $937,487.94 in security alone.

 

The Obamas continually abuse the public trust and raid the taxpayers' coffers for unnecessarily luxurious and incessant vacations and travel.  The very fact that we repeatedly have to file Freedom of Information Act requests and lawsuits to obtain this information reveals that the most transparent administration in history knows that its behavior is extravagant and, therefore, seeks to cover it up. 

 

One can only imagine how this unnecessary travel, and the cover up of facts about its costs, saps the budget and morale of a Secret Service that cannot even secure the White House complex, and had trouble keeping the president secure even when he's traveling on important government business.  I am told that morale in the Secret Service is terrible and that good men and women are fleeing the agency in droves. 

 

According to the numbers we've been able to extract thus far, the Obamas and Bidens have spent more than $40 million taxpayer dollars on trips since 2009 up through the president's most recent Palm Springs and Key Largo golf outings, which cost the taxpayers $2,952,278 in flight expenses.  Tens of millions of dollars in taxpayer money to send Obama golfing and his wife skiing:  keep these numbers in mind as you hear the Obama gang distract from the corruption and abuse of the Secret Service with demands for more money and "reforms."

 

Urgent Update on Border Terror Threat - Narco-Islamist Connection Exposed...

Urgent Update on Border Terror Threat - Narco-Islamist Connection Exposed There are times when all of us hate to say, "I told you so." And the latest news from Judicial Watch on the apprehension of ISIS terrorists on the U.S.-Mexico border is certainly one of them. In late August, you may recall, JW broke the story that Islamic terrorist organizations are operating in the Mexican border city of Ciudad Juarez where they plan to stage attacks against the U.S. In response to this threat, agents in the departments of Homeland Security, Justice and Defense had all been placed on alert and told to work to counter the imminent threat.  Two days after our initial report, Fort Bliss, the massive installation in El Paso, increased its security in response to this international terrorist threat.

 

But then the Obama spin machine cranked up. A spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security officially denied the report, telling the London Daily Mail, "we are aware of absolutely nothing credible to substantiate this claim." The DHS official duplicitously added, "In Mexico? I haven't seen that at all."

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest also responded, telling the newspaper that "the most detailed intelligence assessment that I can offer from here is that there is no evidence or indication right now that [the Islamic State group] is actively plotting to attack the United States homeland. That's true right now." At Judicial Watch, we pulled no punches in standing by our story. We told the Daily Mail that JW's sources were "golden," and that the government's denial constituted a "non-denial denial." As I pointed out, the words "credible" and "specific" were rhetorical loopholes that one "could drive a truck bomb through," the paper reported. This week, Judicial Watch investigations resulted in two more bombshell reports. First, on October 5, JW's Corruption Chronicles blog posted an important story detailing how a "sophisticated narco-terror ring with connections running from El Paso to Chicago to New York City had been uncovered with the help of Judicial Watch."  The details are extraordinary.  The story involves two of the FBI's Most Wanted:  a logistics and transportation operative for militant Islamists in the United States and an illegal alien with an extensive criminal record in El Paso, Texas. Emad Karakrah, and Hector Pedroza Huerta are currently in jail for separate offenses in different states-Karakrah in Cook County Illinois and Huerta in El Paso. But in 2009 they partnered to plan a Chicago truck bombing that was thwarted. Between December 2010 and February 2011, Huerta and Karakrah also planned two additional bomb plots targeting oil refineries in Houston and the Fort Worth Stockyards, according to Judicial Watch's federal law enforcement sources. Before that Karakrah and Huerta met with two of the FBI's "Most Wanted" terrorists: Jaber A. Elbaneh and Adnan Gulshair el Shukrijumah (a/k/a: "Javier Robles"). Meetings took place in a private home a few years ago in Anthony, NM. The four men discussed the movement of drugs, money and people. The plots were further planned by fellow conspirators at a "mosque" on Redd Road in El Paso, as well as two other "mosques" in the city. Karakrah, Huerta, Elbaneh and el Shukrijumah all met again in Anthony, NM, in March 2014, according to Judicial Watch sources.  The urgency is real, as Huerta is alleged to have smuggled explosives and weapons from, ironically, the Fort Bliss range and exercise areas in concert with corrupt US Army soldiers and government contractors with gate passes at the El Paso base. The recent, seemingly unrelated, arrests of Karakrah and Huerta expose the nexus of Islamic terror and drug cartel trafficking operating from El Paso. With both Karakrah and Huerta in custody, federal law enforcement officials have an extraordinary opportunity to break the powerful narco-terrorism grip on El Paso - assuming they can overcome internecine turf wars between the various agencies of the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security.  Judicial Watch "connected the dots" in this narco-terrorism network for federal law enforcement.  This exposé was followed by another Judicial Watch revelation.  On October 8, JW's Corruption Chronicles blog posted another major story detailing how federal authorities and other officials with the Texas Department of Public Safety in McAllen and Pharr had apprehended four Islamic terrorists crossing the border from Mexico into the U.S. just 36 hours earlier. JW's information was confirmed by Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) Hunter revealed on national television that at least 10 fighters from the Islamic State of Iraq and Greater Syria - known as ISIS - have been caught crossing into the U.S. from Mexico in Texas. Duncan said his source of the information is the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the agency responsible for patrolling and safeguarding the porous southern border. Just two days after our report, Ft. Bliss, the U.S. Army post in El Paso, implemented heightened security measures. Military officials who spoke with us said the increased security demonstrates that Ft. Bliss is a terrorist target. Retired Army Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin, former commander of the Army's elite Delta Force, who also served four years as Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence, made it clear to us that military installations in the U.S. only make changes to security measures when they know of a specific threat. "That means they're getting a threat stream. Ft. Bliss had to have a clear and present threat," Boykin said. Despite all JW's comprehensive reporting, high-level Obama officials and allies are looking to silence our reporting and attack the messenger. This includes Rep. Beto O'Rourke (D-Texas) who telephoned the area offices of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) and the U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) in an effort to identify sources that have been used by JW to break the ISIS story. It appears that top officials of the Obama administration are lying about ISIS terrorist activities on our border. Nevertheless, federal agents on the front lines are working to keep you safe and appreciate Judicial Watch's clarion calls about security on the border. Rest assured that your JW will not back down on ferreting out the truth, and we will keep you fully informed.