Social Security: The Ponzi Scheme Debate, Its Unconstitutionality and Fascist Inspiration and the Latest Developments

    
     Now that the general election is over, I can focus on posting more to my blog. One of the topics on which I had made notes during the campaign was about a subject that arose during the 2012 United States presidential election campaign, which has commenced prematurely. There was some debate about whether Social Security is a Ponzi scheme and whether it is unconstitutional. The debate was touched off by comments by Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry, the Governor of Texas.

     In a Ponzi scheme, the initial investors earn high returns on their investments, paid for by the additional investments of newer investors, and not by any profit generated by the fund manager, for without additional investors, there would not be sufficient funds to pay back the original investors. Such a fraudulent criminal scheme only works as long as there is a sufficient number of new investors to satisfy the demands by the original investors of a return on their investment, or else the scheme collapses for lack of sufficient funds. Whether or not Social Security meets the legal definition of such a scheme, it would undoubtedly not be permitted by law because of other problems, at least in many states. For example, an individual can pay Social Security payroll taxes (i.e. a premium) for his entire working life, but die the moment before he reaches retirement age and receive none of the money back. Any pension or old age insurance plan with terms like Social Security would be recognized as a rip-off for this reason alone, among other deficiencies, such as its lack of safeguarded reserves or its low rate of return on investment.

     Indeed, any government-run program can be ended by the government without any obligation to keep whatever promises it made. That a government program is not as safe as a legally-enforceable private plan is an implicit point in the scare tactics made by liberal Democrats every election against Republicans they claim would eliminate or cut Social Security, as if the government-run pension plan is like a private plan that is based upon a legal obligation to pay back the retiree the funds he contributed through the premiums he paid, when, in fact, the program is funded by nothing more than a tax which generates revenues the federal government uses as it pleases without any obligation to pay the taxpayer back even one cent. Thus, the liberal Democrats make the conservatives' point that government-run insurance plans are unreliable.

     The debate inspired Terry Jeffrey to write an article for the Conservative News Service that explains the constitutional questions about Social Security, which may be viewed at the following link, where it was republished: http://townhall.com/columnists/terryjeffrey/2011/09/14/authors_of_social_security_believed_it_was_unconstitutional.
    
     I would add another historical insight to the discussion: the Fascist origin of Social Security. According to the American Italian Historian Association, United States President Franklin Roosevelt sent a delegation to Fascist Italy in the 1930s to study Dictator Benito Mussolini’s socialist retirement pension plan. The American Social Security program was modeled on that fascist program.

     Shortly after the Ponzi scheme debate, Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (R-MI) unveiled his plan to reform Social Security without cutting benefits, raising the payroll tax or privatizing the program. An article about his proposal can be viewed at the following link: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/gop-prez-candidate-calls-reforming-social-security-personal-retirement-accounts. The plan would fund voluntary requirement accounts for older workers funded by federal spending cuts. The accounts would be based upon a mix of bonds and stocks, which would thus represent a conservative risk and would pay competitive returns.

     Meanwhile, there continues to be a congressional debate about whether or not to extend or even expand the 2% cut of the payroll tax which funds Social Security that was approved last year by Congress for 2011 as a temporary economic stimulus measure. The Democrats who support the extension of the cut that was proposed by United States President Barak Obama are accusing the majority Republicans, who had supported the temporary measure, of opposing a tax cut by not supporting its extension. The concern on the part of some conservatives was the loss of revenue to support Social Security and their opposition to the liberal Congressional Democrats’ predictable proposed offset: to increase the tax on the wealthy. The conservatives argue that an increase of taxes on the wealthy, who are often employers, would be counterproductive to the stimulative intent of the payroll tax cut. The Democrats did propose to include employers, who must match employee contributions, but who have been left out of the current tax cut, in the expanded tax cut, if the employers hire new workers. Such a proposal would be fairer and more economically beneficial. There is hope that a compromise can be reached on the payroll tax that neither increases workers’ taxes nor the federal debt, perhaps by offsetting spending cuts.

Third Anniversary of My Blog/One-Year Blogger Hit Report

    
     Thank you, dear visitors, for making this blog successful over its first three years. I especially appreciate the comments you post or pass along to me privately. Please continue to visit or comment. As always, your ideas are welcome.

     I shall summarize in this post the findings from the tracking by the blog host, Blogger.com, as the blog’s anniversary is nearly coincidental with the point at which I began to track hits to it through Blogger. In the year since I first started noticing Blogger’s tracking of hits (pageviews) to my blog, I have observed a number of interesting developments. As I have noted in previous reports, Blogger tracks far more visitors than the tracking service I have been using since April of 2009, StatCounter, especially from Europe, although the former tracking service is far less specific than the latter. Nonetheless, a number of statistics can be determined from the data provided by Blogger.

     Not counting my own pageviews, Blogger has tracked around 6,100 pageviews in one year – a rate of nearly 17 a day, which is more than twice as many as tracked by StatCounter. The far-more specific StatCounter allows the tracking of actual visits (pageviews at least one hour apart), which averages more than four a day. The increase in hits in recent months tracked by both services is much more pronounced in Blogger’s tracking than StatCounter’s.

     Blogger has tracked pageviews of every post to my blog. Indeed, all posts have received more hits than have been tracked by StatCounter. The most-visited posts tracked by Blogger are similar to those visited over the same period by StatCounter, with several interesting exceptions. There were disproportionately more hits (several hundred more, combined) for the following four posts, among others: First Anniversary of My Blog; Happy Thanksgiving; The Santorum-McCain Enhanced Interrogation Policy Controversy; Cinfici’s Interview on Rick Santorum’s Presidential Candidacy; and Freedoms, Rights and Prudence in Regard to the September 11 Site Mosque and the Koran Burning.

     Blogger has tracked more pageviews from all over the world, including the United States, than StatCounter, especially from Europe and Asia. The most hits from outside the United States have been tracked by Blogger from Russia, Germany, Netherlands and France (340+ to 600+ each). Like StatCounter, Blogger has also tracked many pageviews from Algeria, Malaysia and the United Kingdom, although the former has tracked more from those states than the latter. However, Blogger has also tracked scores of hits from Ukraine, Latvia and Poland, which StatCounter has not. There have been more pageivews tracked by Blogger than StatCounter from Eastern Europe, in particular. The tracking of the two services was relatively similar for Canada, Australia and India, but Blogger tracked significantly more hits from Slovenia, Singapore and Italy than StatCounter. Blogger has tracked hits from 10 states from which StatCounter has not tracked any pageviews since I began using its service in April of 2009; in addition to Latvia, there were a significant number of hits from China and Georgia among this group.

     Again, thank you for visiting my blog.  I hope all of you had a great Thanksgiving Holiday. I did, as I recover well both from the recent election and from health problems. I am thankful for my health and the many well-wishes I have received. I have also been focused in the meantime on advising policymakers who have requested my advice in regard to the Reading School District in terms of greater openness and transparency and better financial controls. I hope they are successful in implementing these reforms for better government.

Guatemala and Spain Elect Conservatives

    
     I have been posting about a popular global rightward shift in elections over the last two years. Sometimes, the shift toward the starboard side has been slight – so slight that the conservative candidate has occasionally lost the election by being unable to form a coalition, despite gaining a parliamentary plurality. Guatemala and Spain, however, have each confirmed the trend to the right in a decisive manner.

     In Guatemala earlier this month, voters returned the conservatives to power by electing former General Otto Perez Molina president. Molina was part of the regime charged with atrocities during the Guatemalan Civil War, but he has never personally been associated with any crimes. He was part of the team that negotiated the peace accords with the Communist rebels and he had a record of respecting the constitution and human rights. Molina’s campaign promise to crack down on crime appealed to Guatemalans beleaguered by crime. He will also have to work to improve his impoverished country’s budget.

     The results of the elections this weekend in Spain were even more dramatic. Spanish voters not only ousted the Socialists, but gave the conservatives a parliamentary majority. Conservative leader Mariano Rajoy will be able to become Prime Minister without having to form a coalition. He will also have a free hand to enact further austerity measures to avoid the need for Spain to be bailed out by the European Monetary Union. The Spanish economy has declined during Socialist rule, while Spain’s debt had risen until the adoption of the government’s austerity program. Having a parliamentary majority will give investors confidence that the incoming Spanish government can pass the necessary fiscal and economic reforms.

Monti Is Sworn in as Italian Premier

   
     Economist and Former European Commissioner Mario Monti was sworn in as Prime Minister of Italy today, officially ending the premiership of Silvio Berlusconi. The respected Monti takes the helm of the Italian ship of state as it navigates through the tempest of the European debt crisis, at which Italy is now in the eye. 

     Monti saluted Berlusconi’s service, according to ANSA, the Italian news agency. Berlusconi resigned after the passage of reforms he proposed to stimulate economic growth because of the European loss of confidence in his center-right government’s ability to implement them. The outgoing Prime Minister’s party, the People of Freedom, backs Monti, but its coalition partner, the Northern League, does not, although ANSA reports that Monti has stated that he will continue the League’s policy of fiscal federalism. The main centre-left opposition party and some most centrist parties also back the national unity government that comprises only technocrats, not politicians. 

     Monti was appointed a life Senator by President Georgio Napolitano in order to pave the way to his appointment as Prime Minister, as it would have been seen as less representative to appoint a non-politician as Premier without calling for snap elections. The new Prime Minister’s executive is unusual in that none of its cabinet ministers are Members of Parliament. It remains unclear when elections will be held, but Monti’s new government will face a confidence vote in Parliament Friday, which he is expected to win easily.

     ANSA reports that Monti outlined his agenda before Parliament today for reducing Italian debt and boosting economic growth. He will reexamine Italy’s taxes and spending, particularly the escalating costs of government, which he attributed to high benefit pensions for government employees and redundant provincial administrations, ANSA reported; he proposes tax reform and disincentivizing early retirement, for example. Monti plans to sell state real state assets and urged local governments to privatize public services and sell off interests in municipal companies, according to ANSA. The Italian news agency also reports that Monti would deregulate professional services and crack down even more heavily on tax evasion. 

     Monti’s appointment has won international praise. The expectations are high that he will achieve positive results, despite the difficult challenges.

Conservative Analysis of Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi's Record

    
     Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi has submitted his resignation to the Italian President, as promised, following the passage in Parliament of the reforms he proposed to increase Italy's economic growth in the midst of the European debt crisis.  The reforms include the selling of state assets, the liberalization of Italy's labor market to make it easier for companies to terminate employees and the gradual increase of Italy's retirement age.

     The 75-year old Berlusconi served three times as Premier over the last 17 years.  In earlier stints, he was able to lower taxes, but was blocked from implementing more serious reforms by centrist coalition partners.  In his third government, in addition to the reforms approved yesterday, he was able to sign numerous fiscal reforms into law, including major budget cuts, a decrease in Italian bureaucracy and a crackdown in tax evasion while keeping taxes as low as he could.  All of these reforms were undertaken in a country known for resisting reforms. 

     As I have noted repeatedly, Berlusconi's fiscal reforms met with praise every time from European leaders, only to be undermined always immediately afterward by fears and speculation.  It was to end the fears and speculation to save Italy from bankruptcy that he sacrificed his premiership.

     The foreign policy of the pro-American Berlusconi included the sending of more Italian troops to Afghanistan and his leadership in the NATO mission to defend the Libyan people from dictator Muammar Qaddafi.  His government dealt with an influx of refugees from Tunisia and Libya because of the Arab Spring. 

     Other parts of Berlusconi's successful record included dealing with the Naples sanitation crisis and the earthquake in Abruzzo, cracking down on the Mafia, defending Italy's practice of placing crucifixes in school classrooms and the Italian language within the European Union.

     Berlusconi will remain a Member of Parliament, where his centre-right People of Freedom Party is the largest party.

     Berlusconi was done in not only by fear and speculation, but by his own financial and sexual scandals, as well as the fractiousness of his coalition.  He became the object of derision that magnified the decrease in confidence in Italy's ability to oversee the necessary reforms to maintain its solvency, despite Italy's inherent economic strength. 

     Although the world is hopeful that Italy's incoming technocratic government led by Mario Monti will succeed in boosting Italian growth while making the further necessary fiscal reforms until elections are held, it must be stated that Italy's recovery will have been accomplished on the foundation built by Berlusconi.

European Monetary Union Update: New Governments for Greece and Italy

 
     Major developments are occurring with greater rapidity in the financial crisis in the European Monetary Union as fears mount about the stability of the eurozone. 

     Greek Prime Minister Georgios Papandreou resigned after winning a confidence vote to allow the formation of a new coalition government.  The new government of national unity will include the three main political parties in Greece: Papendreou's Socialists, the conservatives and the nationalists.  It will be led by Lucas Papademos, a former high-ranking official of the European Central Bank who is known for his support for fiscally responsible policies, which is an unusual position in Greek politics.  Papademos will be tasked with implementing Greece's austerity program in order to continue to receive bailout funds from the European Central Bank.  It is uncertain whether there will be snap parliamentary elections in February, as originally planned.

     Meanwhile, even as the Greek drama has played out, more and more focus of attention has been placed on Italy because of its size as the third largest economy in the European Monetary Union and eighth largest in the world, which makes Italy too big to fail for the Monetary Union.  I have noted in earlier updates how every time the Italians pass an austerity measure it is praised for making sufficient reforms by Monetary Union officials – who soon afterward panic and urge more reforms as urgently necessary. 

     After Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi proposed a major economic growth package that include serious reforms in order to ensure Italy balances its budget on schedule by 2013, Monetary Union officials again praised the Italian government.  However, soon afterwards investors began to doubt Italy's ability to implement the reforms because of the increasing instability of Berlusconi's fractious centre-right coalition government as its parliamentary majority has been shrinking.  Fears – and perhaps speculation – drove Italy's borrowing costs to 7%, the same figure that triggered bailouts for Greece, Ireland and Portugal.  However, as the Monetary Union and United States President Barak Obama have noted, Italy is not Greece because its large economy is inherently sound, despite its current low gross domestic product.  In a strong statement on the matter that sought to reassure markets while urging the Europeans to solve the crisis, Obama observed that Italy has a liquidity problem, not a solvency problem, like Greece has.  The European Central Bank, led by new President Mario Draghi, has been purchasing billions of dollars worth of Italian bonds in a so-far unsuccessful attempt to lower Italy's borrowing costs.  Draghi, however, has been careful not to be seen as overly soft on his home country by loaning it too liberally.

     Berlusconi has offered to resign as soon as the pro-growth reforms are passed in order to make way for a new technocratic government.  The reform package cleared the Senate today and will be voted on tomorrow by the lower house of the Italian parliament.  The new centre-right government is expected to be led by Mario Monti, an economist and former European Commissioner.  Monti is politically independent and widely respected.  It is hoped that his government would give Italy the political stability it needs to continue its austerity program while encouraging economic growth.  It is unclear whether there will be snap parliamentary elections in Italy.

     The problems in Greece and Italy are adding to the pressure on France and Belgium, the latter of which remains politically unstable.  Although Italy is considered the firewall of the Monetary Union, having eclipsed Spain in that role, a collapse of France would doom the euro for good.  The French and Germans are plotting a new European financial architecture that excludes the peripheral states whose economic weaknesses are currently threatening the euro project.  Europhiles across the continent continue to urge greater European integration as the solution while the chorus of eurosceptics has grown in size and volume.  As the euro's costs increasingly are seen as outweighing its benefits, the latter group has increasingly urged Europeans to consider what had been unthinkable: the abandonment of the single currency.

Joe Frazier, In Memoriam

  
     Former heavy-weight boxing champion of the world Joe Frazier died recently in Philadelphia of liver cancer at the age of 67.  “Smokin' Joe” was most famous for his bouts in the ring with Muhammad Ali, but was also known for his patriotism, charity and good Samaratinism. 

     Born in South Carolina in 1944, Frazier moved to Philadelphia to train for his amateur boxing career which began in 1962.  It culminated with a gold medal in the 1964 Tokyo Olympics.  He then embarked on a meteoric professional career, winning the boxing championship in 1970 and retaining it in the “Fight of the Century” a year later by defeating the great Muhammad Ali.  Frazier, famed for his devastating left hook, held the title during boxing's golden age until losing to George Forman in 1973.  The Frazier-Ali rivalry was renewed in 1974 when the Philadelphia pugilist failed in his challenge to wrest the title from Ali and again the following year in the legendary “Thrilla in Manila.”  Frazier last boxed professionally in 1981, retiring to run a gym and train other successful boxers.  He also ran “Smokin' Joe's” restaurant.

     Unlike other boxing champions, however, Frazier did not enjoy great financial success, partly because of bad investments and partly because of his charity.  A patriot, he campaigned for Republican Ronald Reagan for President of the United States in 1980 and 1984 and for Democrat and later Republican Frank Rizzo for Mayor of Philadelphia.  When his longtime rival Ali was given the honor of carrying the torch for the 1994 Olympics in Atlanta, Frazier objected because of Ali's conscientious objection to the draft during the Vietnamese War.

     Joseph Frazier was an inspirational figure with the heart of a champion.  May his example continue to inspire others to professional success and to good citizenship.

Analysis of the 2011 General Elections in Pennsylvania and Across the Union

    
     The 2011 General Elections in Pennsylvania were remarkable for being unremarkable in terms of any discernible trend toward one political party or the other. The same is true for the elections across the United States.  Although there were a few hotly-contested races, the elections were generally low-key and therefore attracted little voter turnout, despite the significance of the offices sought.  Races were determined by local factors instead of by any voter mood toward the President of the United States or Congress.

     Starting here in Reading and Berks County, the Democrats won competitive city races for Mayor and School Director where they enjoy a 5:1 voter registration advantage while Republican incumbents won all the contested countywide races despite the slight Democratic registration advantage.  There were no Republicans who challenged any Democratic incumbents.

     Even though the Democratic Party enjoys a significant registration advantage across Pennsylvania, the two political parties split the two statewide appellate judicial races, with a Democrat capturing the open seat on Pennsylvania Superior Court and a Republican winning the open seat on the Commonwealth Court.  The Democrats won the most significant contest of the year in the Keystone State for the majority of the County Commission in Montgomery County; The suburban Philadelphia county that has trended away from the Republicans in recent years will now be governed by a Democratic majority for the first time since 1871.  Elsewhere across Pennsylvania, however, Republicans made historic gains in several rural and western counties previously ruled by the Democrats, which reflects the growing GOP trend in those areas.

     Although Republicans gained a small number of legislative chambers in the American South (i.e. the Houses of Representatives in Mississippi, for the first time since Reconstruction, and Virginia), Democrats held down their expected losses in the Virginia Senate and even made a few gains in offices across the Union.  Two significant conservative referenda, such as in regard to labor in Ohio and in regard to the right to life in Mississippi were easily defeated.

     I shall take this opportunity to comment further on my race for Reading School Director.  Although I did not win the election this time, I was honored by the 2,600 votes I received in the low-turnout election and the broad bipartisan support my candidacy attracted from numerous Democratic elected officials and voters, organized labor, conservatives and Republicans.  I was pleased to run with a bi-partisan ticket.  Several of my Democratic running mates who shared my platform of increasing openness and transparency, improving financial controls and eliminating wasteful spending to keep taxes down were elected to the Reading School Board with a mandate for reform.  I congratulate them and wish them success in office. 

     I greatly appreciated all the support I received.  Thank you to all of you who volunteered for me or supported my candidacy in any way or voted for me.  I intend to remain closely involved with local politics to contribute my counsel and ideas for better government.

The 2011 General Election in Pennsylvania

    
     General Election Day is November 8 in Pennsylvania, as well as in other states in the American Union.  There are many important state and countywide, magisterial district judge, municipal and school director elections on the ballot.

     There are races of state Superior and Commonwealth Courts, which are the two appellate courts in Pennsylvania.  As the state Supreme Court hears only a relatively small number of cases, these courts are usually where the final rulings are made on all appeals for all manner of legal cases.  There are pro-life candidates for appellate court who would not legislate from the bench, but would interpret law according to its original intent.

     County Commissioners are on the ballot across the Commonwealth, as well as county row officers and judges of the Courts of Common Pleas.  There are elections for municipal offices such as for mayor, councilmen, township commissioners and the like.  All of these county and municipal offices directly affect residents in innumerable ways.  Additionally, there are races for school boards.  Like County Commissioners and municipal officers, School Directors have the power to tax and to make expenditures of public money, as part of their role in providing public education in their school districts.  In many of these races, there are conservative candidates on the ballot who would be fiscally responsible with taxpayers' money and who would defend liberty and act in virtue. 

     Although these type of elections are often dismissed as off-year elections, they are significant because they are the ones that affect people the most directly and frequently.  They also provide the opportunity for people to gain experience needed for higher office. 

     In local elections, each person's vote carries more weight than in statewide elections.  I urge conservatives to vote for the most conservative candidates.  If there are no candidates on the ballot, write in the name of a conservative or even your own name.  Urge other conservatives you know to vote.  We can make significant progress in promoting good government and advancing liberty.

The Reverend Monsignor Felix A. Losito, Rest in Peace

     The Reverend Monsignor Felix A. Losito passed away yesterday at the age of 80 in Reading, Pennsylvania from complications suffered from a fall in July.  The holy priest was most known as the founder of National Shut-In Day.  He was also the author of five books, among many other accomplishments.

     Losito was born in Wickatunk, New Jersey in 1931, the son of immigrants from Italy.  He grew up in Kennet Square, Pennsylvania and entered St. Charles Borromeo Seminary in Philadelphia in 1948.  Even as a young seminarian, Losito began to exhibit early signs of sanctity that set him apart from his classmates.  He was ordained to the priesthood in 1958.

     Father Losito's first assignment was to Our Lady of Pompeii Parish in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania and then to Holy Family Parish in New Philadelphia.  He was appointed pastor at Immaculate Conception Parish in Kelayres, where he served for six years.  In 1968, Father Losito was appointed administrator pro tempore of Holy Rosary, the Italian national parish in Reading, in 1968 and pastor four years later.  He served as pastor there until his death. 

     Observing the abandonment of the elderly and others who were shut in, Father Losito founded the National Shut-In Society in 1970.  It became a Pennsylvania state holiday and was proclaimed by United States President Richard Nixon in 1972.  Inspired by Blessed Pope John XIII, Father Losito chose as the organization's motto, “Visit someone who cannot visit you.”  The society remains active to this day.

     A second claim to fame for Holy Rosary Parish during Father Losito's pastorate arose from a boxing program sponsored by the parish that not only led to conversions, but produced a two-time world boxing champion, Steve Little.

     Father Losito was named a Monsignor by Pope Paul VI in 1976.  His reputation for  preaching, spiritual guidance and his personal example continued to grow during his active pastorate.  Monsignor Losito was assigned many posts in the Diocese and community and received numerous awards during this time as his parish became known as an oasis of sanctity.  Over the years, a series of famous religious figures came to speak at Holy Rosary Parish and there were regular spiritual activities.  In addition to ministering to the lonely, he worked tirelessly to aid the poor, defend the right to life, promote education and conserve Italian heritage.

     Monsignor Losito began writing “The Shut-In Corner,” which later became “The Spiritual Corner,” for the Allentown Diocesan newsletter, the AD Times in 1989.  His first book, Attaining Heroic Holiness Through Speech: “The St. James Master Plan,” was published in 1997.  It was the subject of a sermon on the Eternal Word Television Network.  Monsignor Losito's second book was entitled Love is the Measure of All Holiness, which was a compilation of his articles in “The Spiritual Corner.”  He penned two children's books, Donato the Little Donkey and Donato the Little Donkey II.  Monsignor Losito's fifth book, His Love is Unstoppable, published in 2004, was a second volume of his articles in “The Spiritual Corner.” 

     The Reverend Monsignor Felix A. Losito devoted his life to serving God by spreading the good news of salvation through Christ.  Although his legacy of accomplishments are considerable, the greatest legacy of this exemplary priest is the faith he nurtured in his spiritual children. 

     May Monsignor Losito rest in peace and may his example continue to inspire holiness in all those who were familiar with his spirituality and all who will come to know of him through his good works.

European Monetary Union Update: Commentary on the Latest Deal

     A deal was reached late last week to resolve the financial crisis for the European Monetary Union, which is the single currency (euro) zone of the European Union (EU).

     The key provisions included a large-scale increase of the funds for the Monetary Union's rescue fund and further measures to encourage the purchases of sovereign debt in order to keep interest rates from increasing to unmanageable levels and to recapitalize banks.

     In exchange for the latest tranche of bailout funds for Greece, which has undertaken a severe austerity program coupled with higher taxes that have weakened its economy, Greece will essentially execute a partial default.  Private bondholders of sovereign Greek debt will only receive 50% of their investment.

     Because much of the funds for the bailout come from the strongest economy in the Eurozone, Germany, the negotiations over the bailout stirred up more popular resentment between the Germans and Greeks, an issue I had raised in earlier updates.  There has even been discussion that the failure of the EU, which was intended to be modelled after the United States of America, could result in conflict that threatens the peace of Europe.

     Spain was praised by the EU for its austerity program to reduce its debt.  The  Monetary Union demanded Italy present a satisfactory plan to increase its meager economic growth, which it did after Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi worked out a deal with his junior coalition partner to increase the retirement age from 65 to 67 by 2026, make it easier for employers to fire workers and privatize state assets, among other reforms.  It will also support infrastructure projects, but the long-planned bridge from Italy to Sicily is now in doubt.  Italians felt humiliated by the demands from the Germans and French and noted that the economy of France was barely better than Italy's.  As noted previously, Italy is the third largest in the EU and the eighth largest in the world, which makes it even more of a firewall for the Eurozone than Spain.  Like many members of the EU, it is undertaking an austerity program.  Italy's deficit will be eliminated by 2013, at which point it will begin to pay down its debt that is 120% of its GDP.  Only Greece's 150% is higher.  Greece's target is 120% over the next several years. 

     The United Kingdom, which is a member of the EU, but does not use the euro, is attempting to use the crisis as an opportunity to claw back some of its sovereign powers it had surrendered to the EU.  Its demands that a deal be struck urgently and its advice on how to strike one were met with resentment from the French Prime Minister, but the Monetary Union crisis could affect the UK significantly.

     As I have previously warned, the crisis has encouraged its supporters to insist upon further European integration, which means an even more centralized European superstate that reduces the sovereignty of its members instead of an orderly breakup of the grand folly and a restoration of state sovereignty.

     There are doubts about the effectiveness of the deal as a solution to the euro crisis.  The Greek economy is weak and the Greeks violently oppose even modest sacrifices, such as not retiring until after their mid-50s.  Italy's governing coalition is teetering on the brink of collapse with snap elections early in 2012 likely.  Reforms are difficult to enact there with its fractious parliamentary system, but while the coalition government has successfully enacted a series of significant reforms, it has lost much of the margin of its governing majority to a faction led by the Speaker of Parliament and confidence in the Prime Minister amidst his personal scandals has decreased.  Thus, there are doubts about its ability to enact the ambitious reforms it has proposed.  Meanwhile, there have been fresh concerns about Portugal's ability to avoid a default.

     Even if the latest deal represents a comprehensive solution to the euro crisis, as opposed to a continuation of the muddling through the European Monetary Union has undertaken heretofore, the crisis is exposing the euro project's flaws even more than I have posted about before.  The diversity of Europe, which is arguably the most culturally diverse continent on Earth, is not a basis for unity, especially without Christianity.  Europe could be united to a significant degree in Christendom by a universal Church, but a shared secular commitment to peace, liberty and representative government is not enough to unite a continent around a vague concept of Europeaness.  The particular differences between Northern and Southern Europeans have clearly been identified as the cause of the crisis.  Because of the warmer climate in the Mediterranean, Southern Europeans do not work as hard as their Northern European neighbors, a fact that is reflected in their strikingly different cultures. 

     It is no surprise, for example, that the Germans expect the Greeks to work harder and sacrifice more to pay for their overspending and that the Greeks resent being made to make such sacrifices by foreigners.  Both are feeling the loss of sovereignty that is keeping them bound in an unhappy marriage from which neither can separate.  In short, the European Monetary Union has not only failed to unite Europeans, it has increased their divisions.

Blog Milestone: The Visit from the 100th Foreign State to My Blog

    
     The latest milestone for my blog was the visit from the 100th foreign state to my blog tracked by Statcounter since April of 2009, not counting the 50 states of the American Union.  This figure represents over half of the 194 sovereign states of the world, in addition to the United States of America.  In addition, there have been visits from Hong Kong, the Palestinian Territory, the Distict of Columbia, Puerto Rico and Guam.

     Blogger has tracked an additional 11 foreign states of origin of visitors to my blog since November of 2010.  I have noted in previous reports that the web host for this blog tracks far more pageviews, especially from outside the U.S., than Statcounter, but  the latter's greater specificity allows for better statistical analysis.  I shall post an annual analysis of Blogger's tracking, but continue to use Statcounter's tracking for my main reports.

     Thank you for visiting and for your comments.  I recommend viewing the comments on earlier posts, as I sometimes post addenda there for recent posts or if a point is too brief for a follow-up or update post.  Please visit regularly.

Newt Gingrich Is Right to Call for Lincoln-Douglas Style Debates

     Former Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, Newt Gingrich of Georgia, a candidate for the Republican nomination for President, recently called for a series of Lincoln-Douglas style debates in place of the usual “debates” moderated by members of the media.

     No one has ever seen a true presidential candidates’ debate, and few, if any, have seen one for any other federal or state elected office. I have long hoped for precisely such a serious proposal to replace the dreaded media spectacles we only get to witness.

     Since the 1960 Presidential Election, the typical presidential “debates,” like those for most federal and state elected offices, are nothing more than joint press conferences. They are dominated by the moderators or other arrogant members of the press who ask questions trying to trip up a candidate or pit one against another. In short, the outcome is heavily influenced by the media instead of by the candidates. A Republican “debate” moderated by a liberal press corps is especially the modern equivalent of throwing Christians to the lions. Furthermore, these candidate spectacles are superficial, dominated by personality and style over substance and by the question of who supposedly interrupted whom (which is usually only interjecting), with much of the focus on candidates’ gaffes. These “debates” only exacerbate the pernicious trend toward ever more populism in politics and especially in presidential elections.

     I have participated many times as a candidate for elected office in what is correctly identified as a candidates’ “forum.” In a forum, candidates are usually given a brief time to make an opening and closing statement and answer a few questions. The questions are not necessarily from the media. A forum is, nevertheless, not the same as a debate, as it is dominated by the questions and there is little time to respond to the other candidates, especially when there are several, but at least they are not misidentified as “debates.”

     A Lincoln-Douglas or similar-style debate would be a formal, structured event in which each candidate has several minutes to express an argument for or against an agreed-upon resolution, with a series of rebuttals. There is no moderator and no media to influence the outcome, only the candidates. Such a real debate is not superficial, but in depth, and less influenced by personality and style than by substance. The candidates’ thinking would emerge more clearly from such a format. Furthermore, Gingrich’s proposal is to conduct a series of debates, as Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas famously did in the 1858 election for U.S. Senator from Illinois, whereby a series of issues could be debated.

     The current style is an inappropriate one to choose the Chief Executive and Commander in Chief. The presidency was created around General George Washington and before the establishment of political parties and even the thought that candidates would campaign publicly for the office. The winner was not supposed to be determined by populism, but by his character, wisdom, ideals and experience.

     I do not believe that candidates’ debates for any office would be necessary in the first place, as the campaign itself is a public debate, except for the fact that the campaigns are otherwise mostly presented to the public through the filter of a superficial media. However, if there are to be debates, it would be better that they be true debates instead of the phony ones we currently must suffer.

Report on Senator Pat Toomey's Remarks

   
     Pennsylvania's Junior United States Senator Pat Toomey, a Republican, spoke last night at the Berks County Republican Committee Fall Dinner, near Reading, which I attended.  He commented on the severe fiscal challenges facing the U.S. and the complicity of the Senate's liberal Democratic majority and updated us on his role on the Congressional “Super Committee.”

     Sen. Toomey called the Senate “dysfunctional” under liberal Democratic leadership and noted as an example that for three years it has not approved a budget, although required to by federal law, despite the massive and ever-growing federal debt.  The freshman Senator explained that instead of voting for an increase in the debt limit and allowing the spending to continue at its current rate, which is what Congress had always done heretofore, he and the other fiscally conservative members of Congress voted against the measure to slow down the rate of spending.  The resultant bipartisan deal to increase the debt limit with offsetting spending reductions also called for the creation of the Select Committee, known as the “Super Committee.”

     Even though Sen. Toomey voted against the bill, his fiscal conservatism and expertise won him the nomination to the bipartisan, bicameral Committee, which he observed represents a great opportunity for significant spending cuts.  The law that created the Committee requires that both houses of Congress vote, without filibuster or amendment, on whatever proposal the Committee approves by a simple majority vote.  Sen. Toomey predicted that if the Committee were to come to an agreement, Congress would approve it and the President sign it.  The Committee has been engaged in long negotiations, he reported.  Sen. Toomey pointed out that the $1.2 trillion in spending cuts over 10 years, although a huge figure, would represent only 3% of federal spending over that period and cited the Senate's failure to approve such a reduction as further evidence of its dysfunctionality. 

     Sen. Toomey also explained how raising taxes would not solve the debt problem, as it is too large even to be eliminated even by raising income taxes on all earners to 50%, even assuming that such an increase would not harm the economy and thereby reduce revenue.

     The Junior Senator from Pennsylvania warned that the U.S. was on the path toward becoming like Europe, but there was still the chance it could avoid the same fate as Greece, for example.

     Sen. Toomey expressed the importance of electing fiscal conservatives to the majority in the U.S. Senate in 2012 and also defeating President Barak Obama in the presidential election.  In the meantime, he noted the significance of the statewide judicial and local elections coming up in Pennsylvania on November 8 that affect the citizens directly in many ways and urged the people to elect conservatives to every office.

Use Dollar Coins and $2 Bills

     I have been posting recently about the taxpayer money-saving benefits of United States dollar coins. Similarly beneficial is the $2 Federal Reserve Note. The $2 bill is not only still in circulation, it is still printed when necessary by the United States Treasury’s Bureau of Engraving and Printing.

     In fact, the $2 bill is becoming increasingly popular, which necessitated the printing of the 2003 Series and the 2003A Series, the latter of which was printed in 2006. The necessity was created because the 1995 Series of the $2 bill, the first since the introduction of the $2 Federal Reserve Note in 1976 was used up (because paper notes only last a few years) or hoarded. The 1976 Series, with its Bicentennial reverse featuring Jonathan Trumbull’s signing of the Declaration of Independence, was the successor to earlier $2 notes of various kinds that featured Monticello on the reverse with Thomas Jefferson on the obverse. Inflation and immigration by people accustomed to two-denomination notes have increased the popularity of the note. Another contributing factor is clever business marketing, whereby entrepreneurs take advantage of the note’s novelty by giving $2 bills as change as a way of promoting their business by word of mouth. 

     Like dollar coins, $2 bills save taxpayer money because for every $2 note printed, one less $1 note must be printed. Also like dollar coins, $2 bills are convenient for tolls and make nice tips or presents for children. Using a combination of them would be an especially wonderful present. If the $1 bill were ever withdrawn from circulation, as some have proposed, it would be good to get more accustomed to the $2 bill, which is still regarded as a novelty by much of the public or even as unnecessary.

     When receiving cash from the bank, instead of $1 bills, ask for some dollar coins and $2 bills, and then use them. Business owners would especially increase the usage of these coins and currency by giving them out as change. By using them, you would be saving the United States money, literally and figuratively.

Conservative Praise for Two More Obama Policies

     I posted earlier this month that United States President Barak Obama had submitted three free trade agreements to the Congress for ratification that had been negotiated by his predecessor. Although it took nearly three years, his expected signatures will finally provide an economic boost, increase economic liberty and improve foreign relations. There are two other Obama Administration policies that also merit conservative praise.

     First, the Obama Administration has taken a firm stand against marijuana. It has strongly declared the physical and mental dangers of the drug that science is increasingly discovering, as well as the social and economic costs. Although the Administration is not opposed to prudent research into any possible medicinal value of cannabis as a non-smoked prescription drug, it has cracked down on California’s liberal medical marijuana policy. The Golden State system has been abused – to the detriment of the rest of the Union, to where much legally-obtained California marijuana is transported – by strip-mall doctors who prescribe marijuana, which they can obtain at nearby storefront shops, for illegitimate reasons. The principle of federalism, which accepts states’ rights, is not being jeopardized by the Obama Administration policy because California’s actions are harmful to other states. Indeed, the United States has a duty to act in this matter. 

     Second, President Obama is sending up to 100 American troops to Uganda as advisors to help the Ugandans combat the insurrection by the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA). The LRA, which the U.S. State Department has described as a “barbaric cult,” is accused of many atrocities for which it has been charged with crimes against humanity, and has been supported by the terrorist-sponsoring Islamist regime of Sudan. Although the LRA insurrection is not directly related to the War on Terrorism, its actions are undermining the stability of several states in the region that are front-line allies in the fight against militant Islam, namely: Uganda, Kenya, Chad and South Sudan. South Sudan recently became independent from Sudan, as I posted in July, but Sudan might be tempted to renew its support for the LRA in order to weaken its breakaway neighbor, with which it has a territorial dispute, if not to regain it completely. The Administration’s actions, which represent a continuation of U.S. policy of opposition to the LRA since the Administration of President George W. Bush, were the result of bipartisan Congressional resolution calling for greater action against the LRA. 

     I have posted that Obama has continued many Bush Administration policies in the War on Terrorism, as well as temporarily continued its tax cuts, while also posting many criticisms of the radical President and most of his other policies. Although Obama is a danger to the Republic, it is only fair to give him credit for good policies. When a liberal follows conservative policies, it is helpful to the cause of liberty to declare such a validation of those policies.

Good News from the World Trade Center Site: St. Nicholas Church to be Rebuilt

     It was reported today that a deal has been reached to rebuild St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church near the World Trade Center. The church had been destroyed by the September 11 Terrorist Attacks.

     The agreement, which was brokered by New York Governor Mario Cuomo, ended a ten-year dispute between St. Nicholas parish and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. The church must be relocated from its original location because of reconstruction needs at the site. The news is in time for the Feast of St. Nicholas on December 6 – one of the most important dates on the calendar. 

     The news of the deal comes on the same day as a report that the controversial Islamic Center I had posted about, is facing eviction for failure to pay its rent. One of the reasons the center was controversial was the simultaneous apparent resistance by government officials to rebuilding St. Nicholas, an inconsistency which is now finally reconciled. Like the Islamic Center, the St. Nicholas Church will have a center for interfaith dialogue and healing.

     May God Bless St. Nicholas Church and its parishioners.  May they fulfill their goal of improving relations between faiths and healing those harmed by September 11.

Virtue, Liberty and Independence

 
     “Virtue, Liberty and Independence” is the official motto of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Although there are other excellent state and territorial mottos in the United States, the Keystone State’s is arguably the best.

     Pennsylvania’s motto first appeared in 1778 on its coat of arms, which was made official nearly a century later. The coat of arms is emblazoned upon the Commonwealth’s flag. The motto also appears on the quarter dollar coin honoring Pennsylvania for the 50 State Quarter Series. The three timeless principles contained within that glorious motto are worthy of examination.

     Virtue is a particular moral principle, or, in this case, a set of moral principles. Note the word chosen for the Commonwealth’s motto was not “values,” which suggests a relativist philosophy that holds that morality is determined by the individual. Instead, the word “virtue” reflects the belief of the universal moral absolutes of Right and Wrong. Virtue is the principle of doing what is right. 

     Liberty means more than freedom, but also the rights, privileges and immunities of every person or citizen. The word presupposes the Natural Law established by the Creator, as expressed in the American Declaration of Independence. Note “Liberty” follows “Virtue” in Pennsylvania’s motto, as it does not imply license to do whatever we want, but the freedom to do what we ought. Indeed, public virtue leads to liberty. 

     Independence is the state of not being dependent on another – in this case, another sovereign state for the purpose of governance. Pennsylvania declared its independence from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland in 1776. When it joined the federal Union in 1789, the Commonwealth did not surrender its independence, but retained sovereignty under the Constitution over internal matters. Pennsylvania maintains its independence when it stands for its sovereign rights.

     In adopting its motto at the time of the War of American Independence, Pennsylvanians recognized that independence is exercised by self-government, but only in liberty, by the practice of virtue.

U.S. Congress Passes Free Trade Agreements with South Korea, Colombia and Panama

     Both houses of the United States Congress approved free trade agreements with South Korea, Colombia and Panama. The agreements will eliminate tariffs placed on U.S. exports, as well as eliminate the tariffs imposed by those states on American imports – an economic boost of billions of dollars. 

     The agreements, which had been negotiated by President George W. Bush, were submitted by President Barak Obama, who is expected to sign them into law. 

     The votes in each chamber of Congress reflected bipartisanship, as Republicans hold the majority in the House of Representatives and the Democrats in the Senate. The votes also disprove the contention by some liberal Democrats that conservative Republicans were opposing Obama’s proposals out of partisanship; the votes prove that ideology determines support or opposition to proposals. The Republicans provided Obama the overwhelming majority of the votes necessary to pass the agreements, although a significant number of Democrats joined each vote in each chamber. 

     There was some Congressional criticism of Obama, however, for delaying the submission of the agreements to Congress for nearly three years. I have noted in earlier posts that the opportunity cost for not submitting them has contributed to economic weakness.

     The agreement with Colombia, in particular, is a reward for its successful efforts to fight Marxist narco-terrorists, as well as other guerillas and drug cartels, and to establish a peaceful, just free market and representative government. 

     Once the agreements are signed, a contiguous free trade zone will have been established from Canada to Chile. The United States would have free trade agreements with 20 foreign states. Obama would be the fifth consecutive President to sign such an agreement, starting with Ronald Reagan.

     Reagan successfully negotiated a free trade agreement with Canada, which the U.S. had sought since the late 19th Century. George H.W. Bush proposed a Western Hemisphere-wide free trade zone, except for Communist Cuba. George W. Bush was responsible for free trade agreements with more states than all other Presidents combined. He signed agreements with 13 of them into law, in addition to implementing one negotiated by his predecessor and negotiating the latest three.

Follow-Up: Dollar Coins Are Not a Waste of Money

    
     Since my September post, Dollar Coins Are Not a Waste of Money, http://williamcinfici.blogspot.com/2011/09/dollar-coins-are-not-waste-of-money.html, I have since learned some interesting news. According to the United States Mint, some people were buying large quantities of presidential dollar coins by credit card in order to gain rewards points (e.g. frequent flyer miles) and then cashing the dollars in at banks. As a result, the Mint no longer accepts the purchase of dollar coins by credit card, as the intent of minting these coins was for them to circulate.

     This abuse may account at least in part for why the coins are not circulating as much as hoped and are instead piling up at Federal Reserve warehouses. Thus, their lack of circulation may not all be attributable to the coins’ unpopularity. Indeed, even apart from such abuses, the idea that a coin is necessarily unpopular because it hardly circulates is not true. It may seem paradoxical, but the absence of a coin from circulation suggests its popularity, as it is an indication that a coin is being hoarded by the public.

     The Kennedy Half Dollar, for example, is seldom seen in circulation precisely for this reason. Consequently, the Mint stopped striking the coin for general circulation in 2002; only uncirculated and proof Kennedy Halves are still minted for collectors – at an even higher seigniorage than coins struck for general circulation. A similar phenomenon occurs with the seldom-seen $2 Federal Reserve Note, which is either exchanged because it is not considered practical or it is hoarded as a novelty, yet there are no calls to eliminate either Kennedy Halves or $2 bills as wasteful of public money.

     Meanwhile, I also learned of an organization dedicated to promoting the dollar coin. The Dollar Coin Alliance proposes the withdrawal of the $1 bill as the only way to encourage greater usage of the dollar coin, as many foreign states have done with their lowest denomination notes because of inflation. In addition to some of the points I made in my last post on this subject about the cost-effectiveness of the dollar coin versus paper $1 Federal Reserve Notes, they observe that paper bills cause businesses financial loss by getting stuck in vending machines. 

     I shall continue to follow this issue and to post about any significant further developments.

Two-and-a-Half Year Blog Report

     Since I began tracking pageviews of my blog with Statcounter in April of 2009, it has been visited over 3,600 times.  Thank you for visiting!

     As always, I do not count my own visits, and a visit is strictly defined as at least one pageview an hour apart from the previous one.  If I counted all pageviews, there would be considerably more hits to report. 

     Blogger has recorded far more pageviews than Statcounter, especially from outside the United States, but the latter's tracking is more specific, which allows for better statistical analysis.  Since my last report, a few interesting observations can be made. 

     Although the Rise and Fall of Islamic Civilization continues to be the most popular post (with over 720 visits), Commentary on the Roman Influence on America Exhibit at the National Constitution Center has been visited nearly 200 times in just a little over a year – good for third place behind The Economy, Deficit and Debt at the Inauguration of George W. Bush, with nearly 270.  After a slow start, the post has been visited the most this calendar year.

     Statcounter has tracked visits from 96 foreign states.  Brunei, Mali, Namibia, and Mongolia were the most interesting sources of visitors since the last report.  Among other noteworthy hits, there were visits from the United States Department of Veterans Affairs, the National Leauge of Cities and the South African Broadcasting Corporation.

     Again, thank you for your patronage of my blog and for your comments.  Please visit regularly.

Update: Pennsylvania Federal Judge Rules the Mandate to Purchase Health Insurance Unconstitutional

     A federal district judge in Pennsylvania has ruled the individual mandate to purchase health insurance, the linchpin of the federalization of health insurance plan signed into law by United States President Barak Obama, unconstitutional.

     The ruling earlier this month attracted no media coverage outside of the state, even though the liberal media has reported on all other district court rulings.  It is possible that the district ruling was overshadowed by the Courts of Appeals rulings against the mandate which will result in judicial review by the Supreme Court. 

     Nevertheless, the ruling was significant because it was in favor of a plaintiff who is a private citizen.  Such cases have sometimes been dismissed by other federal district courts for lack of standing because no harm can be demonstrated by the mandate, which has not yet been implemented.  The only other cases in which the mandate has been ruled unconstitutional were brought by States of the Union, which successfully argued that the mandate violates states' rights.

     In the Pennsylvania case, a citizen argued that he can afford to pay for health care and thus does not need to purchase health insurance.  Therefore, the individual mandate does not regulate commerce because no commercial activity would have taken place.  The citizen would be harmed by the requirement to enter into a contract with a private party for a service he does not need.  I suppose he could have argued that the harm he is currently experiencing is his inability to set aside the money now for another purpose.

     The constitutional question around the individual mandate has been narrowly focused on whether a decision not to engage in commerce (i.e. not to purchase health insurance) constitutes commercial activity that may be regulated under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution.  As I have been posting, however, the broader question of whether the activity, even if considered commercial, constitutes interstate or intrastate commerce, remains not only unanswered, but unasked.  Under the Commerce Clause, the United States may regulate only interstate commerce, not intrastate commerce, which health insurance is because federal law prohibits its purchase across state lines. 

     The failure to raise the issue legally implies a concession of a broad federal power to regulate all commercial activity, under the theory that it affects the economy.  Liberals have relied upon the tolerance of the gradual expansion of the power to regulate interstate commerce as a justification for increasingly expanding it to all commerce and are relying upon it now to expand it even further to activity that is not even commercial activity.  However, the federal power to regulate interstate commerce was intended not to manage the economies of the States of the Union, but to establish a free market within the Union by prohibiting states from imposing tariffs on goods from other states. 

     The states are defending liberty by reasserting their constitutional rights.  It is also a defense of liberty and the Constitution that the people, such as the plaintiff in this Pennsylvania federal case, reassert their freedom.  May we conservatives continue to defend the liberty of all and the Constitution by opposing the individual mandate to purchase health insurance and all unconstitutional federal encroachments on the rights of the states and the people.

European Monetary Union Update: Italy’s Parliament Approves the Latest Austerity Package

     The Italian Parliament approved the latest round of austerity measures, according to a report from ANSA. As I had posted, the over $50 billion in cuts and tax increases will balance Italy’s budget in 2013 instead of the originally-projected 2014.

     As I have been posting, Italy, with its $1.8 trillion gross domestic product – the eighth largest in the world – has become the European Monetary Union’s firewall during its debt crisis. Because the Italian sovereign debt is 120% of its GNP, Italy’s debt load is the third or fourth largest in the world.

     The acceleration of the balancing of Italy’s budget was strongly urged by the Monetary Union in order to restore confidence in the euro. The Monetary Union had pushed for a large tax increase on upper middle class and above incomes. I posted recently about this violation of sovereignty and Italy’s resistance to it. 

     The 3% income tax increase included in the measure, according to ANSA, will affect only those earning over $400,000 dollars – much less than what was originally proposed to satisfy the European Monetary Union. However, there will also be an increase in the Value Added Tax (the European version of a sales tax) from 20 to 21%, ANSA reports. Most of the austerity program is in the form of spending cuts, including reductions in bureaucracy, and greater efforts to collect unpaid taxes.

     The focus in Italy will now turn to measures to increase economic growth, which has been sluggish. Growth is fiscally beneficial, as it leads to more revenue from taxes as people earn more.

The Centre-Right Gains in the Danish Parliamentary Elections, Despite Losing Power

     At first glance, the victory of the centre-left bloc led by the Socialists in the Danish parliamentary elections appears to be a reversal of the recent trend toward the right in Western elections. Further analysis, however, reveals that the election results confirm the trend.

     The centre-right party of Denmark's Prime Minister Lars Rasmussen gained a seat in parliament and will remain the largest party in that body, despite losing power because of losses by its coalition partners. By a margin of only a handful of votes, the the centre-left bloc will gain the majority, if it can form a coalition government. 

     Rasmussen has been a strong ally of the United States during the War on Terrorism. His government lasted for ten years, thanks in part to his pro-growth policies, which is relatively long in a parliamentary system. The worldwide economic downturn did not leave Denmark untouched, however, although the Danish economy weathered the recession better than many. Rasmussen had proposed spending cuts during the campaign amidst the European debt crisis, while the centre-left opposition proposed more Keynesian spending on health and education supposedly to spark economic growth, although it did acknowledge the need for sacrifice, such as a slight increase in the workweek.

     The centre-left will have difficulty maintaining such a slim coalition. It will have further trouble if it causes Denmark to be added to the list of European states contributing to the debt crisis on the Continent. Despite the loss of the governing majority, the elections in Denmark, as in the elections in Sweden and Australia I posted about, represented gains for the right, despite the losses of power in each case. As such, the Danish elections reflect the popular trend toward the right and fiscal responsibility.

A Liberal Slogan Conservatives Can Adopt for Al-Qaeda Leader Dr. Zawahiri: Healthcare Not Warfare

     I saw a typical Left-wing slogan today, an example of the usual simplistic thinking on the Left.  It read “Healthcare not Warfare.” 

     As is often the case whenever I see slogans intended to oppose the War on Terrorism, such as “Make Peace, Not War,” I would agree literally with the message of the slogan, as long it were intended strictly for the Islamist enemy that has been making war upon us for many years. 

     Alas, Leftists do not mean it that way.  Just as many liberals advocated for unilateral disarmament during the Cold War, by “war,” in this case, they mean not the unjustifiable terrorist and other militant attacks by Islamists, but our own measures of self-defense.  It is the latter that angers them much more than the former, which leads to such foolish slogans. 

     But there was another reason for my post, in addition to refuting liberalism.  Because of the irony that the leader of al-Qaeda, the terrorist organization with the most American and Western blood on its hands, Ayman al-Zawahiri, is a doctor, I could not pass up the opportunity to post my thought that this particular Left-wing slogan ought to be turned to good use against the Islamist enemy: Dr. Zawahiri, practice healthcare, not warfare!