1 - 10 Next
Enough said.
...used to be one that promoted growth. That's exactly why the population doubled in less than 50 years after the Communists took over in 1949, despite a severe famine that killed tens of millions in the late 1950s.

Then they realized the problems of over-population and switched to a one-child policy to contain growth.

Now, they are awakening to the resulting social problems Barone mentioned and are relaxing the policy by allowing single-child parents to have 2 kids.

Unfortunately, some people will never learn the follies of central planning.
In response to:

The Democrats Want Your Kids

arlanjio Wrote: Jul 30, 2009 3:15 PM
A comment from a New York City school principal in John Stossel's book brings out the best of the public school system. Commenting on why Catholic schools perform better with less money, Thelma Baxter said:

"They get the job done because they want to be where they are teaching. But please understand that many of those teachers are not as well-qualified. Some of them are teaching without a four-year degree. Many of them are teaching without a master’s degree."

Hmm, less "qualified" teachers turn out better students at a lower cost, what an idea? Here's my full book review:

In response to:

A Minimum Wage Equals Minimum Jobs

arlanjio Wrote: Jul 29, 2009 3:50 PM
Presumably, a "living wage" is a wage below which life becomes difficult. So, people making below living wages should not be able to support themselves, right?

Well, facts suggest exactly the opposite. Illegals have be making below minimum wages, let alone "living wages" for eons. Not only do they live fine, but they also spare so much to send home that it is one of the largest income for Mexico.

The problem with minimum wage is that it leaves a large gap for people at a much lower level to jump. For example, for a person with no means of transportation, a bicycle is quite a bit better. But if the government decrees that the minimum transportation allowed is a car because bicycles and mopads are deemed below certain...
In response to:

A Minimum Wage Equals Minimum Jobs

arlanjio Wrote: Jul 29, 2009 2:48 PM
The book Freakonomics documents that in the mid 90s, gangsters who sold drugs in Chicago only made about $3.30. In fact, many fancied getting janitor jobs because they were much safer (gangsters didn't want to die either).

Illinois minimum wage was $4.25 since 1992. If only more regular jobs were available at lower wages, even at $3.30, many foot soldiers of drug dealers would switch, making the business (yes, it is a big business) more difficult and saving more of those young lives. It'll also increase drug prices and discourage people from getting hooked.

This is not my theory, but comes straight from gangsters. Read, for example, what Michael had to say on the Sudhir's blog article:

By America isn't healthier, Comrade Obummer must mean this:

Cancer Survival Rates Improving Across Europe, But Still Lagging Behind United States
Zosia Chustecka
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/561737
(google the title if the link doesn't work)

or these:

http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba649

Our system must be improved so that our cancer MORTALITY rate catches up with Europe and Canada! Now I get it.
In response to:

Washington's Lies

arlanjio Wrote: Sep 02, 2009 2:59 PM
Governments always underestimate the cost of their programs, especially in the long run. Health care is a shining example:

http://jec.senate.gov/republicans/public/_files/Are_Health_ Care_Reform_Cost_Estimates_Reliable__July_31_2009.pdf
In response to:

What if Palin Were President?

arlanjio Wrote: Jul 10, 2009 1:39 PM
Unfortunately, elections are more often determined by charisma than anything else. Even ardent Obummer supporters are now criticizing his spending:

http://townhall.com/columnists/LarryElder/2009/07/09/obaman omics_supporters_-_cracks_in_the_dike

But big spending, and taxing the rich to pay for it, was exactly what he promised on the campaign trail. Why else would these people support him but turn around while he is delivering what he promised?

Why else would Obummer's personal approval rating remains high (albeit heading in the right direction), but only 34% of likely voters believe the...
In response to:

Let's Be Honest About Death Counseling

arlanjio Wrote: Aug 21, 2009 7:58 PM
...which is inevitably with any government health plan, then that little subtle pressure won't be so subtle any more. It has already happened before:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6ojBgTyA7I
Commerce involves at least a buyer and a seller. If I choose not to buy anything, then I am not involved in any commerce and the Commerce Clause does not apply. If the Supreme Court has any sense, they cannot possibly allow the individual mandate to stand under the Commerce clause.

This is precisely why the the crooks want the IRS to enforce the mandate, creating an illusion that it is a tax, which actually has a stronger footing in the Constitution. But there are problems with that as well:

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2009/12/Why-the-Pe...
1 - 10 Next
Monday, June 04 | 11:40 AM ET
Monday, June 04 | 11:40 AM ET
Monday, June 04 | 11:40 AM ET
Monday, June 04 | 11:40 AM ET