Let’s expand the corporate welfare state. . . After all, it worked out so well for GM and Detroit. Tad DeHaven, with Cato, joined the program to discuss the way States and the Feds are trying to pick winners and losers. (They’re mostly picking losers, by the way.)
In a recent op-ed for the Indianapolis Star I discussed the symbiotic relationship between federal and state government when it comes to doling out corporate welfare subsidies.
Well I guess we all missed it: President Obama has gotten us out of the recession! Oh wait, but that’s not true at all.
With many European nations already in the midst of a fiscal crisis caused by excessive government, and with most other industrialized nations heading down the same path thanks to aging populations and poorly designed entitlement programs, this would be a good time for supposed experts to propose ways to rein in the welfare state.
People don’t have much incentive to find jobs unless they can enjoy better lives while working than they can enjoy while not working. In other words, they may not bother accepting jobs if there’s no significant increase in their living standards.
To call the Tsarnaev family a “piece of work” is an insult to work.
Since the Boston terrorist attack on 4/15/13 we’ve been learning a whole lot about the two Muslim morons who blew up little children and severely injured hundreds of innocent onlookers and merry marathon runners.
So we’ve now learned that the Boston Marathon terrorists were welfare bums. Why am I not surprised? I’m tempted to joke about al Qaeda including welfare applications in their training manuals, but I’m worried that might give them new ideas.
When I think of the disability program, I think of the bum who is collecting a check so he can be an “adult baby”
Lately, it seems Republicans keep trying to brainstorm about how to attract new voters in order to win in 2014 and 2016.
My latest book, "Dear Father, Dear Son," focuses on the importance of fathers -- and the increasing number of children who grow up in homes without one. Fox's Juan Williams understands this -- sort of. He gets the "what," but not the "why."
One thing nearly everybody agrees upon is that the "sequester" is a silly sideshow to the real challenge facing America: unsustainable spending on entitlements. Ironies abound.
Sit down. I’m truly sorry about this, but we really need to take another trip into the dark recesses of the liberal mind. A dangerous journey to a world where it is greedy to want to keep your own money, but not to covet the money or property of others; a world where earning 17% of the income, but paying 38% of the income taxes means you’re not paying your fair share; a world where any expression of disagreement with any utterance, no matter how ignorant, from the mouth of someone-not-white makes you a racist.