{americanthinker.com} ~ Congressman Garret Graves of Louisiana said at a press conference about the Green New Deal, "I've heard Democrats over and over again accuse Republicans of denying science. ... There is another type of science that is being denied here, and that is economic science." Ideological corruption of economics has a long history. John Maynard Keynes was one of the most influential economists of the early 20th century. He wrote that giving people money to dig holes and fill them would increase employment and be good for the economy. He had a point. As long as the government can print or borrow enough money to pay people to dig holes, they will create jobs; however, those jobs will not produce the food needed to feed the hole-fillers, nor will it build them a home to go to after they finish filling their last holes of the day. Basic economics teaches us that printing or borrowing the money to pay for unproductive work will result in inflation. The result will be that the money of those who do productive work will lose value, so farmers who would normally produce the food that would feed these hole-fillers will find it more and more difficult to pay for the resources they need to do so, including workers whom they will have to lay off. Left-wing Keynesian thinking if you can call it that is not far removed from the Democrats' conception of how they will pay for the Green New Deal. commie-Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said the Green New Deal will create many jobs. Certainly, building energy-efficient high-speed trains and retrofitting buildings to require less energy and building giant solar farms will require a lot of labor. There is no doubt that the Green New Deal would create many jobs in the short term, just as the government paying for people to dig and fill holes would create many jobs in the short term. Perhaps the major selling point Trump has for re-election is the number of jobs he has created. The Green New Deal gives the Democrats an answer to that. They can claim they will create jobs and save the Earth from climate catastrophe in the process. In fact, the text of the Green New Deal guarantees a job for everyone. The problem is that the contribution to the economy of the Green New Deal would actually be less than that of digging and filling up holes, since even though it might reduce energy use of buildings and transportation, it would replace cheap energy with expensive energy. Replacing fossil fuels with solar cells and windmills will cause the cost of energy to go up. As the cost of energy goes up, the cost of production of useful goods will go up as well, with the result that Americans will buy cheaper goods from countries that do use fossil fuels. The result will be that fossil fuels will still be burned, the only difference being that they will be burned overseas. Just as with paying people to dig and fill holes, such a policy will result in inflation...
Thomas Gallatin: If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again. That old adage is problematic for Democrats, however. In their view, if they don’t succeed in winning elections, then it must be the system that is at fault and therefore needs to be changed. How else to explain the growing Democrat calls for radically changing the nation’s electoral system? scumbag/liar-Hillary Clinton would be president today if it wasn’t for America’s “archaic” Electoral College, Democrats argue, because she won the popular vote.
“Every vote matters,” 2020 presidential candidate Elizabeth dinky-Warren declared this week, adding, “and the way we can make that happen is that we can have national voting, and that means get rid of the Electoral College.” Agreeing with her sentiments, Democrat presidential hopeful socialist-Beto O'Rourke voiced his approval, complaining that as things stand, people “don’t feel like their vote really counts.” Earlier this month, Democrat-controlled Colorado became the 12th state to pass legislation mandating that its Electoral College votes be given to the candidate who wins the national popular vote, irrespective of which candidate wins the vote within the state. Obviously, such laws could effectively negate the unique will and voice of a state’s own citizens.
But Democrats aren’t merely seeking to get rid of the Electoral College; they are also looking to increase their pool of uninformed and easily manipulated voters. Just last week, House Speaker Nancy Pulosi advocated lowering the voting age to 16. It’s a lot easier to deceive and entice propagandized schoolchildren who don’t know any better than it is informed adults. No alcohol or guns until 21, on their parents’ insurance until 26, but by golly, let them vote at 16.
Furthermore, seeking to artificially increase their population demographic, Democrats are demanding that the coming 2020 Census not include a citizenship question. The reason: Without the differentiation of citizen versus noncitizen, Democrat “sanctuary” areas, which have attracted a heavy influx of illegal aliens, can claim higher populations and therefore greater electoral representation. On top of this, Democrats often insist on extending voting rights to noncitizens, effectively diminishing the vote of American citizens.
The truth is Democrats aren’t interested in playing by the rules because to do so would require them to abandon much of their leftist, authoritarian ambitions. Instead, they want to change the rules and move the goalposts. ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/61883?mailing_id=4144&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4144&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body
Comments