Having only one not so good eye means my reading and writing are much slower than when I had two reasonably good eyes. Being retired, I have a lot of time to help make up for my lack of speed. Every day I read a lot of news and numerous blogs. Whenever I come across something I feel I want or need to write about, I save the article on my favorites list and then remove them as i write about them. Unfortunately, that list keeps growing much faster than I keep up with. Every morning I debate with myself over which subject I should write about.
Today I lost the debate with myself. In my blog rounds yesterday, two bloggers were recommending other articles to read and they were indeed excellent recommendations. so, today I’m going to write a little on three of these articles. The first two are articles from Hot Air that were recommended on The Free Market Project blog. The third article is from The Reaganite Republican which was among the recommended reading list at Adrienne’s Corner. It was this third article that I really wanted to write about today. But hey, I lost the debate fair and square. My hope is that I can entice you to read these three important stories among the multitude of other options you have.
First up is an article by J. E. Dyer writing for Hot Air. Dyer writes a compelling story on how government could increase its revenues by reducing the cost burden of regulations on businesses in the same way that reducing taxes generates more revenue not less. Here is an excerpt:
What we need today is a regulatory version of what Reagan did with taxes. (Reagan also lifted some important regulatory restrictions, of course.) California, for example, could close much of its budgetary gap with breathtaking speed and efficiency if it merely did three things: opened up its coast for offshore drilling; eliminated its alternative-energy policies; and favored delivering water for human use over actively preventing its delivery. Even California’s mind-blowing pension obligations could be met if the state would also change its litigation environment, its posture on workplace regulation, and its practice of implementing virtually all regulatory policies by enthusiastically imposing costs on business. The average person in California doesn’t even know that 90-plus % of regulations have been imposed; all he knows is that things keep costing more and more, and businesses keep pulling up stakes and moving elsewhere.
Across America, regulatory policies are actively inhibiting the economic activity that produces revenues for the government. The only way to change that is to lift the burden of regulation. Raising tax rates will merely exert an upward pressure on consumer prices, and drive private money away from the taxable categories that strengthen the economy. Lightening the burden of regulation, however, will unleash the economy to produce, sell, and deliver significantly increased revenues to the government – without raising tax rates. Oh, and it will also reduce government spending. Regulating less means government spending less, on regulators and their infrastructure.
This is really important for people to understand. Do give this article a read and spread the word.
Next we have an article written by Ed Morrissey also at Hot Air. Did you know that our wonderful Environmental Protection Agency not only hands out millions of dollars in grants to environmental activist groups who routinely sue the EPA; but they even produce a guide on how to go about suing the EPA. folks, this pure collusion to promote the agendas of the environmental activist. Look at these snips:
Here’s another unsurprising surprise: the EPA usually winds up paying the legal fees associated with these suits. The Equal Access to Justice Act created what a former Bush official calls “sweetheart suits,” a lucrative business that ends up transferring funds from the federal government to activist groups … and their lawyers. It’s a free ride for plaintiff attorneys, since the EPA doesn’t get damaged by the process. In fact, the suits generally force the EPA to do what they want to do anyway, using the courts to grant them jurisdiction and authority that Congress withholds. It’s not for nothing that the EPA funds guides on how to sue them most effectively.
It’s a win-win for regulators. They get more power, make themselves less accountable to Congress, and fund groups they like outside of Congressional appropriations, especially now that pork-barrel spending has fallen out of favor. Trial lawyers get rich, too, a particular benefit for Democrats, who rely on that lobby for heavy political donations. The only people who lose are the taxpayers getting their pockets picked and the businesses that end up on the wrong end of the expanding regulatory state.
Incredible! Again, please read the article and help spread the word.
Finally, The Reaganite Republican has done a remarkable comparison of Stalinist/Marxist policies with what has actually been happening here in America. Yesterday was my first visit to this blog but it won’t be the last. It now appears on my blogroll will be included in my normal rounds. The article is a mind disturbing read but what grabbed my attention more than anything else is this video:
Folks, this video needs to go viral. If you agree, please pass it on.
Well, that’s what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?