February 24, 2010
Vol 4, Number 8
Wednesday Update
In This Issue: |
|
1. Barrett Flips
|
Barrett Flips
Anybody who says Wisconsin will create jobs by making every form of energy use more expensive and dictating that we use less of it is either lying or has no idea what they're talking about. Just to keep our current jobs from leaving they’d need to blow up the bridges across the Mississippi.
|
Fleeing New Jersey Governor Doyle seems to think that he can create jobs in Wisconsin by making it more expensive to live here. New Jersey, another state that until recently was governed by a liberal Democrat, tells a different story. More than $70 billion in overall wealth fled New Jersey from 2004 to 2008, as households of sufficient means to move away did so, and other well-heeled households declined to move in. At the end of January, Boston College’s Center on Wealth and Philanthropy produced an analysis showing wealth and charitable giving-capacity flowed into New Jersey between 1999 and 2004 and flowed out of the state thereafter. What changed? New Jersey’s tax structure may have had something to do with it. The reversal coincides with higher taxes on income, sales, property, and upper incomes, enacted in a futile attempt to balance bloated budgets. So self-defeating were the attempts to squeeze more revenue from already exploited taxpayers that recently-elected Republican Governor Chris Christie issued an executive order freezing $1.6 billion in unspent state funds. Christie also announced plans for ongoing, deep budget cuts. Rutgers University economist Jim Hughes, quoted in the Newark Star-Ledger, said the flight of wealthy taxpayers is “probably the reason why we have these massive shortfalls in the state budget, especially this year.” Last May, The Wall Street Journal noted the results when Maryland Liberals tried to fund an out-of-control budget with an extra-high “millionaire tax." A year later there were one-third fewer millionaires in Maryland. New Jersey and Maryland are only recent examples of something well-demonstrated through history. So we have one question for the Doyle administration and Liberals hoping to follow in its footsteps: At what point will we be entitled to conclude that you understand all this and just don’t care? |
Climate Propaganda Last Thursday London’s Daily Mail reported that the British government blew nine million pounds ($14,040,000 U.S.,) on publicity stunts to stir global warming fear. A tent labeled an “experiential climate dome” was set up in shopping centers and subsidized to the tune of $624,000. An unwitting public forked over another $132,000 to develop a series of “challenging pub quizzes” about climate change. Large sums went to local government, schools and youth organizations for “attitude modification” programs to convince people human-induced global warming is proven fact. A government report on the spending was prepared for the Department of Energy and Climate Change but somehow never got published. It came to light thanks to the Taxpayers’ Alliance using Britain’s Freedom of Information Act. Why do we care? Because the Doyle administration (313 days and counting,) is trying to do it here. Flying below the radar in the “Clean Energy Jobs Act” is a new “Climate Change Coordinating Council” in the Department of Natural Resources. Their job is to “promote and coordinate state educational and training programs related to climate change” with special priority on “promoting and coordinating programs for students in kindergarten through 12th grade.” No matter how the planet behaves, no matter how loudly people are laughing at the global warming scare, climate propaganda will be a permanent mission of Wisconsin government. From the moment they get their hands on your kids at say age 5, full-time shills will be using fear of changing climate to justify anything big, leftist government wants to do. The law will say they have to. By comparison, the British boondoggle looks almost benign. |
|
|
