We're turning Californian, turning Californian!

"Why are you here?"

"To get some money."

"What kind of money?"

"Obama money."

"Where's it coming from?

"Obama."

"And where did Obama get it?"

"I don't know... his stash, I don't know. I don't know where he got it from, but he's givin' it t'us to help us. We love him. That's why we voted for him... Obama! Obama!"

Click to expand...

Byron In Exile said:

This State is nuts... no question.

And bankrupt.

And 40% white people, 38% Mexicans, and God knows what else.

But our per-capita income is still better than "Great" Britain's, with their 92% white people.

Click to expand...

JackAssJim said:

I too voted for Obama. I'm a Obama man from way back.

Obama! Obama! Obama!

Click to expand...

4est_4est_Gump said:

"Why are you here?"

"To get some money."

"What kind of money?"

"Obama money."

"Where's it coming from?

"Obama."

"And where did Obama get it?"

"I don't know... his stash, I don't know. I don't know where he got it from, but he's givin' it t'us to help us. We love him. That's why we voted for him... Obama! Obama!"

Click to expand...

4est_4est_Gump said:

Don't worry, you'll get there!

Click to expand...

JackAssJim said:

Invest in cell phone towers.

And don't forget to pay your union dues.

Click to expand...

Byron In Exile said:

Frederick Fucking Chopin.

Why Johnny Ringo... you look like someone just walked over your grave!

Click to expand...

Ain't that a daisy?
You don't look so fresh.​

Byron In Exile said:

I do believe that unions are a great thing.

We would not have got here without them.

Click to expand...

With amnesty, we will wave the magic wand, and suddenly new low-wage workers will appear, along with new mouths for Nanny State to feed. That's sure to boost incomes and lower the deficit.

Surely, the party of fiscal responsibility wouldn't support such a self-destructive policy, would they? Oddly, some creative Republicans are arguing that "[l]egalizing undocumented immigrants will make them pay more taxes, earn higher wages and bring an underground demographic of workers into the official American economy."

It is quite common for conservatives, and liberals who want to sound responsible, to claim that immigration is needed for economic regeneration. This argument is an extreme absurdity. If immigrants boosted the tax base, then California would be the most successful state in the nation. California would be looking at budget surpluses that would be the envy of the nation.

Instead, California is living proof of the harmful economic impact caused by mass immigration. Over the last two decades, California grew by 10 million new people, but gained only 150,000 new taxpayers. As a study by a team of economic and public policy professors found, "From the mid-1980s to 2005, California's population grew by 10 million, while Medicaid recipients soared by seven million; tax filers paying income taxes rose by just 150,000; and the prison population swelled by 115,000." This is the make-up of a demographic and economic catastrophe, and it is the open borders Republican model for the rest of the nation.

Click to expand...

4est_4est_Gump said:

On a more serious note, the tax magic of immigration:

Charles Martel

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/11/magical_thinking_about_amnesty.html#ixzz2CrNT6okt

Click to expand...

Instead, California is living proof of the harmful economic impact caused by mass immigration. Over the last two decades, California grew by 10 million new people, but gained only 150,000 new taxpayers. As a study by a team of economic and public policy professors found, "From the mid-1980s to 2005, California's population grew by 10 million, while Medicaid recipients soared by seven million; tax filers paying income taxes rose by just 150,000; and the prison population swelled by 115,000." This is the make-up of a demographic and economic catastrophe, and it is the open borders Republican model for the rest of the nation.

Click to expand...

Byron In Exile said:

Well, yes, that's all true.

So what is California supposed to do about it?

They're here. Are we supposed to shoot them? Deport them? What??

Click to expand...

4est_4est_Gump said:

What can you do?

Become another Mexican State.

You already screwed the pooch, as you say, and now the same people who fucked the dog want the rest of us to happily be absorbed into than wonderful mañana culture...

Whoo Hoo! Celebrate!

Click to expand...

Byron In Exile said:

Do you know what keeps California from becoming a Mexican State?

Black people hate them more than they hate white people.

Click to expand...

4est_4est_Gump said:

Black people gonna be a minority señor...

Click to expand...

Byron In Exile said:

Swing votes, now...

Click to expand...

4est_4est_Gump said:

Oh, I just got it...

Swing votes.

Is that like "Are we going to be cross? ... I don't think I could bear it?"

They will be second on the lynch list once the white liberals have fled Eden...

Click to expand...

Byron In Exile said:

Very much like that.

They will stop at nothing to prevent the Mexicans from taking over California. Because once that happens, they're finished.

They know that white people don't hate them, and they know that the Mexicans do.

Click to expand...

Decades earlier, another courageous thinker, Whittaker Chambers, discovered a similar phenomenon to Benghazigate when he dared to reveal the identity of a prominent member of the Communist spy network, Alger Hiss, an official in FDR's State Department. In his famous autobiography, Witness, Chambers wrote:

When I took up my little sling and aimed at Communism, I also hit something else...the forces of that great socialist revolution, which, in the name of liberalism, spasmodically, incompletely, somewhat formlessly, but always in the same direction, has been inching its ice cap over the nation for two decades.

Click to expand...

Chambers was relentlessly attacked by the mainstream media as he testified before Congress, indeed exposing the underbelly of that much larger target and the media's leftist sympathies.

The facts uncovered in the Benghazi incident may also point to something else much more ominous. As Diana West bravely put it, we are discovering that "Uncle Sam joined the jihad."

Click to expand...

Now, however, stalemate may be just as likely as solution. Why? Well, it was former Bush advisor Keith Hennessey who discovered a big obstacle in all this. Team Obama wants a gargantuan $1.6 trillion tax hike over the next ten years to finance larger government. And Hennessey surmised — and I agree — that the reason the president couched his language in terms of higher tax “revenues” rather than tax “rates” is that he essentially wants both. Raise the top rates and cap or eliminate a number of tax deductions for more revenues. This is going to be a big problem. It could well be a deal-breaker.

...

Sooner or later this is the Obama agenda. And it’s going to be a big stumbling block for a year-end deal that would avoid a roughly $450 billion tax hike that would sink us back into recession.

New reports suggest there’s no progress between the White House and Republican congressional leaders. No wonder. The debate looks to be about higher revenues and rates, not a true compromise, and Republicans are getting boxed in.

None of this revenue transfer to the government is remotely pro-growth. And hiking taxes on capital gains and dividends is significantly anti-growth. With Obamacare taxes, the 15 percent cap-gains tax could run up to 23.8 percent and the 15 percent dividend rate could jump to 43.4 percent. And that doesn’t even include the integrated corporate tax rate.

So here’s the economic-growth problem: The after-tax-incentive return on cap-gains would fall more than 10 percent. On dividends it would drop over 33 percent. (Interestingly, over 100 large companies have declared special dividends to beat a year-end tax hike.) This raises the cost of capital and lowers the return on investment for the entire economy.

By making capital less valuable and more expensive, you get less of it. And you can’t have entrepreneurial capitalism without capital. Higher capital costs block business formation, productivity, jobs, and incomes.

Frankly, in terms of long-run economic growth, taxes on capital investment are more important than income taxes. On top of that, every time the capital-gains tax rate is raised, it generates lower long-run revenues. But if you cut the rate, revenues soar. Just ask Bill Clinton, whose second-term capital-gains tax cut led to a budget surplus.

And nobody is even talking about spending. The original across-the-board sequester, which was supposed to slash $1.2 trillion from the budget, is off the table. Apparently, $50 billion is the new number. So let me get this right: A $500 billion tax hike, and a $50 billion spending cut. That’s revenues-over-spending by ten-to-one. Wasn’t Simpson-Bowles looking for $3 or $4 in spending cuts for every $1 of new revenues?

So, it looks like way too many tax hikes, way too few spending cuts, and a big anti-growth fiscal package that is more like European-style austerity than American-style, free-enterprise recovery. This is why the stock markets are so nervous. They don’t know what they’re gonna get.

Right now, stalemate is just as likely as solution.

Click to expand...