Read this post. Read every damn word of it. And take heed of this:
“Right now, through November 2020, every day is Saint Crispin’s Day.”
And by the way, I see my local Congressweasel Van Taylor is among the list of bastards who sided with the Socialists against the President.
He will be hearing from me, in no uncertain terms.
“Cold Anger”? Try red-hot fury.
I for one cannot wait until November 2020, when we’ll see if everything that’s been said about Forgotten America is true.
From POTUS-wannabe Pocahantas comes this policy proposal:
Democrat presidential hopeful Elizabeth Warren wants to use federal excise taxes to reduce gun and ammunition sales.
Her gun control, made public in August on Medium, shows Warren believes the current ten percent excise tax on firearms is too low. She wants to raise that tax to 30 percent while increasing the tax on ammunition to 50 percent.
Because excise taxes are paid directly by the consumer–the taxes are added to the price of the goods–this means a $500 gun would immediately cost $515 and the price for a $20 box of ammo would immediately rise to $30.
Warren claims this taxation policy would “bring in new federal revenue” that can used for “gun violence prevention.” And she simultaneously suggests the tax would raise the price on guns and ammo to a level sufficient to stifle sales.
So using her “economics” it would go something like this:
So therefore Madame Marxist suggests that with her plan:
Except of course that in the real world, AK ammo sales would fall to 100 rounds and yield only $15 in excise taxes (a 50% loss in revenue). “Yay yay yay, but ammo sales have fallen!” she would pronounce. But why would sales fall so precipitously, she asks? Because of the higher tax?
Because, you Commie coksucquer, during the months before you could enact this poxy tax increase, we AK owners would buy countless millions of rounds of ammo, so that we’d have enough stored for the lean years — just like we did before the term of that other socialist asshole Barack Obama — and resume buying once an actual American became president again.
Ditto all those eeevil AR-15s and AK-47s you hate so much: we’d buy so many before you could touch them, the gun factories would have to institute 365-day / 24-hour shifts just to cope with the demand.
I swear, I’m a huge fan of the First Amendment and I like to hear politicians spell out their proposed policies; but I would also propose that anyone using idiotic economics theory (like the above) to create policy should be forced to wear a dunce cap and be beaten with wet spaghetti — just because of their naked stupidity.
And this phony bitch wants to run things?
* (example) Wolf Performance (WPA) is $304 / 1,000 at Cheaper Than Dirt at time of writing.
I’ve been wondering where Socialist POTUS-candidates Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders have been getting the foundation for their Lefty economic policy proposals because, frankly, neither strikes me as much of an intellectual heavyweight — Warren’s tokenist Harvard Law degree notwithstanding.
I wonder no more, and the headline to this article alone tells us why:
Two French economists from Berkeley advising Warren and Sanders on wealth tax
As the expression goes, it’s hard to see how you could fit much more annoying shit into a single sentence. As for their economic philosophy, we have this:
There are competing explanations for the rise in inequality. Those on one side argue that wealth concentration is natural as a result of globalization, technology gains, and economic growth, which give enormous rewards to the smartest, innovative, and most hardworking people. Drastically increasing tax rates, they say, would discourage innovation and hurt the economy.
The other camp sees rising inequality as unfair, immoral, and a threat to society.
Saez and Zucman are firmly in the second camp.
…
Saez, 46, and Zucman, 32, are both originally from France and have each worked in the past with Thomas Piketty, the famous French economist whose research on wealth and income inequality made him a best-selling author.
Ah, jeez. Piketty’s work is horribly slanted — it’s full of the Chomskyist research “methodology” so eloquently debunked by Bill Whittle, in that by taking a shovelful of beach sand and extracting a few black grains and discarding the rest, one can “prove” that all beaches contain not white, but black sand. Ditto Piketty, whose oh-so data-driven proposals for taxing wealth (as opposed to just income) were initially latched onto by many European governments:
So far, at least 15 European countries have tried wealth taxes. All but four, though, have repealed them, most recently Saez’s and Zucman’s homeland of France.
As we saw recently with Frogland, when their dotgov imposed more and more restrictions on wealthy Frenchmen, capital and its owners simply fled the country for more tax-hospitable climes.
Which of course means that despite the documented failure of such policies, our own home-grown Lefties like Warren and Sanders are keen to implement them Over Here.
But that’s the Left for you: never let facts get in the way of theory. And the Marxist “problem” of “income inequality” has proven to be, well, insoluble short of outright Leninism — confiscation of wealth and murder of an entire economic class (the kulaks) being the hallmarks thereof. (And for Lenin’s “kulaks”, read our modern-day Leninists’ “gun owners” as the disposable class, cf. Beto and Swalwell’s statements thereof.)
Which should tell you all you need to know about Warren and Sanders. It’s not just your guns they’ll confiscate: it’s your pension fund, your property and your livelihood as well.
Prove me wrong.
Apparently Bernie Sanders, socialist Senator and POTUS wannabe, had a heart attack on the campaign trail but survived after some pretty nifty (and quick) medical care — after which the Commie asshole had the nerve to bellow: “Medicare For All!” (his campaign slogan).
As Dan Greenfield has pointed out:
While Bernie’s timetable of getting an angioplasty within a day might not sound that impressive to Americans, in the British NHS system, the median time from assessment to treatment is 55.3 days. Mean times for treatment have been cited as being 80 days. The maximum NHS waiting time is supposed to be 18 weeks and almost 16% of patients in the UK have to wait more than 3 months for an angioplasty.
Canada’s socialist system has angioplasty waiting times of around 11 weeks. And that’s after you get an appointment to see a specialist.
…
Bernie waited a day in Vegas to get his angioplasty. In Norway, he would have waited 39 days.
In Finland, which Bernie has also cited as an inspiration for his socialist program, he would have waited 22 days. In Sweden, another favorite of American socialists, Bernie would have waited 42 days.
Greenfield also points out (and I paraphrase) that as President Sanders, the man who would have implemented socialized medical care, Our Bernie wouldn’t ever be subject to the same kinds of waiting periods imposed on others: oh no. He’d have been whipped into Bethesda Naval Hospital within the hour, and had an angioplasty a couple hours later.
Which is always the way with Communists: the ordinary people suffer while the nomenklatura get only the best. And under socialism, ordinary individuals’ lives are irrelevant as long as the principle is upheld.
Well, I wish the evil old bastard had croaked, just on principle.
Oh boy, this is priceless:
Beto Goes to Kent State, Argues Only the Government Can Be Trusted With Guns
I know the little Texas twerp is clueless; but how clueless is that?
These socialist turds haven’t yet figured out that in America, threatening to ban a type of gun doesn’t cause us to stop buying it — on the contrary, it makes us run out and buy more of them, in greater number and variety. Even the ladies join in the fun:
And such is the ignorance among college students nowadays, I bet ol’ Beta-boy’s speech was rapturously applauded. Morons.
Stay with me on this one.
If I were many years younger, and if I were not married, and if I lived in Colorado; and if this woman wasn’t already married, and if I happened to meet her, and if she wasn’t utterly repulsed by me to the point of shooting my fat ass — if all that, then I’d give her a big kiss on the cheek.
Which woman? This one.
And I bet I’m not the only man who thinks this.