The IUSB Vision Weblog

The way to crush the middle class is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation. – Vladimir Lenin

Archive for June 2nd, 2011

Obama Administration Lawyer to Federal Court: If a citizen does not want to buy the forced ObamaCare mandate, all they have to do is eliminate their income and go into poverty to not qualify…

Posted by iusbvision on June 2, 2011

Have we had enough of this kind of nonsense yet?

 

This is kind of technical and legalistic, but this is the argument the government is making to the court. They are also arguing that there are no limits to government power under the “Commerce Clause” and the “Necessary & Proper Clause”. This takes the entire idea of limited government and tosses it out the window, just as this web site said was one of the goals of the legislation back in 2009.

Washington Examiner

President Obama’s solicitor general, defending the national health care law on Wednesday, told a federal appeals court that Americans who didn’t like the individual mandate could always avoid it by choosing to earn less money.

Neal Kumar Katyal, the acting solicitor general, made the argument under questioning before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in Cincinnati, which was considering an appeal by the Thomas More Law Center. (Listen to oral arguments here.)  The three-judge panel, which was comprised of two Republican-appointed judges and a Democratic-appointed judge, expressed more skepticism about the government’s defense of the health care law than the Fourth Circuit panel that heard the Virginia-based Obamacare challenge last month in Richmond. The Fourth Circuit panel was made up entirely of Democrats, and two of the judges were appointed by Obama himself.

During the Sixth Circuit arguments, Judge Jeffrey Sutton, who was nominated by President George W. Bush, asked Kaytal if he could name one Supreme Court case which considered the same question as the one posed by the mandate, in which Congress used the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution as a tool to compel action.

Kaytal conceded that the Supreme Court had “never been confronted directly” with the question, but cited the Heart of Atlanta Motel case as a relevant example. In that landmark 1964 civil rights case, the Court ruled that Congress could use its Commerce Clause power to bar discrimination by private businesses such as hotels and restaurants.

“They’re in the business,” Sutton pushed back. “They’re told if you’re going to be in the business, this is what you have to do. In response to that law, they could have said, ‘We now exit the business.’ Individuals don’t have that option.”

Kaytal responded by noting that the there’s a provision in the health care law that allows people to avoid the mandate.

“If we’re going to play that game, I think that game can be played here as well, because after all, the minimum coverage provision only kicks in after people have earned a minimum amount of income,” Kaytal said. “So it’s a penalty on earning a certain amount of income and self insuring. It’s not just on self insuring on its own. So I guess one could say, just as the restaurant owner could depart the market in Heart of Atlanta Hotel, someone doesn’t need to earn that much income. I think both are kind of fanciful and I think get at…”

Sutton interjected, “That wasn’t in a single speech given in Congress about this…the idea that the solution if you don’t like it is make a little less money.”

The so-called “hardship exemption” in the health care law is limited, and only applies to people who cannot obtain insurance for less than 8 percent of their income. So earning less isn’t necessarily a solution, because it could then qualify the person for government-subsidized insurance.

Throughout the oral arguments, Kaytal struggled to respond to the panel’s concerns about what the limits of Congressional power would be if the courts ruled that they have the ability under the Commerce Clause to force individuals to purchase something.

Sutton said it would it be “hard to see this limit” in Congressional power if the mandate is upheld, and he honed in on the word “regulate” in the Commerce clause, explaining that the word implies you’re in a market. “You don’t put them in the market to regulate them,” he said.

In arguments before the Fourth Circuit last month, Kaytal also struggled with a judge’s question about what to do with the word “regulate,” to the point where the judge asked him to sit down to come up with an answer. (More on that exchange here). Kaytal has fallen back on the Necessary and Proper clause, insisting that it gives broader leeway to Congress.

Judge James Graham, a Reagan district court appointee who is temporarily hearing cases on the appeals court, said, “I hear your arguments about the power of Congress under the Commerce Clause, and I’m having difficulty seeing how there is any limit to the power as you’re defining it.”

Advertisements

Posted in Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild, Health Law | Leave a Comment »

Moody’s to USA: Change Course on Deficit Spending By Mid-July or Else…

Posted by iusbvision on June 2, 2011

By IUSB Vision Editor Chuck Norton

What does “or else” mean? It means that Moody’s strips the United States of it’s AAA credit rating. What does that mean? I have no time to explain now as I am about to leave for dinner, but essentially it means that the Great Depression will look like a stroll in the daisy’s.

I have been in the process of putting together an economic roundup post of a new dip in the recession. A double dip recession is exactly what we predicted in early 2009. The papers said that this dip was unexpected, but even someone with basic economics training and a little talent could see it coming and we did [When I took the economics aptitude test that the IU Business and Economics School gives all B&E students I received one of the highest scores in IU history. We are not trying to be cocky, but like I said, a little talent – Chuck].

Now the game is over. The Democrats spending binge must end or else.

DEBT CEILING: Moody’s Just Threatened To Slash The US Credit Rating

I would like to deal with the first objection that the left is going to make, “What do you mean ‘The Democrats spending binge’! Isn’t this all Bush’s fault because of the tax cuts?”

This graph answers that question. Remember the first tax cut was passed in 2001, it was the “Bush Bucks” refund checks. It did not help much. The real tax cut in 2003 is the one that set long term rates and tax rules to help economic certainty is the one that made the difference.

2003 is the year that the Iraq war started as well. It took about a year for the tax cuts and rules to settle into the economy, but you can see the results. In spite of increased spending the deficit was dropping in fact the “rich” paid more taxes in real dollars (that is in dollars and inflation adjusted dollars) after the tax cuts were passed. For more information on this graph check HERE and be sure to read the commentary at the bottom of the page.

The simple truth is this, when the productive are taxed at a higher rate they just park their money so it is not taxed at all. The same thing happens when there is economic uncertainty. The result is that the tax burden is transferred from the rich to the middle class; exactly the opposite of the left’s stated intent.

The second objection is equally as obvious and equally as easy to defeat, “Look at what the Clinton tax increase did for the economy and the deficit.” Yes by all means lets do just that. The massive 1993 tax increase did increase revenue, but not nearly as much as the Democrats, CBO static models and such had predicted. Reports from the CBO, OMB, and IRS all agree – LINK. After the Republicans took over Congress, passed welfare reform, cut spending, set a path to a balanced budget and CUT TAXES on capital gains from 28% to 20%, instituted the child tax credit, cut taxes on inheritance and raised the ceiling for IRA’s the economy exploded and revenue pored in. Unfortunately at the end of Clinton’s term the capital gains tax cut expired because it had a sunset provision, Clinton pushed massive new fuel and energy regulations which sent fuel prices skyrocketing and the tech bubble burst causing a stock market crash.

So what will happen if we lose AAA and how will it impact you?

Coin Week explains this in technical terms: 

* A credit rating reflects the risk of default. A downgrade will raise the cost of borrowing for the United States government‚ could have a spillover effect on corporate debt and investors will buy fewer U.S. Treasuries.

* There could be a massive outflow of foreign investment. Some global funds are mandated to invest only in AAA debt and if the U.S. loses its AAA rating‚ it loses those investors.

* A credit rating downgrade provides a perfect excuse for an alternative reserve currency to replace the dollar. China‚ Russia and other countries are already suggesting creating a “basket of currencies” that would replace the U.S. dollar.

* Interest rates will increase. Should the United States lose its AAA credit rating‚ it will trigger rising interest rates in an already unfrozen credit market.

* The risk of inflation increases. Philadelphia Federal Reserve President Charles Plosser has warned that the U.S. government’s emergency programs for the economy undermined central bank independence and raised the risk of inflation. “When a nation’s treasury or finance ministry and its central bank work too closely together‚ there is a clear risk that the government’s spending will end up being financed by the central bank’s power to create money‚” Plosser cautions. “History shows us that you can get very bad economic outcomes with rapidly rising inflation.”

What does this mean in English? 

Many of those who invest in the United States would stop, as many funds mandate investments of AAA risk. Wealth would leak out of the country fast. It will be harder for the United States Government to burrow money. This will cause interest rates to rise.

The interest on the debt that the government would pay every year would skyrocket, leaving even less money to pay our bills with. The credit markets would dry up even worse than they are now. This will make it very expensive or impossible for seasonal businesses like farms to get seasonal loans. Many businesses use short term loans for big contracts and sales such as the purchase of a capital investment like a large production machine or a farm tractor. All of this will mean less production, job loss, and severe inflation. The government, being unable to borrow as much money and as cheaply, will do more of what it is doing now, just print up money. This makes the value of YOUR dollar even less resulting in even higher prices for everyone. At that point the government will be forced to have massive spending cuts, or print money till it is like the Yen.

Interest rates on mortgages, credit cards etc would jump considerably.

We did not lose AAA even during the Great Depression. In a country that requires as much temporary credit as our economy and production does, losing AAA will impact us in a way that is much worse than it would many smaller countries.

It gets worse as I have saved the worst for last. Many of these short term loans/credit is used for large import/export deals. The United States is the world’s largest importer and has fallen to fourth behind the EU, China, and Germany in exports. We have not even considered what impact this would have on global markets.

Welcome to hell.

 

We are already heading into a double dip

ADP: U.S. Added Fewer Workers in May

Companies in the U.S. added fewer workers than forecast in May, a sign that job growth is struggling to gain momentum, data from a private report based on payrolls showed today.

Employment increased by 38,000 last month, the smallest increase since September, from a revised 177,000 in April, according to figures from ADP Employer Services. The median estimate in the Bloomberg News survey called for a 175,000 advance for May.

 

Labor Market Worries Rise on Weak Private Sector Job Growth

U.S. private-sector payroll growth slowed sharply in May, falling to the lowest level in eight months and prompting some economists to lower forecasts for job growth in Friday’s U.S. government report.

 

US Manufacturing Growth Slowest Since Sept 2009

The pace of growth in the U.S. manufacturing sector tumbled in May, slackening more than expected to its slowest since September 2009, according to an industry report released Wednesday.

The Institute for Supply Management (ISM) said its index of national factory activity fell to 53.5 in May from 60.4 the month before. The reading missed economists’ expectations for 57.7.

 

Stocks Plunge Amid Global Recovery Fears

Stocks sank more than 2 percent Wednesday, following several economic reports that confirmed a struggling recovery and after Moody’s downgraded Greece’s bond ratings deeper into junk status.

 

Horror for US Economy as Data Falls off Cliff

The last month has been a horror show for the U.S. economy, with economic data falling off a cliff, according to Mike Riddell, a fund manager at M&G Investments in London.

“It seems that almost every bit of data about the health of the US economy has disappointed expectations recently,” said Riddell, in a note sent to CNBC on Wednesday.

“US house prices have fallen by more than 5 percent year on year, pending home sales have collapsed and existing home sales disappointed, the trend of improving jobless claims has arrested, first quarter GDP wasn’t revised upwards by the 0.4 percent forecast, durables goods orders shrank, manufacturing surveys from Philadelphia Fed, Richmond Fed and Chicago Fed were all very disappointing.”

“And that’s just in the last week and a bit,” said Riddell.

Pointing to the dramatic turnaround in the Citigroup “Economic Surprise Index” for the United States, Riddell said the tumble in a matter of months to negative from positive is almost as bad as the situation before the collapse of Lehman Brothers in 2008.

 

Obama’s Treasury Sec. Tim Geithner said just on April 26 that there was no risk of the United States losing the AAA credit rating. So much for that. Real pro’s like Jim Rogers said that he expects us to lose AAA. Famed University of Maryland economist Pete Morici and David Walker, the former Comptroller of the United States  say we should have lost it already – LINK. Jim Leaviss, head of retail fixed interest at M&G, the fund management arm of the Prudential, says that the United States will lose AAA after 2011 – LINK.

 

Posted in Chuck Norton, Economics 101 | Leave a Comment »

Saint Augustines College in Public Smear Campaign Against One of Its Best Students….

Posted by iusbvision on June 2, 2011

Speaking of unhinged administrators from our last post. This story from Saint Augustines College (SAC) makes me wonder if you have to fail the Wal-Mart psych test to get hired and a school administrator.

You are not going to be pleased after you read about this injustice.

Roman Caple is the kind of student that any university would be thrilled to call one of it’s own. He was in the school band, he was in the school choir, he was involved in student government, and he was so supportive of his school’s athletic program that he had the mascot, a falcon, shaved into the side of his head. He even played on the school tennis team for three years.

The Daily Caller has much of the story and be sure to keep reading after because it gets worse.

The Daily Caller:

Facebook and college go hand and hand these days — students read up on each other, share funny videos, send messages, and publicize those embarrassing photos from the night before. At Saint Augustine’s College (SAC), however, posting the wrong thing on Facebook will land you in hot water.

The Raleigh, N.C., college prohibited senior Roman Caple from participating in his class’ graduation because of a “negative social media exchange” he had on Facebook regarding the school’s response to the April 16th tornado damage.

What Caple is being punished for is encouraging his peers on SAC’s Facebook page to go to the school’s public meeting to argue for what he thought was the best way to respond to the tornado damage.

“Here it go!!!!!” he wrote. “Students come correct, be prepared, and have supporting documents to back up your arguments bcuz SAC will come hard!!!! That is all.”

Come correct, be prepared, have documentation. There is your horrible message that must be punished according to SAC Vice President Eric W. Jackson

More –  and read carefully:

Several days later, Caple met with SAC Vice President for Student Development and Services Eric W. Jackson, who that same day informed Caple that he would not be allowed to walk with his class. In a letter to Caple, Jackson explained that the reason for his prohibition was the Facebook comments, adding that “[a]ll students enrolled at Saint Augustine’s College are responsible for protecting the reputation of the college and supporting its mission.”

While graduation has already happened, without Caple participating, the student is still fighting the decision. His attorney, Brandon S. Atwater, has sought help from the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE).

“While it promises free speech, Saint Augustine’s College has apparently rolled out a brand new, unwritten ‘don’t challenge our decisions on Facebook’ rule that warrants keeping a student out of graduation ceremonies,” FIRE senior vice president Robert Shibley said. “It’s hard to think of a pettier way to punish a loyal, graduating student for publicly disagreeing with administrators.”

In a statement issued in response to concern about Caple’s punishment, the school explained that the decision was due to the fact that they saw Caple’s words as an attempt to stir up trouble.

“At a time when the College staff was working diligently to ensure the well being of all students, Mr. Caple, a senior, chose to attempt to create chaos,” the school wrote in a statement. “It is important to note that Mr. Caple is a student who resides off campus and therefore, was not present on campus throughout the tornado or its aftermath.”

The college added that they had had past troubles with Caple, but were not prepared to share them at this time.

“Throughout his matriculation, there were more incidents involving Mr. Caple that factored into the College’s decision, however, because of FERPA [Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act] constraints, that information cannot be disclosed,” the school added. “The posts to Facebook during this time left the administration with no other choice other than to exclude him from the actual commencement exercise.”

Smear Campaign

Bring documentation and have your facts correct is chaos? Was Caple going to start a riot? Was this statement so bad that the school had to prevent him from attending graduation as a matter of public safety? So urgent that they had to abandon all due process in his “punishment”?

FERPA is not that cut and dry, in every case where a school tries to hide behind FERPA when it trashes a student (Hello IUPUI) it ends up being just what it looks like. If the administrators were really interested in protecting Roman Caple’s privacy they would not even claim the student had past problems (after all it is private right?). This is an assault on his reputation now put out nationwide. In cases such as the famed Keith John Sampson case at IUPUI where the student who was persecuted and trashed in the media by unhinged administrators, when the student waved privacy and asked for the documentation under the law, the school had nothing. For a while IUPUI claimed that it had knowledge of “secret” violations that not even the student could be made aware of. All lies.

ABC News 11 has video and more details. In the video ABC shows that his other Facebook comments were very positive and supportive.

Our friends at FIRE have more details:

FIRE wrote SAC President Dianne Boardley Suber on May 18, pointing out that SAC’s punishment of Caple violated the college’s extensive promises of freedom of expression. FIRE noted that SAC’s Student Handbook states that “[s]tudents enjoy the same basic rights and are bound by the same responsibilities to respect the rights of others, as are all citizens.” These rights include “freedom of speech.” SAC’s Student Handbook also states that SAC has an “obligation to provide an open forum to present and debate public issues,” and SAC policies further explicitly note that the college is not “a setting described in the concept of in loco parentis” (emphasis in original)that is, SAC students are to be treated as adults.

On May 24, a law firm representing SAC wrote FIRE, arguing that SAC had “legitimate reasons” to punish Caple. The firm failed to indicate any of those reasons and did not explain why SAC appeared to act entirely outside of the due process procedures that the school promises its students. [Emphasis IUSB Vision – that folks, is a smear campaign – Editor] Despite the college’s apparent breach of its contractual promises to students, the firm insisted that SAC “did not err or violate Mr. Caple’s rights.”

“If I were Saint Augustine’s College, I would have commended this student for encouraging his peers to provide documentation that supported their arguments about a contentious issue,” FIRE Vice President of Programs Adam Kissel said. “Instead, SAC did the opposite and punished Roman Caple for exercising his rights.”

In my view this looks like a deliberate attempt to sully Roman Caple’s reputation.

Reaction

This injustice has generated outrage all over the internet. At the time of this writing Google is already showing 10,200 hits on the issue.

Here is a video from Hip Hop reviewer who goes by the name “Misanthropik One”. WARNING – ADULT LANGUAGE! The language is “Hip Hop”, but the substance is solid and, in spite of the 30 second music intro that is intolerable (so just skip to the 30 second mark), the clip is strangely charismatic and entertaining.

My personal reaction is to SAC Vice President Eric W. Jackson is this video clip, which I am confident Mr. Jackson has seen many times, and yet shows no ability to grasp of whatsoever:

Posted in Academic Misconduct, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton | Leave a Comment »

School Accuses Diverse Group of Students of Being White Supremacists for Wearing T-Shirts…

Posted by iusbvision on June 2, 2011

There are more cases of unhinged school administrators engaging in incredible foolishness than we could ever tell you about. This one is amazing.

School picture time is important for kids. The cheerleaders were all going to wear pink, the jocks were all going to wear tank tops, so another group of friends decided that they would wear white t-shirts so they could easily identify each other in the class photo.

Enter the unhinged school administrator.

He accuses the students of being a part of a white supremacist group and says that he has gotten complaints, of course he cannot substantiate that claim. So he suspends some of the students at finals time so they cannot graduate, including an Asian student. Welcome to yet another lawsuit that a school will have no chance of winning and will cost the taxpayers money.

There is also a libel/slander aspect to this. Accusing someone of being in such a group is almost the worst thing you can say about someone. The school has accused students and named them as white supremacists in the media and on the internet with no evidence to support it. Anyone who does an internet search on these students names will find this. These students have been damaged and their reputations trashed nationwide. I hope they sue the school district and, if California law allows, go after the administrator’s personal assets.

KION News:

SOQUEL, Calif. – Students banned from a Central Coast school for wearing a white t-shirt. On Wednesday, Soquel High School suspended at least two students. The students say it’s because of allegations, they’re part of a white supremacist group.

“All the girls wore pink, all the sports guys wore tank tops,” says Soquel High Senior Mikey Donnelly. “We were all going to wear white so that was the plan. Just wear white t-shirts to identify ourselves and look back and say that was our group of friends right there.”

Soquel High Senior Mikey Donnelly wore a white t-shirt for his senior class photo Tuesday. About 10 of his friends did the same. That decision may seem harmless. But Soquel High suspended Donnelly for three days because of it.

Donnelly said the school told him people were offended and intimidated by his group, claiming they’re a white supremacist gang.

“I do think this is BS,” says Donnelly. “I’m not a white supremacist in any way shape or form. If I did say white power, I would probably say it just as much as I say black power.”

He’s not the only one upset.

“I feel disrespected,” says Soquel High Senior David Mine.

Mine also wore a white t-shirt and was also suspended. He’s missing out on finals and that could jeopardize his graduation.

“I’m Asian,” says Mine. “I don’t see how I can be a white supremacist. I’m against it completely.”

Soquel High Principal Ken Lawrence-Emanuel was very tight-lipped about it, saying students’ punishments are confidential. But told me the school got several complaints about a white pride group on campus.

“Safety is always first at Soquel High,” says Lawrence-Emanuel. “We want to make sure we do everything we can to keep people from feeling and being safe on campus.”

But, the students don’t agree and are ready to fight it.

“It’s a pretty bad feeling to be labeled something you’re not,” says Donnelly.

Donnelly said nobody’s ever accused him of being a white supremacist before and plans on appealing the schools decision. He’ll even take it to court if he needs to.

Posted in Academic Misconduct, Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Stuck on Stupid | 1 Comment »