Widget Image
Follow PPD Social Media
Thursday, February 13, 2025
HomeStandard Blog Whole Post (Page 561)

[brid video=”40085″ player=”2077″ title=”Violent AntiU.S. Protestors Corner Egg Woman at Trump Rally in San Jose”]

Violent anti-American protesters cornered, attacked and egged a woman attending a Donald Trump rally in San Jose, California on Thursday night. The woman was egged and spit on until she was finally let inside the Marriott Hotel, while law enforcement essentially observed and did nothing.

The so-called protestors, most of whom were of Hispanic ethnicity, also burned the American flag and chanted “America was never great! Fuck Trump!” and “This is Mexico!”

The crowd had no respect for the First Amendment or anything else having to do with law and order, the Constitution or American patriotism. In fact, they were blatantly open about their hatred for the country and intention to transform it into one where varying opinions are unwanted.

Other protestors were sucker-punched on the way out of the event with children at their side and, again, the police did nothing.

Violent anti-American protesters cornered and attacked a

[brid video=”40072″ player=”2077″ title=”Full Speech Donald Trump Rally in San Jose CA (6216)”]

At a rally in San Jose, Calif., Thursday night, presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump responded to Hillary Clinton’s attack during her foreign policy speech.

“Now she’s saying, ‘Donald Trump, do you trust him with the nukes?’ Let me tell you. My temperament is so much tougher and so much better than her temperament,” Mr. Trump said. “And by the way, we need a tough temperament. All of these countries that are our allies — she talks about our allies — our allies think we’re very stupid people.”

The Donald’s comments come after Mrs. Clinton gave what turned out to be a fiery campaign speech in California on Thursday, calling his “America First” foreign policy platform “dangerously incoherent,” adding the man himself is “temperamentally unfit” to be President of the United States and command the nation’s armed forces.

“It’s like taking Sominex. To watch her is like Sominex. You ever hear of Sominex? Sleep all night. It’s hard to stay awake,” he said. “I think she could make more money if she made speeches and sold them for people that can’t sleep. It was hard.”

While even her critics pointed out the improvement in her demeanor and performance, it was billed as a major foreign policy speech and it was not. Further, there was little to stop her detractors from pointing out the foreign policy failures during her tenure at the State Department. The Federal Bureau of Investigation is currently probing whether the Mrs. Clinton mishandled classified emails and information when she kept her personal server to conduct official State Department business, as well as public corruption.

Mr. Trump said the president is protecting her from prosecution even after others had their lives destroyed for much less. He vowed that the Justice Department would be allowed to do their job if he is elected president in November.

“Hillary Clinton has to go to jail. She has to go to jail. I said that,” he said about the email scandal. “She’s guilty as hell.”

At a rally in San Jose Thursday

Donald-Trump-America-First-Energy-Policy-Speech-Bismarck-ND

Presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump speaks at the Williston Basin Petroleum Conference in Bismarck, North Dakota, to deliver his major energy policy and climate speech, on May 26. (Photo: Reuters)

Apart from the endless question of who always will, who probably will, who may and who never will vote for Donald Trump, I’d like to call a temporary truce between the believers and the skeptics and warn against any conscious abandonment or neglect of our founding principles.

I sense that the Trump movement in some ways presents a false choice–that we either temporarily abandon our principles to save America or preserve our principles and lose America. To the contrary, even if we take drastic action, we must always do so within the constraints of the Constitution–being mindful that to restore America’s greatness, we must reclaim our founding principles.

Some Trump supporters will be offended by the suggestion that they want to de-emphasize the Constitution or do not hold Trump to ordinary standards of decency, but I’ve had many exchanges with Trump supporters in which they have demeaned the Constitution as a bygone relic, a meaningless piece of paper.

I refuse to believe that to combat leftism we must abandon our founding principles, our standards of decency and our aspirations for a noble, virtuous and civil society. If, as a Trump supporter, you agree with me, then this column is not meant for you, but if you disagree, please indulge my sappiness for a moment.

The gravity of this issue hit home to me as I was watching, with two of my daughters, an online lecture by Hillsdale College President Larry Arnn on Western civilization. I wish everyone could hear Arnn’s inspiring message on the critical importance of studying Western civilization and how ignorance of our history and founding principles has directly contributed to the situation in which we now find ourselves.

Arnn said: “We live in a time when a kind of blight has settled on the world because of doctrines that were adopted in America … in the 19th and 20th centuries. … So we’ve lost a lot because of that. We don’t teach old and high things in school the way we used to, and ignorance of those things is everywhere — and that’s a threat to our freedom. Hillsdale has an old commitment to the principles of our country and an old belief announced in the founding document that learning the right things is necessary to perpetuate our freedom and our justice in America.”

It’s not enough to say “we will make America great again.” Closing the borders is vital, but it’s not the only thing that matters.

I share the angst of Trump supporters toward the left and the establishment, and I’m deeply concerned by the current miserable condition the nation is in. Indeed, constitutional conservatives have been fighting against these foes longer than most Trump supporters, but there’s no point in bickering over that now.

Trump supporters must know it’s outrageous to lump constitutional conservatives in with the establishment merely because we are skeptical of Trump. There are many reasons for skepticism, including that he has hardly been anti-establishment and is not likely to be consistently so if he becomes president.

We understand the gratification of believers when Trump refuses to kowtow to leftist and politically correct pressure to conform to the left’s thought-stifling standards. We feel it, too; at least I do.

There are countless examples of Republicans caving to liberals on policy and muzzling their own ideas. No wonder young people gravitate toward the left. It’s not just cultural influences and educational indoctrination. It’s that our side often doesn’t stand up for what it claims to believe in.

In contrast, when Hillary Clinton recently denounced Trump for buying up properties at depressed values, he didn’t defensively scramble to offer some irrelevant excuse. He ridiculed the allegation and affirmed capitalism in one fell swoop. In response to Clinton’s claim that he bought properties at low prices to sell at higher prices and make profits, he said, “Who the hell doesn’t?” Apart from my issues with Trump, that’s how you handle leftist bullying.

There have been plenty of such incidents throughout the course of this campaign — sometimes appropriate but sometimes not, which brings me back to one of the concerns I have with the Trump phenomenon.

I fear we are in danger of sacrificing too much at the altar of Trump. As I’ve said before, Trump supporters seem to have an endless willingness to forgive anything he does. Though it is admirable to combat political correctness, it is not commendable to abandon decency in the name of fighting political correctness. We should applaud the former and condemn the latter — lest we succumb to the notion that things are so bad these days that the only way we can fix them is to be bad boys ourselves.

I get that Trump supporters believe extraordinary measures must be taken to restore America, given the Republicans’ failed track record of effectively opposing PC and leftist tyranny. But we mustn’t lose ourselves in the process. Leftists long ago adopted an ends-justify-the-means approach and will say and do anything in support of their cause. If the right does likewise, ostensibly to save America, we will have already lost it.

Even if you disagree, Trump supporters, please humor us and understand we will always believe, like Larry Arnn, that neglecting our founding principles has imperiled our liberties and that learning and aspiring to what is noble and virtuous is necessary to perpetuate our freedom and our justice.

Please try to meet us halfway.

[mybooktable book=”the-emmaus-code-finding-jesus-in-the-old-testament” display=”summary” buybutton_shadowbox=”true”]

I sense that the Trump phenomenon in

Hillary-Clinton-AP-John-Locher

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton gives an address on national security, Thursday, June 2, 2016, in San Diego, Calif. (Photo: AP/John Locher)

Hillary Clinton, in a fiery campaign speech in California on Thursday, called Donald Trump’s “America First” foreign policy platform “dangerously incoherent,” adding the man himself is “temperamentally unfit” to be President of the United States and command the nation’s armed forces.

“This is not someone who should ever have the nuclear codes, because it’s not hard to imagine Donald Trump leading us into a war just because somebody got under his very thin skin,” the former secretary of state said. “We cannot put the security of our children and grandchildren in Donald Trump’s hands.”

While even her critics pointed out the improvement in her demeanor and performance, there was little to stop them from pointing out the foreign policy failures during her tenure at the State Department. From the failed “Russian reset” to the so-called Arab Spring and her personal failure in Libya, which cost four Americans to lose their lives, the Democratic frontrunner’s central argument against the presumptive Republican nominee began to show a clear weakness.

“I will leave it to the psychiatrists to explain his affection for tyrants,” she said.

However, as Mrs. Clinton lambasted Mr. Trump for allegedly praising the Korean dictator Kim Jong-un and China during the crackdown against dissidents at Tiananmen Square, her critics were quick to remind supporters she called Syrian President Bashar al-Assad “a reformer” right before he murdered hundreds of thousands of his own people. Nevertheless, what was billed as a foreign policy speech turned into little more than an effort to get free media to launch an attack on Mr. Trump.

Mr. Trump, who later railed against her record in Libya and more at a rally in San Jose, Calif., responded to the speech on Twitter:

Meanwhile, the secretary tried to focus on the general election even as she struggles to carry the largest and most delegate-rich state to vote on the final day of the primary season on June 7. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, who has also questioned her judgement on foreign policy decision-making in Iraq and Libya, has been campaigning hard in the Golden State, forcing Mrs. Clinton to leave New Jersey.

The most recent California Democratic primary poll conducted by [content_tooltip id=”39829″ title=”NBC/WSJ/Marist”] found Sen. Sanders closing the gap to just 2 points. Further, a PPIC Poll survey conducted from May 13 to May 22 showed Mrs. Clinton leading 46% to 44% for Sen. Sanders, with minority voters disproportionately making up the most supportive group for the self-proclaimed socialist.

“It’s important to note that age has been an important factor for the Democratic presidential candidate preferences,” PPIC pollster Mark Baldassare said. “The nonwhites have a younger age profile and the whites have an older age profile among the California Democratic presidential primary likely voters in our May PPIC Survey.”

There are a total 548 delegates up for grabs in the California Democratic primary, including 317 in the congressional districts. Another 105 are at large, 53 are Pledged PLEOs and 73 Unpledged PLEOs.

“This may be the end of the road for the Sanders campaign,” said PPD’s senior political analyst Richard D. Baris. “They don’t believe these numbers and actually feel that they have a good shot to defeat Mrs. Clinton in the Golden State. It wouldn’t be the first primary this cycle where the polling was grossly off.”

“But if it’s the end of a longer-than-anticipated road for Bernie, it looks like the beginning of a tough road for Mrs. Clinton.”

Meanwhile, Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown, who is still above water with 50% approving and 39% disapproving of the job he is going, endorsed Mrs. Clinton this week despite his near 25-year feud with the Clinton family. Gov. Brown once accused Bill and Hillary Clinton of public corruption on a debate stage during the 1992 Democratic Presidential Primary Debate. Those who disapprove include 67% of Republicans, 27% of independents and 20% of Democrats, with the latter groups breaking big for Donald Trump in a general election.

Hillary Clinton, in a fiery campaign speech

Obama Weightlifting Gif

Wow. Picture is worth a thousand words.

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling, which thinks that nothing is worth a war, is much worse. A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. — John Stuart Mills

I read with disgust this week the details of a YouGov Poll that showed a large percentage of millennial men don’t consider themselves fully masculine. This is the result of decades of leftist, cultural Marxism that have changed the fabric of American society. It is also how nations lose wars and find themselves relegated to the dustbin of history.

If you haven’t noticed, the “conquest ethic” is alive and well in the world today. All you have to do is look to the Crimean Peninsula or the South China Sea for real-life examples. The world is getting more dangerous, not more peaceful. The aggressors smell weakness, especially in the Obama administration. The fact that this weakness has been willfully engineered is especially disturbing.

Power-hungry empires and dictators are now taking advantage of this weakness and planning for more. Russian snap drills of 150,000 troops on the NATO border are not just for show. Secretary of State John F. Kerry was dead wrong: This is the 19th century all over again, only this time with nuclear weapons.

Pundits laugh at pictures of Vladimir Putin shirtless on a horse, or chasing a tiger through the Siberian tundra. Laugh all you want, but this is an image that sells in Russia, where men are men and women are women.

“He is a real man,” you hear people say of Mr. Putin. In other words, a protector, a primal real man protecting the family cave. When compared to pictures of President Obama on a bumper car or eating ice cream on Martha’s Vineyard, the mental picture is especially troubling.

As long as we are speaking of Russia, did you know feminism is especially despised there? By the women? “Why would I want to act like a man? I’m proud of being a woman,” one Russian women recently told the news site Russia Beyond the Headlines. In the old Soviet Union days, women were able to experience real egalitarianism. Unfortunately, the outcome was not so pleasant.

Feminism only flourishes in rich, comfortable societies. A woman who is starving to death and wants to eat knows abstract principles don’t fill the belly.

I’m all for equal opportunity for women — for everyone, for that matter. That is what has made America great. But I’m not for mandated equal outcomes. I’m not for the emasculation of American men. This will be our downfall. The forced integration — and therefore the forced lowering of standards — in our armed forces will lead to more American deaths and possibly defeat in battle. Our edge will be gone.

What this country desperately needs are more men like Marcus Luttrell, Chris Kyle, John McCain and Joshua Wheeler; there are too many to name. But they are getting fewer in number. We don’t need a bunch of metrosexual millennials demanding their safe spaces.

Our country is at a turning point, a precipice, a fork in the road.

We must decide as a society if we are going to be worried about defending ourselves, or more worried about boys using girls’ bathrooms. We must choose between self-reliance and dependency on government. Right now. The country is 50/50. It could go either way.

The barbarians are coming.

Please note: This article first appeared on L. Todd Wood’s Behind the Curtain blog on The Washington Times.

[mybooktable book=”motherland” display=”summary” buybutton_shadowbox=”true”]

In an increasingly dangerous world full of

mobile-ecommerce

“Mobile use is growing faster than any of Google internal predictions.” This statement comes from Eric Schmidt, Executive Chairman of Google/Alphabet.

Mobile phones have truly revolutionized the way we come into contact and consume information. It is the first thing we check when we get up in the morning and the last thing we set aside before going to sleep at night. Mobile phones, especially smartphones, have become an irreplaceable part of our lives. Estimations suggest that there will be about 220 million smartphone users and around 42% of the U.S. population owns a tablet already. These are very impressive figures for recent technologies.

This newfound dependency has paved the way for the boom of m-commerce. Findings from a Forrester research show that mobile and tablet commerce is expected to hit $293 billion in 2018 from 2014’s projection of $114 billion – a quite astounding growth. According to research done at Criteo, top retailers are now earning almost 50% of their sales from mobile orders. Findings by IBM on Thanksgiving 2013 showed that 40% of all web traffic over the holiday season was from mobile phones and it also accounted for 23% of all sales. There were initially a lot of naysayers, citing the screen size as an issue, there were concerns about the safety of mobile transactions; users will leave the website if the loading time is too long or the website is not optimized for mobile, but we all saw massive improvements and innovations in phone functions and internet capacity lately. Businesses have invested heavily on their native apps and this resulted in a massive growth in shares of their total transaction – 58% of all mobile revenue to be exact.

This is because the mobile experience is more flexible and enjoyable. We spend hours of our time swiping through carefully curated images as retailers make various kinds of offers and sell discount codes to promote their business. They are willing to overlook the negativity of making snap decisions for the benefits of ownership. On an average, potential customer views 14 products on an app while they get disinterested or distracted after viewing only 4 products on the desktop. Consumer habits include shopping mobile while watching TV (58%) or while in cafe and on the move (17%). A big attraction to use mobile for e-commerce is in less time in transacting, as peak time for purchases is between 8 and 10 PM. Also, app users are two and a half times more likely to place a product in the cart for purchase. Conversions on mobile are heavily outperforming desktop computers.

But it would be wrong to assume that retailers can depend solely on mobile devices and m-commerce. The mobile ecosystem is still not sophisticated enough to support e-commerce to that extent. In figures, it accounts for only 11.4% of all e-commerce, which roughly accumulates to 5.9% of all retail. Hence, we can draw a conclusion that mobile commerce actually generates only 0.67% of all US retail. Pessimists are quick to point that majority of visits to online web commerce still come from desktop users. Mobile phones help bridge the gap between reality and the virtual space and the act of making a purchase actually takes place on multiple interfaces.

Criteo believes that consumers browse on one device, which is commonly a home or work desktop and confirming the purchase on their smartphones. On the other hand, the micro moments bring together the context, immediacy and intent in order to define the consumer’s willingness to buy a product. You will be looking for ways in which to attract the attention of the consumer and try to make them convert in the process of carrying out product searches. Statistics show that cross-device users are 20% more likely to complete their transaction on mobile phones than a normal user.

No single platform will be sufficient to produce a year-on-year growth of profits. Providing a good experience across all platforms is the key to success. Users now pay more attention to the appearance, utility and easiness of using a product. Consumers will be looking for ease of purchase and fulfillment of people’s greater need of personalization, better mobile security and hybrid shopping experience. E-commerce (particularly m-commerce) is going to play a major role in 2016. Businesses that will win in this dynamic landscape must put in place the best practices when it comes to mobile e-commerce that will help them fully capitalize on these changing technologies.

E-commerce, particularly m-commerce, is going to play

travel-image

Where did you go for your last vacation? How much did you enjoy the trip?

While thinking of the vacation reminds you of all the good times and experience you had there, you probably don’t remember all the hassles you had to go through to find the best deals and rates regarding travel and accommodation. I don’t blame you though; hotel and flight deals can be tricky as they get updated in real time and if you don’t know what you are doing, you are likely to end up paying a lot more than you normally should.

Here’s comes HolidayMe. This Dubai based travel startup raised $4 million last year, and since then have been growing at a tremendous rate. The most significant difference between HolidayMe and its competitors lie in HolidayMe’s ability to offer extreme customization for its users. As a user, you can create extremely customized travel plans that could include airport pickup and drop off, tourist activities, and hiring guides.

Instead of giving customers what is available, HolidayMe is ready to walk that extra mile to make things simpler and easier for the customers. They try and avoid the back and forth which is often associated with these holiday programs. Everything is automated and customers can ensure hotel bookings, travel arrangements, airport transfers and other things beforehand without having to run around and waste too much of time.

The founders, Geet Bhalla and Digvijay Pratap are both passionate travelers themselves. They realized that there is no platform or solution that integrates everything required for traveling under one roof, and decided to do one of their own. Starting with just 5 people in a small rowhouse in Dubai in 2013, HolidayMe has since then grown to a team with more than 100 members. Offering access to more than 300 cities, 8,000 tourism activities and 100,000 hotels worldwide, HolidayMe is definitely one of the most prmising startups in the tourism industry right now.

Middle east is one of the fastest growing tourism market in the world right now. Tourists have traditionally chosen travel agents to manage their tours, but startups like HolidayMe look forward to disrupting the market. HolidayMe have already launched an Arabic version of their site, and says they will release a few more exciting updates that will make travel planning even more exciting for their users.

At HolidayMe, you can create extremely customized

Paul-Ryan-Donald-Trump-AP-Getty

House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., left, and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, right. (Photos: AP/Getty Images)

House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., finally climbed aboard the Trump Train on Thursday, saying he would vote for presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump. The announcement, which came in the form of a column in the speaker’s hometown paper the Gazette, is one his office said amounts to an endorsement.

The two men and Republican leaders have had a tenuous relationship at times, with Speaker Ryan making the unprecedented move to denounce Trump’s proposal to temporarily ban Muslim migrants, a plan that led to the House voting to halt Syrian refugee program. Ryan was also the running mate for former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who has been one of the most vocal and unwelcome critics of the party’s choice for president.

But he ultimately touted his confidence in Mr. Trump’s willingness and ability to pass the “confident America” policy agenda, something Speaker Ryan has been developing since he became speaker of the GOP-controlled House of Representatives last fall.

Donald Trump and I have talked at great length about things such as the proper role of the executive and fundamental principles such as the protection of life. The list of potential Supreme Court nominees he released after our first meeting was very encouraging.

But the House policy agenda has been the main focus of our dialogue. We’ve talked about the common ground this agenda can represent. We’ve discussed how the House can be a driver of policy ideas. We’ve talked about how important these reforms are to saving our country. And we’ve talked about how, by focusing on issues that unite Republicans, we can work together to heal the fissures developed through the primary.

Through these conversations, I feel confident he [Mr. Trump] would help us turn the ideas in this agenda into laws to help improve people’s lives. That’s why I’ll be voting for him this fall.

In a tweet posted to social media following the submission, his office spokesman clarified Speaker Ryan’s intent.

“It’s no secret that he and I have our differences. I won’t pretend otherwise,” Speaker Ryan wrote. “And when I feel the need to, I’ll continue to speak my mind. But the reality is, on the issues that make up our agenda, we have more common ground than disagreement.”

House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., finally climbed

fdr_pearl_harbor

Democratic President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, left, gave his famous “Infamy Speech” shortly before Congress declared war on Japan on December 8, 1941, in response to the surprise morning attack on Pearl Harbor, right, on December 7, 1941.

Who is the worst President in U.S. history? No, regardless of polling data, the answer is not Barack Obama. Or even Jimmy Carter. Those guys are amateurs. At the bottom of the list is probably Woodrow Wilson, who gave us both the income tax and the Federal Reserve.

And he was a disgusting racist as well.

However, Wilson has some strong competition from Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who advocated and implemented policies that exacerbated the bad policies of Herbert Hoover and thus deepened and lengthened the Great Depression.

Best President Worst President Polls (Source: Quinnipiac University)

Today we’re going to look at a new example of FDR’s destructive statism. Something so malicious that he may actually beat Wilson for the prize of being America’s most worst Chief Executive.

Wilson, after all, may have given us the income tax. But Roosevelt actually proposed a top tax rate of 99.5 percent and then tried to impose a 100 percent tax rate via executive order! He was the American version of Francois Hollande.

These excerpts, from an article by Professor Burton Folsom of Hillsdale College, tell you everything you need to know.

Under Hoover, the top rate was hiked from 24 to 63 percent. Under Roosevelt, the top rate was again raised—first to 79 percent and later to 90 percent. In 1941, in fact, Roosevelt proposed a 99.5 percent marginal rate on all incomes over $100,000. “Why not?” he said when an adviser questioned him. After that proposal failed, Roosevelt issued an executive order to tax all income over $25,000 at the astonishing rate of 100 percent. Congress later repealed the order, but still allowed top incomes to be taxed at a marginal rate of 90 percent. …Elliott Roosevelt, the president’s son, conceded in 1975 that “my father may have been the originator of the concept of employing the IRS as a weapon of political retribution.”

Note that FDR also began the odious practice of using the IRS as a political weapon, something that tragically still happens today.

For more detail about Roosevelt’s confiscatory tax policy, here are some blurbs from a 2011 CBS News report.

When bombers struck on December 7, 1941, taxes were already high by historical standards. There were a dizzying 32 different tax brackets, starting at 10% and topping out at 79% on incomes over $1 million, 80% on incomes over $2 million, and 81% on income over $5 million. In April 1942, just a few short months after the attack, President Roosevelt proposed a 100% top rate. At a time of “grave national danger,” he argued, “no American citizen ought to have a net income, after he has paid his taxes, of more than $25,000 a year.” (That’s roughly $300,000 in today’s dollars). Roosevelt never got his 100% rate. However, the Revenue Act of 1942 raised top rates to 88% on incomes over $200,000. By 1944, the bottom rate had more than doubled to 23%, and the top rate reached an all-time high of 94%.

And here are some excerpts from a column that sympathized with FDR’s money grab.

FDR proposed a 100 percent top tax rate. …Roosevelt told Congress in April 1942, “no American citizen ought to have a net income, after he has paid his taxes, of more than $25,000 a year.” That would be about $350,000 in today’s dollars. …lawmakers would quickly reject FDR’s plan. Four months later, Roosevelt tried again. He repeated his $25,000 “supertax” income cap call in his Labor Day message. Congress shrugged that request off, too. FDR still didn’t back down. In early October, he issued an executive order that limited top corporate salaries to $25,000 after taxes. The move would “provide for greater equality in contributing to the war effort,” Roosevelt declared. …lawmakers…ended up attaching a rider repealing the order to a bill… FDR tried and failed to get that rider axed, then let the bill with it become law without his signature.

Regarding FDR’s infamous executive order, here are the relevant passages.

In order to correct gross inequities…, the Director is authorized to take the necessary action, and to issue the appropriate regulations, so that, insofar as practicable no salary shall be authorized under Title III, Section 4, to the extent that it exceeds $25,000 after the payment of taxes allocable to the sum in excess of $25,000.

And from the archives at the University of California Santa Barbara, here is what FDR wrote when Congress used a debt limit vote to slightly scale back the 100 percent tax rate.

First, from a letter on February 6, 1943.

…there is a proposal before the Ways and Means Committee to amend the Public Debt Bill by adding a provision which in effect would nullify the Executive Order issued by me under the Act of Oct. 2, 1942 (price and wage control), limiting salaries to $25,000 net after taxes. …It is my earnest hope that the Public Debt Bill can be passed without the addition of amendments not related to the subject matter of the bill.

And here are excerpts from another letter from FDR later that month.

When the Act of October 2, 1942, was passed, it authorized me to adjust wages or salaries whenever I found it necessary “to correct gross inequities…” Pursuant to this authority, I issued an Executive Order in which, among other things, it was provided that in order to correct gross inequities and to provide for greater equality in contributing to the war effort no salary should be authorized to the extent that it exceeds $25,000 net after the payment of taxes.

Even though Congress was overwhelmingly controlled by Democrats, there was resistance to FDR’s plan to confiscate all income.

So Roosevelt had a back-up plan.

If the Congress does not approve the recommendation submitted by the Treasury last June that a flat 100 percent supertax be imposed on such excess incomes, then I hope the Congress will provide a minimum tax of 50 percent, with steeply graduated rates as high as 90 percent. …If taxes are levied which substantially accomplish the purpose I have indicated, either in a separate bill or in the general revenue bill you are considering, I shall immediately rescind the section of the Executive Order in question.

And, sadly, Congress did approve much higher tax rates, not only on the so-called rich, but also on ordinary taxpayers.

Indeed, this was early evidence that tax hikes on the rich basically serve as a precedent for higher burdens on the middle class, something that bears keeping in mind when considering the tax plans of Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton (or, tongue in cheek, the Barack Obama flat tax).

Let’s close by considering why FDR pushed a confiscatory tax rate. Unlike modern leftists, he did have the excuse of fighting World War II.

But if that was his main goal, surely it was a mistake to push the top tax rate far beyond the revenue-maximizing level.

That hurt the economy and resulted in less money to fight Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.

So what motivated Roosevelt? According to Burton and Anita Folsom, it was all about class warfare.

Why “soak the rich” for 100 percent of their income (more or less) when they already face rates of 90 percent in both income and corporate taxes? He knew that rich people would shelter their income in foreign investments, tax-exempt bonds, or collectibles if tax rates were confiscatory. In fact, he saw it happen during his early New Deal years. When he raised the top rate to 79 percent in 1935, the revenue into the federal government from income taxes that year was less than half of what it was six years earlier when the top rate was 24 percent. …First, FDR, as a progressive, believed…that “swollen fortunes” needed to be taxed at punitive rates to redistribute wealth. In fact, as we can see, redistributing wealth was more important to FDR than increasing it. …Second, high taxes on the rich provided excellent cover for his having made the income tax a mass tax. How could a steelworker in Pittsburgh, for example, refuse to pay a new 24 percent tax when his rich factory owner had to pay more than 90 percent? Third, and possibly most important, class warfare was the major campaign strategy for FDR during his whole presidency. He believed he won votes when he attacked the rich.

In other words, FDR’s goal was fomenting resentment rather than collecting revenue. And there are leftists today who still have that attitude. Heck, there’s an entire political party with that mentality.

[mybooktable book=”global-tax-revolution-the-rise-of-tax-competition-and-the-battle-to-defend-it” display=”summary” buybutton_shadowbox=”true”]

Who is the worst president in U.S.

jobs-san-francisco-unemployment

A discouraged worker sits in an unemployment office in San Francisco. (Photo: Reuters)

The ADP National Employment Report conducted by payroll processing firm ADP said 173,000 people were added to private sector payrolls in May, missing the median forecast. April payrolls were revised higher by 10,000 to 166,000.

“Job creation appears to have slowed as we move further into 2016,” said Ahu Yildirmaz, VP and head of the ADP Research Institute. “Challenging global conditions affecting hiring at large companies and a tightening labor market for skilled workers are among the factors that may be contributing to the slowdown.”

Economists surveyed by Reuters had forecast the payroll processing firm’s report would show an increase of 175,000 jobs, with estimates ranging from 105,000 to 200,000. Further, with stagnant wages remaining a major problem for American workers and the overall U.S. economy, it is another disappointing month relating to the sectors creating the positions.

Goods-producing employment, which typically offers higher-paying jobs, fell by 1,000 jobs in the month of May after losing another 7,000 (revised) in April. The construction industry added 13,000 jobs, mirroring gains in the previous month.

Unfortunately, the manufacturing sector lost another 3,000 jobs after losing 10,000 the previous month. While the Institute for Supply Management’s gauge of national manufacturing activity hovered above contraction last month, regional data showed widespread contraction (as PPD previously reported).

Service-providing employment, which typically offers lower-paying jobs, rose by 175,000 jobs in May. That’s a slight increase over April’s upwardly revised 173,000, but the sector continues to disproportionately influence the headline jobs number in both the ADP National Employment Report and Labor Department report conducted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The ADP report indicates that professional/business services contributed 43,000 jobs, up from April’s upwardly revised 38,000. Trade/transportation/utilities increased by 28,000, up slightly from the 24,000 jobs added the previous month. Financial activities added 13,000.

“Job growth has moderated this spring as energy companies and manufacturers shed jobs,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody’s Analytics. “Retailers are also more circumspect in their hiring. Despite the recent slowdown, job growth remains strong enough to reduce underemployment.”

Since the Great Recession, and for the first time ever in U.S. history, more small businesses have gone out of business each year than not. They represent or account for roughly 70% of all jobs created in the U.S. economy.

In May, private sector payrolls for businesses with 49 or fewer employees increased by 76,000 jobs, down sharply from an upwardly revised 101,000 in April. Companies with 50-499 employees increased employment by 63,000, up from last month’s 39,000. Employment at large companies–or, those with 500 or more employees–increased by 34,000, up from April’s 25,000.

Companies with 500-999 employees added 11,000 and companies with over 1,000 employees added 24,000 this month.

The ADP National Employment Report is conducted in collaboration with Moody’s Analytics.

ADP National Employment Report payroll processing firm

People's Pundit Daily
You have %%pigeonMeterAvailable%% free %%pigeonCopyPage%% remaining this month. Get unlimited access and support reader-funded, independent data journalism.

Start a 14-day free trial now. Pay later!

Start Trial