Big govt, Economy & Investments, Politics

Democrats Vote to Double Minimum Wage

Forget a market-driven economy. The Democrat-led House just voted 231-199 to double the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour, with just six Democrats voting against the “Raise the Wage Act.” This bill itself will incrementally raise the minimum wage-the first increase in a decade, if passed-over the next seven years. Yet, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that 1.3 million people could lose their jobs, while other scenarios predict as many as 3.7 million could get a pink slip. Translation: redistribution of wealth never ends well.

Here’s more from Washington Examiner…

The Democrat-led House voted to raise the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour, more than double the current rate of $7.25, and the first proposed increase in a decade.

The legislation, approved 231 to 199, now goes to the Republican-led Senate, which is not expected to take it up. Six Democrats voted against the bill, while three Republicans voted in favor of it.

The bill, the Raise the Wage Act, would increase the minimum wage in increments over seven years.

The new wage floor was originally intended to be phased in over five years, but it was amended this week at the urging of centrist Democrats to have an extra year.


Big govt, Economy & Investments, Politics

O’Rourke Calls America’s Economy “Racist”

America is so racist that Beto thinks babies need a bailout. During a meet-and-greet in Iowa, 2020 contender Beto O’Rourke disputed claims that he’s a socialist, saying, “I consider myself a capitalist,” but then he went on to say that America’s capitalist economy is “racist.” Beto also acknowledged that “government intervention or policy alone” isn’t enough to address America’s “historic challenges” and what is “clearly an imperfect, unfair, unjust, and racist capitalist economy.” One solution he put forth appears to be borrowed from fellow Democratic candidate Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ): to give infants a “a baby bond” as a way to address the wealth, income, and opportunity disparity “between white America and black America.” In other words, Beto endorses another government handout. Apparently, federal entitlements should now also be part of the cradle-to-grave nanny state.

Here’s more from Politico…

Beto O’Rourke said Friday that America’s capitalist economy is “racist,” while he praised a proposal to give infants so-called baby bonds to address systemic inequalities.

Responding to a question at a meet-and-greet in Iowa about whether he is a socialist, O’Rourke reiterated that “I consider myself a capitalist” and said capitalism is necessary to meet myriad “historic challenges” facing the country.

“It won’t be government intervention or policy alone that makes it possible,” he said.

However, O’Rourke added at a coffee shop here, “Having said that, it is clearly an imperfect, unfair, unjust and racist capitalist economy.”

On Friday, O’Rourke lamented “the disparity in wealth accumulation between white America and black America” and spoke favorably about a proposal to give infants a “baby bond” of hundreds of thousands of dollars at birth — mirroring a bill Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) has introduced.


Big govt, Economy & Investments, Politics

Kamala on Green New Deal: “It’s Not About a Cost”

Poor serfs rejoice! Democratic 2020 contender Kamala Harris (D-CA) says cost is NO PROBLEM, or at least that’s her line when it comes to forcing “Green New Deal” insanity on America. Of course, her argument hinges on poor comprehension of Economics 101 replete with misuse of such concepts as “externalities” and return on investment. Harris also ignored CNN’s John King when he asked about China, which will take full advantage to run circles around us. Instead of answering, she deflected with: “What’s the return on investment? People in the private sector understand this really well. It’s not about a cost. It’s about an investment.” In typical fashion, Leftists view “cost” (i.e., taxpayer dollars) as “investment” so long as it’s someone else’s money. On the bright side, at least she’s not lying about “affordable” as a certain former POTUS did.

Here’s more form PJ Media…

It must be nice to live your life not having to worry how much something costs. Of course, you would have to be fabulously wealthy.

Or a liberal Democratic senator from California with access to an unlimited amount of taxpayer funds.

Or, in Kamala Harris’s case, both.

Spending other people’s money can be fun. It can also be politically profitable.

Just ask Senator Harris.

Fox News:

“There’s no question we have to be practical. But being practical also recognizes that climate change is an existential threat to us as human beings,” Harris began. “Being practical recognizes that greenhouse gas emissions are threat to our air, and threatening our planet. And that it is well within our capacity as human beings to change our behaviors in a way that we can reduce its effect. That’s practical. Of course we can afford it.”


Big govt, Economy & Investments, Politics

AOC Caught Lying About “Government Takeover” aka “Green New Deal”

Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) jumped headfirst into her utopian plan to destroy America in the name of climate change, now known as the “Green New Deal,” and she had some tough words for critics on the Right, saying they were trying to “mischaracterize” her impossibly ambitious scheme: “…the Right does try to mischaracterize what we’re doing as though it’s like some kind of massive government takeover.” Then on NPR she responded to the question whether or not this requires a massive government takeover: “It does. Yeah, I have no problem saying that.” It may be time for a Democrat intervention.

Here’s more from The Daily Wire…

Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) lied about her “Green New Deal” on Thursday, saying that it is not a “massive government takeover” hours after admitting the exact opposite.

During an interview on MSNBC, Ocasio-Cortez criticized the political Right, saying that the Right was trying to “mischaracterize” her plan.

“One way that the Right does try to mischaracterize what we’re doing as though it’s like some kind of massive government takeover,” Ocasio-Cortez said. “Uh, obviously what we’re trying to do is, well obviously it’s not that because what we’re trying to do is release the investments from the federal government to mobilize those resources across the country.”

Yet this morning, during a radio interview with NPR, Ocasio-Cortez said the exact opposite.


Big govt, Economy & Investments, Politics

AOC’s “Green New Deal” More Laughable

Nuclear energy. Airplanes. Cows. All are on socialist Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s (D-NY) socialist wonderland hit list. The “to-do” wish list is possibly even more absurd and unrealistic. It includes “upgrading all existing buildings in the United States” and guaranteeing economic security for those “unwilling” to work. We kid you not. The vehicle: AOC’s “Green New Deal.” Even more laughable is that AOC has put this pipe dream on a “10-year national mobilization” timetable to achieve. If you want a preview, just look to Venezuela.

Here’s more from PJ Media…

On Thursday, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) unveiled her much-vaunted “Geen New Deal,” and it’s even worse than you expected. Among other absurd things, it calls for abolishing cows, nuclear energy, and airplanes, “upgrading all existing buildings in the United States,” guaranteeing “high-quality health care” for all Americans, and spreading the Green New Deal to other countries. Oh, and it isn’t even technically a bill.

Ocasio-Cortez leaked a copy of the “Green New Deal” to National Public Radio (NPR), and her slipshod work in progress is a resolution. Rather than making law, the resolution states the “sense of the House of Representatives.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) slammed the proposal Wednesday, saying, “The green dream or whatever they call it, nobody knows what it is, but they’re for it right?”

The resolution does not lay out specific plans but calls on Congress to “create a Green New Deal,” which will consist of a “10-year national mobilization” yet to be determined.


Big govt, Economy & Investments, Politics

House Dems Gear up for Climate Fight

House Democrats are ready to hit the ground running next week when they officially take control of the lower chamber in the new session, and they’re starting with a new and novel Select Committee on the Climate Crisis. The committee will be led by Representative Kathy Castor (D-FL), presently a member of the House Energy Committee, and will focus on “reducing pollution, growing green jobs, and expanding climate-related national security concerns.” Nancy Pelosi explained, “The American people have demanded action to combat the climate crisis, which threatens our public health, our economy, our national security and the whole of God’s creation.” In what may be a momentary instance of brilliance, socialist-elect Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) retorted that the panel “sounds about as useful as a screen door on a submarine.” That May be a bit too generous.

Here’s more from PJ Media…

WASHINGTON — House Democrats are preparing to take control of the lower chamber next week by forming a new Select Committee on the Climate Crisis — but some members of the caucus aren’t happy.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), the caucus’ choice for the next speaker of the House, today announced the appointment of Rep. Kathy Castor (D-Fla.), a member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, to lead the select panel.

“She will bring great experience, energy and urgency to the existential threat of the climate crisis,” Pelosi said in a statement. “This committee will be critical to the entire Congress’s mission to respond to the urgency of this threat, while creating the good-paying, green jobs of the future.”

She called Castor, who has served in Congress since 2007, “a proven champion for public health and green infrastructure, who deeply understands the scope and seriousness of this threat.”


Big govt, Economy & Investments, Politics

AOC’s Green New Deal Weakens U.S. Against China, Russia

HotAir’s Jazz Shaw is crying foul over congresswoman-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s “Green New Deal” for being both a naive pipe dream and also wholly devoid of energy security strategy. Under her “deal,” U.S. energy strategy would be moved as closely as possible to using 100 percent renewable energy. The U.S.’s dominant fossil fuel and nuclear power industries would be abandoned completely. Except here’s the catch: it depends on obtaining “rare-earth metals,” which are in short supply and mostly under the control of Russia and China. So, short of the U.S. colonizing massive asteroids orbiting the solar system in the near future, AOC’s plan would essentially hand over control of the globe to communists. Brilliant idea…or maybe that was the plan in the first place.

Here’s more from Hot Air…

Every time you see congresswoman-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez showing up in the news, she almost always begins preaching the “Green New Deal” that she spoke of endlessly on the campaign trail. Under this plan, we would supposedly move the United States to 100% renewable energy (or very close to it) while shutting down the fossil fuel industry entirely. It’s a progressive wish list item which helped her gain traction throughout the midterms.

But just how “green” is this deal? There are a number of problems with it. For one thing, it shuts down nuclear power (which produces no greenhouse gases, by the way). That’s an element of the “deal” being pushed heavily by Bernie Sanders. Of course, when they shut down all nuclear energy in his home state they wound up having to burn oil to keep the power grid alive last winter. Super plan there, Bernie.

But the bigger crisis we’re looking at with the Green New Deal has to do with our ability to actually manufacture all the equipment required to generate that kind of energy. A new report from Leiden University in the Netherlands reveals one factor that progressives don’t seem to have considered.


Big govt, Economy & Investments, Politics

CA Has Highest Poverty Rate in Nation

California’s socialist dogma has successfully bankrupted this once prosperous state according to newly released data from the U.S. Census Bureau. The report clocks California at a 19% poverty rate (2017), encompassing 7.5 million of its residents despite a 13.9% national poverty average. The redistribution of wealth by liberals in the Golden State appears to be failing in improving the quality of life, and it’s a trend seen in other predominately blue states, including New York, Oregon, Nevada, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, Delaware, Connecticut, New Jersey, and Massachusetts, where poverty rates are likewise above the national average.

Here’s more from The Daily Wire…

California is the most liberal state in the nation. It’s also the most poverty-ridden state in the nation.

Newly released data from the U.S. Census Bureau put California’s 2017 poverty rate at 19% — or 7.5 million state residents. That was well above the national average, which was 13.9%.

The Bureau uses a formula called the Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM), which “extends the official poverty measure by taking account of many of the government programs designed to assist low-income families and individuals that are not included in the official poverty measure,” the Bureau says in its report. The formula also factors in cost of living for different regions.

“There were 16 states plus the District of Columbia for which SPM rates were higher than official poverty rates, 18 states with lower rates, and 16 states for which the differences were not statistically significant,” said the Bureau.

Interestingly, the states where the SPM was higher than the official rate are mostly liberal: California, New York, Oregon, Nevada, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts.



Big govt, Economy & Investments, Politics

Russia Ready For Economic Cold War

Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev was up front Friday, announcing that the former Soviet Union is ready to wage “economic war” against America should President Trump impose tougher sanctions. “I would like not to comment on the talks about future sanctions, but there is one thing I can say: if measures like a ban on banking activities or the use of this or that currency follows, this can be clearly be described as a declaration of an economic war,” Medvedev said. He then went on to threaten a response by ‘economic, political, or other means’. It’s the first direct threat the U.S. has received from Russia since President Trump’s inauguration. But let’s not hold it against them. They’ve gotten used to working with a push-over in the White House during the previous two terms.

Here’s more from Washington Examiner…

Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev warned Friday that he is prepared to wage “economic war” with America if the Trump administration tries to impose tougher sanctions against his country.

“I would like not to comment on the talks about future sanctions, but there is one thing I can say: if measures like a ban on banking activities or the use of this or that currency follows, this can be clearly be described as a declaration of an economic war,” Medvedev said, according to the state-run Tass.

“And this war will have to be responded – by economic, political and, if necessary, other means,” he said. “And our American partners should realize this.”

The Trump administration this week imposed new sanctions against Russia in response to a chemical weapons attack on British soil that the West believes was sponsored by Russia.


Economy & Investments, International

Art of the Deal: China Flinches First in Trade War

Last week President Trump made good on promises to force the Chinese into a position of better trade balance after years of currency manipulation and tariffs on US exports.

But the Dow dropped like a rock after fears that US exporters would be hit hard with the negative effects of a trade war with China.

Then came Monday and China flinched. Rather than responding with reciprocal import tariffs on US products, Chinese leaders offered to negotiate better trade deals to avoid a massive fight.

That was likely the entire motive behind Trump’s announcement in the first place.

And the Chinese bit hard.

Here’s more from Newsmax…

Following Friday’s massive losses on Wall Street amid reports of a trade war between the United States and China, the market bounced back Monday after China signaled it is willing to negotiate better trade deals with the Trump administration.

The Dow’s point increase was the largest single-day gain since 2008. The Financial Times reported early Monday morning that China is offering to buy more U.S.-made semiconductors to help reduce the $375 billion merchandise trade surplus it has with America.

Gordon Chang, an expert on North Korea and China, told Newsmax TV Americans shouldn’t worry about a trade war anyway because it would be a one-sided affair.

“Everyone has been worried about a trade war, but we shouldn’t because we hold most of the high cards,” Chang said. “And the Chinese really have no way to win a trade war with the United States if they face a determined American president.”