A Redistribution Campaign

Charles Krauthammer is really on fire in the Washington Post:

…Obama introduced a shiny new twist — the Buffett Rule, a minimum 30 percent rate for millionaires. Sounds novel. But it’s a tired replay of the alternative minimum tax, originally created in 1969 to bring to heel all of 155 underpaying fat cats. Following the fate of other such do-goodism, the AMT then metastasized into a $40 billion monster that today entraps millions of middle-class taxpayers.

There isn’t even a pretense that the Buffett Rule will do anything for economic growth or job creation (other than provide lucrative work for the sharp tax lawyers who will be gaming the new system for the very same rich). Which should not surprise. Back in 2008, Obama was asked if he would still support raising the capital-gains tax rate (the intended effect of the Buffett Rule) if this would decrease government revenue.

Obama said yes. In the name of fairness.

This is redistribution for its own sake — the cost be damned…

[Obama] Can’t run on his record… His platform is fairness, wrapped around a plethora of little things, one mini-industrial policy after another — the conceit nicely encapsulated by his proclamation that “I will not cede the wind or solar or battery industry to China or to Germany.” As if he can command these industries into existence. As if Washington funding a thousand Solyndras will make solar economically viable.

As usual… adding my thoughts to to someone as intelligent as Krauthammer will likely do a disservice to him so … I wont.

sad truth…

unfortunately… I think this guy might be on to something:

The secret shame of the conservative base is that they’ve internalized the enemy’s secular cosmopolitan value set and status hierarchy—hence this obsession with the idea that somewhere, someone who went to Harvard might be snickering at them.

And if that wasn’t convincing enough…

Or consider the study Ryan Sager highlighted a while back, showing that many SUV owners don’t merely think their choice of vehicles is harmless or morally neutral, but positively virtuous. Apparently the “moralistic critique of their consumption choices readily inspired Hummer owners to adopt the role of the moral protagonist who defends American national ideals.” Note two things here.  First, this is classic ressentiment: It’s not just that SUVs are great in themselves because they somehow “embody” some set of ideals. They’re goodjust because they symbolize an inversion of the “anti-American” values of critics. Second, think what it reveals that people feel the need to construct these kinds of absurd rationalizations—to make their cars heroic rather than simply denying that they do much harm. It betrays an incredible sensitivity, not to excessive taxes or regulations on the vehicles, but to the feeling of being judged.

 

SOTU Response

Mitch Daniels had a compelling response to the President’s State of the Union address:

“In three short years, an unprecedented explosion of spending, with borrowed money, has added trillions to an already unaffordable national debt.  And yet, the President has put us on a course to make it radically worse in the years ahead.  The federal government now spends one of every four dollars in the entire economy; it borrows one of every three dollars it spends.  No nation, no entity, large or small, public or private, can thrive, or survive intact, with debts as huge as ours.

“The President’s grand experiment in trickle-down government has held back rather than sped economic recovery.  He seems to sincerely believe we can build a middle class out of government jobs paid for with borrowed dollars.  In fact, it works the other way: a government as big and bossy as this one is maintained on the backs of the middle class, and those who hope to join it.

 

WSJ Magazine

Lets forget about the customer for a minute… I don’t mean that in an arrogant way.  We believe that great brands don’t chase customers, customers chase great brands.

 

At the Gap, someone would try to do polo shirts with a zipper.  I’d say, ‘That’s just wrong.’  And they never sold.  You can take a polo and distress it, do it in new colors, but it’s still a polo.  If you destroy its integrity, it’s not better, just different.

- Gary Friedman in the June 2011 issue of Wall Street Journal Magazine.

WSJ Mag

Architecture is about aging well, about precision and authenticity…  There is much more to the success of a building than what you can see.

- Annabelle Selldorf, in the May 2011 edition of Wall Street Journal Magizine

 

Quote of the Day

The Wall Street Journal had an article on Friday discussing Obama’s declining approval numbers.  I think this quote just about wraps up the reality of the situation:

“As a Democrat and as a woman, I am disappointed in him [Obama],” said poll respondent Melissa Riner, a 42-year-old law clerk from Mesa, Ariz

Referring to the oil spill, Ms. Riner added, “I don’t think he’s handling it. He doesn’t seem to be doing anything. He just talks.”

via Confidence Waning in Obama, U.S. Outlook – WSJ.com.