Monthly Archives: October 2010

Commentary

Obama’s reversal of the Bush tax cuts would cut your take-home pay

1 Comment

Investors Business Daily explains what would happen if Obama allows the Bush tax cuts to expire. (H/T Ponder With Us)

Excerpt:

Professor Michael Graetz of Columbia University recently estimated in the Wall Street Journal that letting the tax cuts expire will cost the U.S. economy $10 billion a month in added withholding from paychecks.

Goldman Sachs economist Alec Phillips estimates letting the Bush cuts expire could slash “nearly 10 percentage points” from disposable income growth in the first quarter of next year, and nearly two percentage points from GDP in the first half.

With GDP now at a tad above $14 trillion, the impact could be $280 billion or more in the first six months alone.

In short, the higher taxes could very well push us back into recession — at a time when the economy is struggling under 9.6% unemployment with little if any private-sector job growth.

What’s most worrisome is what it will do to the working taxpayer. His or her take-home pay is about to fall, leaving noticeably less to spend and save.

A married couple without children and an annual income of $80,000 would have an added $221 taken from their paycheck every two weeks, the Bloomberg report says, quoting the H&R Block Tax Institute. That jumps to $558 for couples bringing in $240,000.

Data from the Tax Policy Center show even those with modest family incomes would take a hit. For example, a couple with income of $60,000 and four children can expect to pay $130 more every two weeks to Uncle Sam. It doesn’t get much better for those who make just $40,000. They’ll find about $108 more withheld every other week.

Obama likes to spread the wealth around. You don’t mind, do you? He knows so much better than you do how to spread your money around.

News

Does Mark Driscoll know anything about economics, politics and foreign policy?

45 Comments

UPDATE: Welcome visitors from Peter Lumpkins. Thanks for the link, Peter.

I find this article on religion and politics by shallow, trendy metrosexual pop star pastor Mark Driscoll to be extremely disturbing.

Excerpt:

People are longing for Jesus, and tragically left voting for mere presidential candidates. For those whose candidate wins today there will be some months of groundless euphoric faith in that candidate and the atoning salvation that their kingdom will bring. But, in time, their supporters will see that no matter who wins the presidency, they are mere mortals prone to sin, folly, and self-interest just like all the other sons of Adam and daughters of Eve. To help extend naïve false hope as long as possible, a great enemy will be named and demonized as the one who is hindering all of the progress to atone for our sins and usher in our kingdom. If the Democrats win it will be the rich, and if the Republicans win it will be the terrorists. This diversionary trick is as old as Eve who blamed her sin on Satan rather than repenting. The lie is that it’s always someone else’s fault and we’re always the victim of sinners and never the sinner. Speaking of repentance, sadly, no matter who wins there will be no call to personal repentance of our own personal sins which contributes to cultural suffering and decline such as our pride, gluttony, covetousness, greed, indebtedness, self-righteousness, perversion, and laziness.

And, in four years we’ll do it all again and pretend that this time things will be different. Four years after that, we’ll do it yet again. And, we’ll continue driving around this cul de sac until Jesus returns, sets up his throne, and puts an end to folly once and for all.

From this regrettable post, I understand that Mark Driscoll thinks that Christians should not try to assess which party best promotes policies that will promote liberty and goodness in the world. And that they should not take seriously their duty to vote, and to convince others to inform themselves and vote. Instead, I understand that he thinks that it doesn’t really matter who wins. Democrats, Republicans – who cares?

What does it mean when someone says that it doesn’t matter who wins elections?

  • It means that the pro-life and pro-abortion positions are equivalent
  • It means that traditional marriage and same-sex marriage are equivalent
  • It means that intact families and single-mother families are equivalent
  • It means that Iran and Israel are equally threatening to world peace
  • It means that North Korea and the United States are equally free
  • It means that Zimbabwe and Canada are equally prosperous
  • It means that sex education and abstinence education are equivalent
  • It means that public schools and homeschooling are equivalent
  • It means that it doesn’t matter whether Darwinism is taught as dogma or taught critically in schools
  • It means that it doesn’t matter whether there is another terrorist attack and millions of Americans are killed
  • It means that it doesn’t matter whether people have jobs or enough money left over after taxes
  • It means that it doesn’t matter whether tax dollars go to fund abortion, ESCR, IVF or sex changes
  • It means that it doesn’t matter whether religious liberty is limited by repressive fascist policies
  • It means that it doesn’t matter whether Iran nukes Israel back to the stone age
  • It means that it doesn’t matter whether poor children have the choice to go to a better school
  • It means that it doesn’t matter whether people die while waiting in line for health care
  • and so on…

Back in the days of slavery, it wouldn’t have mattered to such a person whether the slavers or the abolitionists won the election.

Avoid Mark Driscoll at all costs on these political and economic issues – stick with Wayne Grudem on politics/economics. Grudem actually knows about how reality functions. He studies the Bible and then he studies how the world actually works. Unlike Driscoll. Driscoll needs to spend less time on his hair and clothes, and more time reading actual books on economics, social policy and military affairs.

Here is my previous article about how Mark Driscoll minimizes women’s responsibility for their own poor choices.

News

How mistrust of men prevents fathers from parenting daughters

9 Comments

Stuart Schneiderman explains how the war against men has made it harder for fathers to parent their daughters.

Excerpt:

In today’s America a man knows that he can be sued for workplace sexual harassment if he looks at a woman in the wrong way, if he makes a sexually suggestive remark, or if he touches her inappropriately.

He also knows that children, especially female children, are strictly off limits. Speak to his daughter in the wrong way and a man can find himself charged with child molestation. Even when the charges are false, it is very, very difficult to restore a reputation tarnished by the suspicion of child abuse.

It isn’t easy being a man in America today. The culture has made men into a threat, into the enemy of women and girls.

Not everywhere, not for everyone, but enough of the time for men to be wary in their dealings with female children.

The attacks on men, the stigmatization of men, the distrust about their motives have created a cultural miasma. If you were a father living in such a culture, would you want to talk about sex with your preteen daughter?

The toxic environment produced by the war against men has made men more likely to shut down lines of communication with their daughters.

Then, these same men are criticized for being too reticent, for not opening up, and for not expressing themselves.

The culture strongly encourages girls to discuss intimate matters only with other women. Who but a woman would understand a woman’s experience?

Of course, this deprives girls of a good relationship with the most important man in their lives. And it also tells them that the only people they should listen to are people who are just like them.

His post was linked by Instapundit and Helen Reynolds. It’s a great post. Some women are so busy bad-mouthing men that they don’t realize that men shut down and withdraw from family life unless they get encouragement and respect. Men rise to the expectations of women.