Tag Archives: Spending

Barack Obama is the worst President ever

Bill Whittle explains. (7 minutes)

This is not to mention his record on abortion – the most pro-abortion President ever. Or the election of hardline Muslim extremists in Egypt.

The man is a catastrophic failure.

Who gives more to charity? Religious people or secular people?

Barbara Kay explains in the National Post.

Full text:

No matter where you live, charity begins at home. But, as we learn from the Fraser Institute’s newly released annual report on charitable giving, the question of where charity ends depends on where you live. For the 13th year in a row, Quebec has come out on the bottom of the Fraser Institute’s charity scale.

Of the provinces, Manitobans are the biggest givers, with 26% of those filing taxes donating to a registered charity, and 0.89% of total income being donated. Saskatchewan and Prince Edward Island tied for second place. Ontario, Canada’s largest province, tied Alberta for fourth place with 24% of its tax filers donating 0.74% of total income to registered charities.

And then there’s Quebec. Oh dear. Only 21.7 % of Quebecers claimed donations to registered charities, and gave only 0.30% of their total income. On average dollar value donated, Alberta led with $2,112. And Quebec limped in at $606, half the national average of $1,399.

Lest Albertans and Manitobans get swelled heads, they should know that no Canadian provinces are a patch on the Americans. Almost 27% of American tax filers donated to registered charities, compared with 23% of Canadians. Countrywide, Americans gave 1.32% of their aggregate personal income to charity, more than double the 0.64% that Canadians gave.

What’s up with these statistics? Aren’t we supposed to be kinder and gentler than Americans?

Well, one clue to deconstructing the Canadian figures, and in particular Quebec’s lousy performance, comes from the news release: “Utah was by far the most generous jurisdiction in North America, with 33.4% of tax filers donating 3.09% of the total income earned in the state, nearly three-and-a-half times the share of aggregate income donated by Canada’s top province (0.89%), Manitoba.”

Why? Here’s a clue: Mormons constitute about 60% of Utah’s population. Mormons give a lot to charity, in part because of their tithing system. And, countrywide, it’s not just Mormons. The United States is a religious country – and research tells us that observantly religious people generally give more to charity (both in time and money) than non-religious people. Canada’s secularism makes it a less generous place, no matter what we tell ourselves about the virtues of being Canadian.

Another well-observed sociological phenomenon is that big government tends to discourage charity – both because people have less money to give to charity in high-tax jurisdictions, and because coddled nanny-state citizens believe that taking care of the poor huddled masses has become government’s job. Statism dampens the impulse to be generous at an individual level.

Quebec scores high on both secularism and nanny-statism. In fact, it is the least religious of the Canadian provinces (and in fact the most militantly anti-religious). Quebec also is the most statist (and highly taxed) of the provinces. Quebecers figure their taxes are taking care of all the social problems, or should be taking care of them, and it is therefore no surprise that they are the least likely to take responsibility for the afflictions of others.

Taking personal responsibility for alleviating the sufferings of others is the mark of a mature individual. Statism tends to suffocate the blessing of empathy, and thereby promotes civic immaturity. One more in a long litany of reasons for working to bring down the size of government.

These findings echo Arthur Brooks’ study on who gives most. Religious people give more than secular people, and that just stands to reason, given that the former generally takes morality to be objective, and the latter generally takes it to be subjective.

Michele Bachmann takes on NBC leftist David Gregory on Meet the Press

From Newsbusters. (14 minutes)

Here’s the partial transcript:

MICHELE BACHMANN: When I came into Congress in January of 2007, the country was $8.67 trillion in debt; today it’s $15 trillion. Next year it’ll be $17 trillion. We’re acting like Greece and like Italy, and that’s what people are frustrated with. They want us to act like a first world nation, not like what President Barack Obama’s doing. He’s acting like we’re a banana republic. We’ve got to get our act together and stop spending money that we don’t have.

DAVID GREGORY: You’re not – I mean, you’re seriously calling the United States acting like a banana republic compared to the sort of debt issues that, that the Eurozone countries have had?

BACHMANN: What, what I’m doing is I’m – what I’m doing is saying that what – the decisions that Barack Obama is making is acting like a banana republic. It’s absolutely irresponsible what President Obama is doing to get behind measures to, to increase spending to such a level that we’re going into debt $1.5 trillion every year. This compares to President George Bush. Back in 2007, our debt for the entire year was $160 billion.

GREGORY: Congresswoman, that just misstates the record.

BACHMANN: Well, we topped that just in the month of November alone.

GREGORY: I mean, the Bush presidency, the-

BACHMANN: There’s no comparison. We’re talking-

GREGORY: -the, the debt – wait a minute, Congresswoman.

BACHMANN: David, let me just finish.

GREGORY: No, wait a minute. I just want to stop you for accuracy.

BACHMANN: Let me just finish. We’re talking-

GREGORY: For accuracy, Congresswoman.

BACHMANN: -we’re talking 10 times.

GREGORY: For accuracy, the debt exploded under the Bush administration.

BACHMANN: For accuracy. For accuracy. David, David, then, then let me finish. Do a comparison. I agree with you that there was too much money that was spent under George Bush.  But for the year 2007, the debt for the year was $160 billion. The debt for this last year was about $1 1/2 trillion. That’s almost 10 times more in debt than George Bush. And just for the month of – for the month of, I think it’s November of this year, it was more than the entire year for 2007.  So there’s no question that the debt has just skyrocketed under, under President Obama in comparison to George Bush.

GREGORY: Let me just point out, I don’t want to appear to be cutting you off. Sometimes the satellite delay can exacerbate that, so I wanted to make sure you could finish your point.

Can you imagine that DAVID GREGORY doesn’t even know what the deficit graph looks like?

Here it is:

Last Republican budget was in 2007
Last Republican budget was in 2007

The last Republican budget was 2007. The deficit was 160 billion. It’s almost TEN TIMES that under Obama. The Democrats took over the House and Senate in the 2006 mid-term elections. Doesn’t David Gregory know that? Does anyone in the mainstream media know ANYTHING?