Links to Our Latest Articles
- Economics for Politicians Lesson 2: Introduction to Microeconomics - Why Prices Matter
- Economics for Politicians - Lesson 1: It's not Your Money!
- Memorial Day 2021 - Why They Died
- Don’t Give Your Money to the Left!
- A Guide to Charitable Giving for the Political Right - Our Constitution Requires a Virtuous and Morally Strong People
- I Am Practicing Self-Censorship in US Now, Something I Didn't Do Even in the CCP's Labor Camp
- Purple Mountain Majesties and Amber Waves of Grain: The Story of America the Beautiful
- The Law Perverted - Bastiat and Present Circumstances
- How the Statue of Liberty Got Built
- Domestic Tranquility and the Constitution
- Remove the Washington Monument - Why Stop There?
- Structural Racism
- D.C. Sights for Tea Partiers
- The Forgotten Black Patriots of the Revolutionary War
- What Is The Electoral College
- The Odd Behavior of Colin Kaepernick & Company
- They Completed the Founders’ Vision - A Monumental Achievement
- Face-Off: MacArthur, Eisenhower, and Patton vs. The ‘Bonus Army’ of the Great Depression
- "If We Can Save One Life!"- What Happens When You Make the Perfect the Enemy of the Good
- Michael Moore's "Planet of the Humans"
- The Midnight Patriotism of Paul Revere
- No photo needed to vote in Virginia
- Fairfax Don’t Need No Education - When Equality Becomes the Enemy of the Good
- Fake News or Just Plain Lies
- Actually, the Corona Virus Is Exactly Why We Shouldn’t Do the Green New Deal
- This is the Crisis that Every Citizen Can Not Let Go to Waste
- Gun Owners, We Support You!
- It’s Not Fair, Change the Rules - Why We Have the Electoral College
- Capitalism is Books
- The Three-Fifths Clause
- The Ruling Class and the Unruly Class
- We the Deplorables
- Frederick Douglass to Governor Blackface - Don’t Take My Guns
- The Grasshopper and the Ants (a fable)
- Don’t Drink the Kool-Aid - Seeing Through the Fake Narratives of the Left
- Three reasons socialism will never succeed
- The Problem with ‘Red Flag’ Laws
- African Americans Don’t Need Reparations. We Need To Take Responsibility For Our Lives
- America, America, I Love You, Let Me Count the Ways
- Social Security and Medicare Still in Actuarial Deficit on a Long-Term Basis
- Do the rich pay their fair share?
- Are You a Tea Partier and Don’t Know It?
- The Rhetoric of Ronald Reagan
- Even a Bad Investor Can Beat Social Security
- Celebrating Freedom in a Country That Seems to Be Throwing It Away
- Making the World Safe for Democracy – One Therapy Dog at a Time
- A Graphical Update on the National Debt
- In a Perfect World, the Government Would Protect Our Rights, But....
- Why I Oppose a 'Single-Payer' or 'Public Option' Medical Plan
- Leftist Battlecry: “No Borders! No Walls! No USA at All!”
- Enough with the Government Dependency, Already!
- What If You Had No Right to Life, Liberty, or Property?
- Insider Reveals How the Media Distort the News on Guns
- U.S. Becoming More Economically Free, and That’s a Good Thing
- Why Do We Have the Second Amendment Right to Bear Arms?
- MORE - try the search box on the homepage
Economics for Politicians Lesson 2: Introduction to Microeconomics - Why Prices Matter
PERMALINK
Welcome to lesson II of "Economics for Politicians"! In the first lesson we explained who the government's money belongs to (the people), and now we move on to Lesson 2 - a basic introduction to Microeconomic Theory. Hey! Stop - don't get up and leave! Contrary to what you may have heard economics in not necessarily boring, and this lesson will be a huge help in your crafting policy that will get you re-elected!
Ah, I knew that magic word would get your attention. As I was about to say, the most fundamental building block of understanding economics is the classic supply and demand curve. You probably remember seeing something like this in one of the classes you slept through early on in your undergraduate days:
OK, we've put a bunch of points on a graph and plotted them out. So what does all of this mean? Like any problem it's easier to understand if you break it down piece by piece. Let's make the discussion more interesting by talking about a good or product that you will find interesting - bottles of whiskey. Back in the early days of your career before you had lobbyists to provide you with bottles of your favorite blend, you had to actually pay for them with your own money. What drove your decision as to what to buy? Probably lots of factors, such as the quality of the brand, how far you may have had to travel to get it, and of course, cost. To simplify this lesson we'll use a term that factors out externalities, or what economists call caterus parebus, "All other things being equal" to only focus on price. Assuming that every store carries your favorite whiskey where you buy and how much will only depend on price for now.
Let's assume that the local shop has ten bottles of whiskey on the shelf, and they are giving them away for free! If it's your favorite brand, it's a no brainer - you take all ten. Now let's say the price goes up to $10 per bottle - still a very good deal, and these could make great stocking stuffers for your cohorts. But you don't want to or can not buy all ten bottles, so you buy only nine. When the price increases to $20 you buy only eight, and so on until the price reaches $100 where you decide that whiskey is too expensive for your tastes right now and you decide to buy some vintagely challenged wine instead. Plot all of the points, and you get a demand curve that looks something like this:
Keep in mind that these curves will not perfectly predict your buying behavior, but this is a short lesson so we have to speak on a general level. On a large enough scale and when you compile enough actual data from real world examples, these graphs hold pretty true to actual behavior.
Now let's look at the other side of the aisle, the supply curve. Where as we just looked at whiskey from the buyer's perspective, the supply side looks from the seller's perspective. If you are selling your whiskey you are willing to supply more if you will get paid more for it. If you have your ten bottles of whiskey to sell at $100 per bottle you will gladly sell all ten! Now as we drop the price you are not willing to sell as many since you can not make as much profit on each bottle. Your willingness to sell them drops until we get to giving them away for free, and you are unwilling to offer any on your store's shelves. Plot the points and you get something like this:
An obvious question is that if you're only able to charge $40 per bottle why you would order ten in the first place when you are only willing to sell four of them? The answer is that your awareness of this lower market price leads you to only order four bottles since more are not worth your trouble. Consider this your introduction to why price controls are an excellent way to cause shortages and rationing.
Plot both lines together and we see a magical point where both lines meet - buyers and seller have found the point where we have maximized how many will sell with how many will buy, also known as equilibrium - voila!
Going back to a strictly buyer's perspective, when the price of a good increases less of it gets consumed, while as the price drops more of it gets consumed. To some degree you already understand this - think of when you pass "sin taxes" to encourage people to consume less of goods that they want but that groups who fork over truckloads of cash into your reelection campaign you deem a bad choice, such as cigarettes or oil. On the flip side, when you want people to consume more of a good that they would not willingly choose at the market price you introduce subsidies to bring costs down and increase demand, such as with electric cars or "green" energy.
Now you see how your decisions and the laws you impose on us help to modify people's behavior and distort marketplaces where prices are the measurement of what people will freely choose to buy or not buy. Think of the sum of all of the legislation that you pass designed to affect markets as the biggest anti-choice initiative ever created. Prices do matter!
Now that we've seen how to understand the economics of individual decisions, next up will be an introduction to Macroeconomics, or how how we measure the sum of all of this economic activity!
Welcome to lesson II of "Economics for Politicians"! In the first lesson we explained who the government's money belongs to (the people), and now we move on to Lesson 2 - a basic introduction to Microeconomic Theory. Hey! Stop - don't get up and leave! Contrary to what you may have heard economics in not necessarily boring, and this lesson will be a huge help in your crafting policy that will get you re-elected!
Ah, I knew that magic word would get your attention. As I was about to say, the most fundamental building block of understanding economics is the classic supply and demand curve. You probably remember seeing something like this in one of the classes you slept through early on in your undergraduate days:
OK, we've put a bunch of points on a graph and plotted them out. So what does all of this mean? Like any problem it's easier to understand if you break it down piece by piece. Let's make the discussion more interesting by talking about a good or product that you will find interesting - bottles of whiskey. Back in the early days of your career before you had lobbyists to provide you with bottles of your favorite blend, you had to actually pay for them with your own money. What drove your decision as to what to buy? Probably lots of factors, such as the quality of the brand, how far you may have had to travel to get it, and of course, cost. To simplify this lesson we'll use a term that factors out externalities, or what economists call caterus parebus, "All other things being equal" to only focus on price. Assuming that every store carries your favorite whiskey where you buy and how much will only depend on price for now.
Let's assume that the local shop has ten bottles of whiskey on the shelf, and they are giving them away for free! If it's your favorite brand, it's a no brainer - you take all ten. Now let's say the price goes up to $10 per bottle - still a very good deal, and these could make great stocking stuffers for your cohorts. But you don't want to or can not buy all ten bottles, so you buy only nine. When the price increases to $20 you buy only eight, and so on until the price reaches $100 where you decide that whiskey is too expensive for your tastes right now and you decide to buy some vintagely challenged wine instead. Plot all of the points, and you get a demand curve that looks something like this:
Keep in mind that these curves will not perfectly predict your buying behavior, but this is a short lesson so we have to speak on a general level. On a large enough scale and when you compile enough actual data from real world examples, these graphs hold pretty true to actual behavior.
Now let's look at the other side of the aisle, the supply curve. Where as we just looked at whiskey from the buyer's perspective, the supply side looks from the seller's perspective. If you are selling your whiskey you are willing to supply more if you will get paid more for it. If you have your ten bottles of whiskey to sell at $100 per bottle you will gladly sell all ten! Now as we drop the price you are not willing to sell as many since you can not make as much profit on each bottle. Your willingness to sell them drops until we get to giving them away for free, and you are unwilling to offer any on your store's shelves. Plot the points and you get something like this:
An obvious question is that if you're only able to charge $40 per bottle why you would order ten in the first place when you are only willing to sell four of them? The answer is that your awareness of this lower market price leads you to only order four bottles since more are not worth your trouble. Consider this your introduction to why price controls are an excellent way to cause shortages and rationing.
Plot both lines together and we see a magical point where both lines meet - buyers and seller have found the point where we have maximized how many will sell with how many will buy, also known as equilibrium - voila!
Going back to a strictly buyer's perspective, when the price of a good increases less of it gets consumed, while as the price drops more of it gets consumed. To some degree you already understand this - think of when you pass "sin taxes" to encourage people to consume less of goods that they want but that groups who fork over truckloads of cash into your reelection campaign you deem a bad choice, such as cigarettes or oil. On the flip side, when you want people to consume more of a good that they would not willingly choose at the market price you introduce subsidies to bring costs down and increase demand, such as with electric cars or "green" energy.
Now you see how your decisions and the laws you impose on us help to modify people's behavior and distort marketplaces where prices are the measurement of what people will freely choose to buy or not buy. Think of the sum of all of the legislation that you pass designed to affect markets as the biggest anti-choice initiative ever created. Prices do matter!
Now that we've seen how to understand the economics of individual decisions, next up will be an introduction to Macroeconomics, or how how we measure the sum of all of this economic activity!
Economics for Politicians 101, Lesson 1 - It's Not Your Money
PERMALINK
Foreword
Welcome, dear readers! This series was originally written ten years ago, but the need for politicians to be taught basic economic literacy has not diminished! So, the series will be republished here at Potomac Tea Party, and without further ado...
Over the last few years I’ve noticed our leaders in Washington and the state capitols enacting ever more policy that is ultimately harmful to our economy. Whether wasteful programs, unsustainable deficits, or business-strangling regulation, we see law after law get passed as people who consider themselves the most brilliant minds in the country seem genuinely surprised that we see rising deficits and inflation, high unemployment, and a housing market that can’t seem to recover.
Then I realized something as I interacted with many of the people who live in this town, whether as politicians, staffers, members of the Non-Profit/Non-Governmental Organization Industrial Complex (H/T to the Destroyer of Colons for that term), career bureaucrats or think tankers – they shared a fairly common thread. Very few of these people have lived outside of this town or state houses or worked in jobs where employment depended on producing a good or service that customers would willingly buy rather than on ensuring that whichever member of congress funds your program is happy. They throw around platitudes like "living wages" or "social justice" without considering the implications of what their policies actually do. They are more interested in what they want their policies to accomplish rather than what their policies actually accomplish. The problem is that having never lived out in the real world they have no frame of reference as to what it’s actually like out there and how real people actually respond to their mandates.
That’s the purpose of these posts – to educate our sheltered ruling class. What follows below is the first of a nine part series called "Economics for Politicians". It is targeted toward our elected leaders to help them understand why economies behave as they do, laid out in nine basic lessons put in layman’s terms. I’ll be releasing a new one roughly once every week or two, so without further ado…
Lesson One: It’s Not Your Money
Have you spent your entire career in the DC Beltway, in a State House, or in a news room or college campus? Do you walk around saying that deficits don’t matter or that you should spend more money to keep from going bankrupt? Do you pass laws designed to punish job creation and investment and then wonder why jobless rates "unexpectedly" rise? Then this series is for you! In the nine part series we will discuss the basics of Micro and Macroeconomic theory, show examples of unintended consequences, and even provide advice that will help you improve the economies of your town/county/nation that will achieve your number one objective in office – reelection! Before we can start you need to understand one basic principle:
It’s not your money. If that previous sentence sounded like a foreign language or the rantings of some angry Tea Bagger, then read it again. And re-read it. And keep re-reading it until it sinks home. Until you understand this, there is no point in reading any further.
Under a libertarian definition, government is an entity designed to provide for whatever the private sector is unwilling or unable to do – highways, fire departments, and the military are often cited examples. Over time, this has expanded far beyond that scope, but ultimately, we as a society come to an agreement to allow our government to do everything that it does. There are things that some of us want and things that some of us don’t want, whether it be for highways, a powerful military, generous pensions for public employees, regulatory agencies, offices to provide foreign nations the means to interact with our government, or insurance for our unemployed. In that last sentence I listed things that almost everyone reading this will like and dislike to varying degrees, but regardless of it we pay our taxes to fund the package as a whole.
Now read that last sentence again. It is the people who pay these taxes, whether directly or indirectly. Every penny that goes into your budget comes from us, whether direct taxes – income, property, sales, or indirect taxes- taxes on the business that we interact with who then have to pass those costs along to us as part of their cost of doing business. Taxes on the wealthy? Yes, even regular citizens feel the impact of that favorite remnant of Marxism to which the left desperately clings. We have a progressive tax system where the wealthy and businesses pay most of the share, but ultimately every dollar that you collect comes from a person whom you were elected to serve. That’s it – that money is there to serve your constituents and nobody else.
To give a simple example I used to manage a rec league co-ed flag football team. The league charged a flat fee for teams, so to figure out everyone’s dues I took the total team fee, divided by number of people who we had recruited, and rounded up by a few dollars to cover the eventual few people who never show or disappear without paying, and have a few dollars left over. I kept tight records and used all of the extra money on the team, buying things like Gatorade and water to bring to our games. Whatever was left over at the end of the season was used toward the tab at our last happy hour. In my last season my initial calculation used a number that was a few dollars off of the league’s individual person fees, and the fact that I had recruited a small army would have had the total dues collected at a relatively high individual fee, but still cheaper than if anyone had joined individually. Then I did my calculations and realized I would have collected a $400 surplus. I considered ways to spend the money – bringing food to the games, buying the team a good night out at the end… and then a radical idea hit me.
I could give it back to them and let them choose how to best spend their money. If the team wanted more happy hours or better food and drink games they could choose how to do so. So after calculating what each person’s share would be and building in a small buffer the dues came down to far lower than my initial SWAG (Start With A Guess), with the few dollars left over being used to buy water and Gatorade and ice for the cooler. For all of the time and effort I put into organizing the team nobody would have begrudged me if I kept a few dollars at the end, but that’s not a good path to start down. I could easily see myself thinking that I would be deserving of some compensation (recruiting and managing a team is a bit time consuming) and then next season maybe I might feel I deserved a bit more, and more and more after that… I’m only human and just as susceptible to greed as anyone else. Obviously I don’t have much of a future in politics..
This is not to pretend that running a nation’s government is as simple as running a flag football team. But the basic principle still stands – the money needed to run any organization belongs to the people who fund it, not the leaders who impose the taxes and not the bureaucrats who administer these budgets. We understand that to some degree we’re going to see public funds used for political payback – it’s a reality of a system that we’ve come to expect when our candidates win and tolerate when our candidates lose. There are limits, though. If one of your biggest campaign contributors is part of a massive company and is a major reason for why it’s unprofitable, handling that contributor control of the company, installing some crony of yours with no background in the industry to run it and rewriting bankruptcy law on the fly to further reward your contributor would be an example of going too far.
When the day comes that you start seeing tax revenue as your personal re-election fund, it’s time to retire to private life. And if the day comes that you see tax revenue as your reward for your service, then chances are you’re probably involved in some activities that warrant jail time. If your constituents are luckily, you’ll actually end up there. Or maybe you’re well connected enough to get away with it. But always remember, it is not your money.
On deck: Lesson 2, Introduction to Microeconomics, or Prices do matter!
Foreword
Welcome, dear readers! This series was originally written ten years ago, but the need for politicians to be taught basic economic literacy has not diminished! So, the series will be republished here at Potomac Tea Party, and without further ado...
Over the last few years I’ve noticed our leaders in Washington and the state capitols enacting ever more policy that is ultimately harmful to our economy. Whether wasteful programs, unsustainable deficits, or business-strangling regulation, we see law after law get passed as people who consider themselves the most brilliant minds in the country seem genuinely surprised that we see rising deficits and inflation, high unemployment, and a housing market that can’t seem to recover.
Then I realized something as I interacted with many of the people who live in this town, whether as politicians, staffers, members of the Non-Profit/Non-Governmental Organization Industrial Complex (H/T to the Destroyer of Colons for that term), career bureaucrats or think tankers – they shared a fairly common thread. Very few of these people have lived outside of this town or state houses or worked in jobs where employment depended on producing a good or service that customers would willingly buy rather than on ensuring that whichever member of congress funds your program is happy. They throw around platitudes like "living wages" or "social justice" without considering the implications of what their policies actually do. They are more interested in what they want their policies to accomplish rather than what their policies actually accomplish. The problem is that having never lived out in the real world they have no frame of reference as to what it’s actually like out there and how real people actually respond to their mandates.
That’s the purpose of these posts – to educate our sheltered ruling class. What follows below is the first of a nine part series called "Economics for Politicians". It is targeted toward our elected leaders to help them understand why economies behave as they do, laid out in nine basic lessons put in layman’s terms. I’ll be releasing a new one roughly once every week or two, so without further ado…
Lesson One: It’s Not Your Money
Have you spent your entire career in the DC Beltway, in a State House, or in a news room or college campus? Do you walk around saying that deficits don’t matter or that you should spend more money to keep from going bankrupt? Do you pass laws designed to punish job creation and investment and then wonder why jobless rates "unexpectedly" rise? Then this series is for you! In the nine part series we will discuss the basics of Micro and Macroeconomic theory, show examples of unintended consequences, and even provide advice that will help you improve the economies of your town/county/nation that will achieve your number one objective in office – reelection! Before we can start you need to understand one basic principle:
It’s not your money. If that previous sentence sounded like a foreign language or the rantings of some angry Tea Bagger, then read it again. And re-read it. And keep re-reading it until it sinks home. Until you understand this, there is no point in reading any further.
Under a libertarian definition, government is an entity designed to provide for whatever the private sector is unwilling or unable to do – highways, fire departments, and the military are often cited examples. Over time, this has expanded far beyond that scope, but ultimately, we as a society come to an agreement to allow our government to do everything that it does. There are things that some of us want and things that some of us don’t want, whether it be for highways, a powerful military, generous pensions for public employees, regulatory agencies, offices to provide foreign nations the means to interact with our government, or insurance for our unemployed. In that last sentence I listed things that almost everyone reading this will like and dislike to varying degrees, but regardless of it we pay our taxes to fund the package as a whole.
Now read that last sentence again. It is the people who pay these taxes, whether directly or indirectly. Every penny that goes into your budget comes from us, whether direct taxes – income, property, sales, or indirect taxes- taxes on the business that we interact with who then have to pass those costs along to us as part of their cost of doing business. Taxes on the wealthy? Yes, even regular citizens feel the impact of that favorite remnant of Marxism to which the left desperately clings. We have a progressive tax system where the wealthy and businesses pay most of the share, but ultimately every dollar that you collect comes from a person whom you were elected to serve. That’s it – that money is there to serve your constituents and nobody else.
To give a simple example I used to manage a rec league co-ed flag football team. The league charged a flat fee for teams, so to figure out everyone’s dues I took the total team fee, divided by number of people who we had recruited, and rounded up by a few dollars to cover the eventual few people who never show or disappear without paying, and have a few dollars left over. I kept tight records and used all of the extra money on the team, buying things like Gatorade and water to bring to our games. Whatever was left over at the end of the season was used toward the tab at our last happy hour. In my last season my initial calculation used a number that was a few dollars off of the league’s individual person fees, and the fact that I had recruited a small army would have had the total dues collected at a relatively high individual fee, but still cheaper than if anyone had joined individually. Then I did my calculations and realized I would have collected a $400 surplus. I considered ways to spend the money – bringing food to the games, buying the team a good night out at the end… and then a radical idea hit me.
I could give it back to them and let them choose how to best spend their money. If the team wanted more happy hours or better food and drink games they could choose how to do so. So after calculating what each person’s share would be and building in a small buffer the dues came down to far lower than my initial SWAG (Start With A Guess), with the few dollars left over being used to buy water and Gatorade and ice for the cooler. For all of the time and effort I put into organizing the team nobody would have begrudged me if I kept a few dollars at the end, but that’s not a good path to start down. I could easily see myself thinking that I would be deserving of some compensation (recruiting and managing a team is a bit time consuming) and then next season maybe I might feel I deserved a bit more, and more and more after that… I’m only human and just as susceptible to greed as anyone else. Obviously I don’t have much of a future in politics..
This is not to pretend that running a nation’s government is as simple as running a flag football team. But the basic principle still stands – the money needed to run any organization belongs to the people who fund it, not the leaders who impose the taxes and not the bureaucrats who administer these budgets. We understand that to some degree we’re going to see public funds used for political payback – it’s a reality of a system that we’ve come to expect when our candidates win and tolerate when our candidates lose. There are limits, though. If one of your biggest campaign contributors is part of a massive company and is a major reason for why it’s unprofitable, handling that contributor control of the company, installing some crony of yours with no background in the industry to run it and rewriting bankruptcy law on the fly to further reward your contributor would be an example of going too far.
When the day comes that you start seeing tax revenue as your personal re-election fund, it’s time to retire to private life. And if the day comes that you see tax revenue as your reward for your service, then chances are you’re probably involved in some activities that warrant jail time. If your constituents are luckily, you’ll actually end up there. Or maybe you’re well connected enough to get away with it. But always remember, it is not your money.
On deck: Lesson 2, Introduction to Microeconomics, or Prices do matter!
Why They Died
Memorial Day 2021
PERMALINK
Andrew Yang, who is running for New York City mayor, recently called for noncitizens to be allowed to vote. Shame on him. And shame on him for not voting in New York municipal elections despite living in the city for the last 25 years. U.S. citizenship should mean something. Yang is a U.S. citizen by virtue of being born in Schenectady. Yang’s citizenship must not mean very much to him if he can’t be bothered to vote in city elections.
This Memorial Day, it’s worth remembering why our soldiers fought and died for us. They died for self-rule, for freedom, and for individual rights, including the right to vote. The least the rest of us could do is show a little appreciation for their sacrifice on our behalf.
Unfortunately, there are too many people in this country who have been snookered by the Left’s false narrative America is the worst country ever.
Black Lives Matter co-founder Patrisse Cullors, a self-admitted trained Marxist, says the U.S. flag is a “symbol of hate” and it is not something she “stands by”. If the former slave Frederick Douglass could get past his anger for what was done to him, what’s wrong with her? I mean, this country’s been very good to her. She owns four mansions and just left the BLM organization to concentrate on her TV and book deals. A lot of soldiers died to protect her right to do just that. Does she show any gratitude to the country? No, she spits on it. She also says voting is worthless and she intends to force a revolution by non-democratic means. Ingrate.
A draft of the ethnic studies standards for Portland schools would require kindergartners to learn criticisms of private enterprise, first-graders to learn “systems of power”, and pupils in third grade and up to deconstruct - that is, tear apart - the U.S. Constitution as an instrument of oppression, and as institutionalizing white supremacy and systemic racism. These kids are being taught to hate their country. What are the chances, do you think, they will grow up willing to die for it?
Then we have school districts that try to hide this kind of indoctrination from parents, and Maxine Waters who believes police view their jobs as keeping black people in their place. Presumably, this would include the black police chiefs who have served in many of our major cities. We also have a UN ambassador who believes America’s Founders were just like the Chinese communists who are committing genocide against the Uighurs.
Finally, there’s some pushback against all this, but the consequences of letting the Left’s poisonous and destructive false narratives on race go unchallenged for decades include unhinged leaders and too many people who think America is a horrible rotten place.
Before you throw in with the ‘hate America first’ crowd, you should consider the fact they have no plan for governance. They say ‘burn it all down’ but their thinking stops there. They have no idea what to do next. The Russian revolutionary Nechayev said ‘burn it all down’ and that’s all he said. Karl Marx told people not to ask him what happens after the revolution because he didn’t know, it wasn’t his job. Black Lives Matter has no plan. And a writer in Jacobin magazine freely confessed that socialists have no idea how to build their utopia. All these people are completely irresponsible. Why on earth would you buy a house from people who tell you right upfront they don’t know how to build one? You can be sure of one thing, though: for every power structure they dismantle, they will build another that will benefit them and their friends richly, and it won’t be the least bit inclusive.
You know, our enemies are laughing at us as they watch us destroy ourselves with phony grievances and the other deliberate mischief of the Left. You might think about that this Memorial Day, and you might remember John F. Kennedy’s words, “And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you--ask what you can do for your country.” Those who died on our behalf did exactly that.
Memorial Day 2021
PERMALINK
Andrew Yang, who is running for New York City mayor, recently called for noncitizens to be allowed to vote. Shame on him. And shame on him for not voting in New York municipal elections despite living in the city for the last 25 years. U.S. citizenship should mean something. Yang is a U.S. citizen by virtue of being born in Schenectady. Yang’s citizenship must not mean very much to him if he can’t be bothered to vote in city elections.
This Memorial Day, it’s worth remembering why our soldiers fought and died for us. They died for self-rule, for freedom, and for individual rights, including the right to vote. The least the rest of us could do is show a little appreciation for their sacrifice on our behalf.
Unfortunately, there are too many people in this country who have been snookered by the Left’s false narrative America is the worst country ever.
Black Lives Matter co-founder Patrisse Cullors, a self-admitted trained Marxist, says the U.S. flag is a “symbol of hate” and it is not something she “stands by”. If the former slave Frederick Douglass could get past his anger for what was done to him, what’s wrong with her? I mean, this country’s been very good to her. She owns four mansions and just left the BLM organization to concentrate on her TV and book deals. A lot of soldiers died to protect her right to do just that. Does she show any gratitude to the country? No, she spits on it. She also says voting is worthless and she intends to force a revolution by non-democratic means. Ingrate.
A draft of the ethnic studies standards for Portland schools would require kindergartners to learn criticisms of private enterprise, first-graders to learn “systems of power”, and pupils in third grade and up to deconstruct - that is, tear apart - the U.S. Constitution as an instrument of oppression, and as institutionalizing white supremacy and systemic racism. These kids are being taught to hate their country. What are the chances, do you think, they will grow up willing to die for it?
Then we have school districts that try to hide this kind of indoctrination from parents, and Maxine Waters who believes police view their jobs as keeping black people in their place. Presumably, this would include the black police chiefs who have served in many of our major cities. We also have a UN ambassador who believes America’s Founders were just like the Chinese communists who are committing genocide against the Uighurs.
Finally, there’s some pushback against all this, but the consequences of letting the Left’s poisonous and destructive false narratives on race go unchallenged for decades include unhinged leaders and too many people who think America is a horrible rotten place.
Before you throw in with the ‘hate America first’ crowd, you should consider the fact they have no plan for governance. They say ‘burn it all down’ but their thinking stops there. They have no idea what to do next. The Russian revolutionary Nechayev said ‘burn it all down’ and that’s all he said. Karl Marx told people not to ask him what happens after the revolution because he didn’t know, it wasn’t his job. Black Lives Matter has no plan. And a writer in Jacobin magazine freely confessed that socialists have no idea how to build their utopia. All these people are completely irresponsible. Why on earth would you buy a house from people who tell you right upfront they don’t know how to build one? You can be sure of one thing, though: for every power structure they dismantle, they will build another that will benefit them and their friends richly, and it won’t be the least bit inclusive.
You know, our enemies are laughing at us as they watch us destroy ourselves with phony grievances and the other deliberate mischief of the Left. You might think about that this Memorial Day, and you might remember John F. Kennedy’s words, “And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you--ask what you can do for your country.” Those who died on our behalf did exactly that.
Don’t Give Your Money to the Left!
- A Guide to Charitable Giving for the Political Right (a work-in-progress)
April 2021
PERMALINK
The Left’s long march through the institutions took it through the philanthropic sector. Sadly, most charitable institutions lean left. That said, there are still places where people on the political Right can feel good about placing their charitable dollars.
Potomac Tea Party endeavors to identify the best of these on the national level. We started with poverty alleviation, animals & wildlife, and disaster relief.
We filtered for:
1. No government funding above 5% of total budget
2. No obvious leftist leanings from a scan of the organization’s website
3. Must earn at least a three star rating (four is highest) from Charity Navigator for financial health and transparency
Our results are set forth below.
Disaster Relief
Name Gov’t Funding Level Rating - Charity Navigator Description
Disaster Relief None 3 Stars - Good supplies at the ready
Effort
Poverty Alleviation
Name Gov’t Funding Level Rating - Charity Navigator Description
Charity Cars None 4 Stars - Excellent free vehicles to struggling families
LIFT None 3 Stars - Good helps parents set financial goals
Modest Needs None 3 Stars - Good short-term financial assistance
Animals & Wildlife
Name Gov’t Funding Level Rating - Charity Navigator Description
Guide Dogs for None 4 Stars - Excellent guide dog school
the Blind
Guiding Eyes None 3 Stars - Good guide dog school
for the Blind
Animal Rescue None 4 Stars - Excellent rescues shelter animals
Foundation
Primarily Primates None 3 Stars - Good primate sanctuary in Texas
Whitetails Unlimited None 3 Stars - Good deer habitat and hunting
Sportsmen’s Alliance None 3 Stars - Good defends hunting & fishing
Delta Waterfowl < 5% 3 Stars - Good duck habitat and hunting
Boone and Crockett None 3 Stars - Good big game hunting & conservation
Club
NOTE: Although we are listing national organizations, we recommend starting at the state and local levels. During Hurricane Katrina, lots of conservative websites strongly urged donations to local groups rather than the national ones. Many provided links to such organizations. Local groups are less “corporate” (more nimble) and have a better understanding of real needs. Yes, most organizations found at the state and local level are on the Left. (Remember, the Left owns the charitable sector.) But most of the right-leaning ones are to be found there. Virtually all national groups are on the Left and virtually all those on the Right are at the local/regional levels.
We welcome any feedback you have! Please send your comments and suggestions to mail@potomacteaparty.com
- A Guide to Charitable Giving for the Political Right (a work-in-progress)
April 2021
PERMALINK
The Left’s long march through the institutions took it through the philanthropic sector. Sadly, most charitable institutions lean left. That said, there are still places where people on the political Right can feel good about placing their charitable dollars.
Potomac Tea Party endeavors to identify the best of these on the national level. We started with poverty alleviation, animals & wildlife, and disaster relief.
We filtered for:
1. No government funding above 5% of total budget
2. No obvious leftist leanings from a scan of the organization’s website
3. Must earn at least a three star rating (four is highest) from Charity Navigator for financial health and transparency
Our results are set forth below.
Disaster Relief
Name Gov’t Funding Level Rating - Charity Navigator Description
Disaster Relief None 3 Stars - Good supplies at the ready
Effort
Poverty Alleviation
Name Gov’t Funding Level Rating - Charity Navigator Description
Charity Cars None 4 Stars - Excellent free vehicles to struggling families
LIFT None 3 Stars - Good helps parents set financial goals
Modest Needs None 3 Stars - Good short-term financial assistance
Animals & Wildlife
Name Gov’t Funding Level Rating - Charity Navigator Description
Guide Dogs for None 4 Stars - Excellent guide dog school
the Blind
Guiding Eyes None 3 Stars - Good guide dog school
for the Blind
Animal Rescue None 4 Stars - Excellent rescues shelter animals
Foundation
Primarily Primates None 3 Stars - Good primate sanctuary in Texas
Whitetails Unlimited None 3 Stars - Good deer habitat and hunting
Sportsmen’s Alliance None 3 Stars - Good defends hunting & fishing
Delta Waterfowl < 5% 3 Stars - Good duck habitat and hunting
Boone and Crockett None 3 Stars - Good big game hunting & conservation
Club
NOTE: Although we are listing national organizations, we recommend starting at the state and local levels. During Hurricane Katrina, lots of conservative websites strongly urged donations to local groups rather than the national ones. Many provided links to such organizations. Local groups are less “corporate” (more nimble) and have a better understanding of real needs. Yes, most organizations found at the state and local level are on the Left. (Remember, the Left owns the charitable sector.) But most of the right-leaning ones are to be found there. Virtually all national groups are on the Left and virtually all those on the Right are at the local/regional levels.
We welcome any feedback you have! Please send your comments and suggestions to mail@potomacteaparty.com