WINNERS & SINNERS

Comments on the Passing Scene
January 19, 2003
By: James K. Sweeney

CAN THE NEW YORK TIMES BE FAR BEHIND?

The Guardian is England's most liberal newspaper. Today's online edition editorializes: "Military intervention in the Middle East holds may dangers. But if we want a lasting peace, it may be the only answer."

BY THE NUMBERS

In Miami, an anti-Hugo Chavez rally drew 50,000 people which is roughly equal to Saturday's anti-war rally in Washington D.C. Moreover, that 50,000 was probably larger than any anti-war rally anywhere in the world. So much for the mass movement against the war in Iraq. As we often ask, did you read about that in your local newspaper? If not, why not?

JIMMY CARTER, CALL YOUR OFFICE

Today, Cuba held an election. There were 609 offices to be filled, including that of the Maximum Leader. There were 609 candidates in the running; no opposition. Former president (Thank God) Carter failed to appear with his entourage to certify the election.

Speaking of Cuba, ever wonder what became of Elian Gonzales? Maximum Leader was counting on that. Elian is 8 now. Damn Janet Reno to the 9th Circle.

CALIFORNIA DREAMIN'

California's economy is the 5th or 6th largest in the world. The United States, Japan, England, France and Germany or California is the order of economies. Soon, California will be number 3. Despite this, its Governor, Gray Davis, who neglected to mention tax increases during his recent re-election campaign, proposed $10 BILLION in tax increases. Naturally, Davis wants to soak the rich. Trouble is that there aren't nearly as many this year as in past years and just 3% of California's taxpayers, about 44,000 people, pay 25% of the taxes. When the tax take was high, the liberal legislature spent what it took in plus. Not only spent it, but purposely enacted recurring cost programs. That is, the legislature assumed those tax revenues would always be available and committed the state to the new expenditures into the future. They never do it right. The only way to kill that beast is starve it to death.

TIME MAGAZINE'S PEOPLE OF THE YEAR

Picking up Time in my doctor's office, I noticed that it chose whistleblowers as People of the Year. Linda Tripp didn't receive honorable mention.

ALICE IN WONDERLAND

Words, said Alice, mean exactly what I want them to mean, nothing more, nothing less. I think that's pretty close to what Alice said. But Alice had nothing on the NOW gang which refers to reproductive rights when it means the right to an abortion, not to bear a child. Others use the code word gender when they mean radical feminism. Pretty soon someone will say affirmative action when they really mean quotas.

SENATOR PATTY MURRAY

The dim-bulb Senator from Washington State was most complimentary of Osama bin Laden's charitable and nation building efforts in the world of Araby. The U.S.'s efforts were criticized. Maybe you read about it? Probably not as none of the Big 3 TV democratic anchors chose to run the story. There was little to nothing in the liberal press either. Suppose, though, that Trent Lott had said something complimentary about Slobodan Milosevic? Can you imagine that same media's righteous indignation? Their calls for resignation or worse?

GUESS WHO'S COMING TO DINNER aka

HOW TAX CUTS WORK; A POPULAR INTERNET BLOG

Every day, ten men go out for dinner. The total bill is $100. They decided to pay the bill as they paid their taxes. The first four men, the poorest, paid nothing; the fifth paid $1, the sixth $3, the seventh $7, the eighth $12, the ninth $18, and the tenth and richest man paid $59.

All went well until the restaurant's owner said: "Since you are such good customers, I'm going to reduce your meal's price by $20."

Dinner now costs $80.00, not $100. The guys still wanted to pay their bill the way as they paid their taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They still ate free. What about the paying customers? How could they fairly divvy up the $20 windfall?

First they tried equally dividing it: $3.33 each from everyone's bill. If they did that, the fifth and sixth men would end up being PAID to eat their meal. The owner suggested reducing each man's bill by roughly the same amount. Thus, the fifth man paid nothing, the sixth pitched in $2, the seventh $5, the eighth paid $9, the ninth paid $12, the tenth $52. Each was better off than before and the first four still ate free.

Later, the men compared their savings. "I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man who pointed to the tenth. "But he got $7!". "Yeah, that's right," said the fifth man, "I only saved a dollar ... It's unfair that he got seven times more than I!". "True!" said the seventh man, "Why should he get $7 when I got only $2? The rich get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!" The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night he didn't show up for dinner, so the nine sat down and ate without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered, a little late, what was very important. They were FIFTY-TWO DOLLARS short of paying the bill! Imagine that!

People who pay taxes benefit from tax cuts. Tax them too much, and they don't show up at the table anymore.