Friday, February 17, 2017
Trump's wall would pay for itself in 3 years, end services to illegals
Via Billy
Even if President Trump's border wall cost the highest estimation of $16 billion, it would save that amount in just the first three years of operation by eliminating the lifetime cost to taxpayers for letting 170,000 slip in every year, according to a new analysis.
The authoritative Center for Immigration Studies Thursday crunched the numbers in a new analysis and found that even if the wall failed to stop the bulk of illegals, it would still pay for itself in a decade by cutting welfare, education, and other associated lifetime costs to federal, state and local taxpayers to care for undocumented immigrants.
Even if President Trump's border wall cost the highest estimation of $16 billion, it would save that amount in just the first three years of operation by eliminating the lifetime cost to taxpayers for letting 170,000 slip in every year, according to a new analysis.
The authoritative Center for Immigration Studies Thursday crunched the numbers in a new analysis and found that even if the wall failed to stop the bulk of illegals, it would still pay for itself in a decade by cutting welfare, education, and other associated lifetime costs to federal, state and local taxpayers to care for undocumented immigrants.
More @ Washington Examiner
Thursday, February 16, 2017
Du Pont and His Powder Industry
E. I. Du Pont’s position as an anti-slavery advocate may have been more about containing black people in the South and forbidding them into the North and territories, as was common among Republicans. He may also have been opposed to the war but made a fortune through powder orders by providing 4 million barrels to the Northern government. Du Pont’s revolutionary “mammoth powder” for heavy artillery allowed greater range for bombarding American cities in the South.
Bernhard Thuersam, www.Circa1865.com The Great American Political Divide
Du Pont and His Powder Industry
“. . . Du Pont, a strong Whig and anti-slavery partisan could hardly feel much enthusiasm for the [Mexican] war, even if it did bring him government powder orders. [In the postwar] Ohio and Indiana farmers were industriously clearing away timber land, and potent charges of Du Pont powder were needed to extract the stumps. This was the first era of railway building, and powder was a necessity for railroad contractors. William Astor and his Oregon Fur Company needed powder for hunting in the Northwest. Mining was also beginning to develop.
Du Pont did not need a war, but the gods smiled and gave him one. In 1854 England, Turkey, and others went to war with Russia, and guns in the Crimea needed powder. Du Pont filled [orders from both England and Russia, and] shipments of the “black death” went forth to the far corners of the world.
During the American Civil War Du Pont was again the patriot – at least the Northern patriot. Naturally the war brought Du Pont large orders and he was the mainstay of the Northern government.
The Civil War created a virtual partnership between Du Pont and the government. When the war was over, this relationship was not disturbed . . . [and] Working hand in glove with the government became a regular practice for Du Pont.
The last decades of the nineteenth century witnessed the formation of powerful combines and trusts in American business. It was only natural that Du Pont should be transformed from a simple powder company into a gigantic combine with international ramifications.
The development came as a result of the Civil War [and] Government orders had been so reckless that the supply of powder on the market proved a drug to the entire industry. The government sold its surplus at auction prices sand the bottom fell out of the powder industry.
Beginning in 1872 the Du Pont Company gradually brought “order” into the industry, and in 1907 it was not only supreme in the field, but had virtually united all powder companies in the country under its guidance, control, or ownership.
The result of this monopolistic policy may be seen in the fact that by 1905 Du Pont controlled the orders for all government powder orders. Having established this monopoly, Du Pont turned again to price-fixing [and] national prices were established from which there was no deviation.
During the World War Du Pont supplied 40 per cent of the powder used by the Allies, and after 1917 its orders from the United States government were enormous.”
(Merchants of Death, A Study of the International Armament Industry, H.C. Engelbrecht & F.C. Hanighen, Dodd, Mead & Company, 1934, excerpts, pp. 29- 36)
Moral Consequences of Abandoning the Cause of Freedom
Via Mike
...........Congress, overriding Nixon’s veto, cut the budget for supporting the Vietnamese Armed Forces from $2.27 billion in fiscal year 1973 to $1.01 billion in 1974, and $700 million in 1975. (The North admitted that Thieu was forced to fight a poor man's war and that the North was far better equipped.) 105's, Just In From The States
*****************
From December 18 to December 29,
1972, USAF and US Navy strategic bombing devastated North Vietnam’s
previously restricted military, logistical, and transportation targets
surrounding Hanoi. In addition, US Navy aircraft mined the strategically
critical Hanoi-Haiphong Harbor. These air-raids, which included 929
completed sorties by massively destructive USAF B-52 bombers, destroyed
80 percent of North Vietnam’s electrical generating capacity and
comparable percentages of fuel reserves, railroad facilities and rolling
stock. More than 80 percent of North Vietnam’s material and weapons
shipments supporting the NVA and their Viet Cong auxiliaries were
halted. Their air defense system was no longer able to offer any
resistance to American airpower.
Hanoi’s Communist leaders were ready to postpone
their conquest of Southeast Asia for decades. Their only hope was the
Marxist American Left and its increasing influence on a war-weary
Congress with a heavy Democrat majority.
On January 27, 1973, The United States, South
Vietnam, North Vietnam, and the Communist National Liberation Front
signed a peace agreement that should have ended the Vietnam War.
More @ The Tribune
Major Blow to Obamacare Mandate: IRS Won't Reject Tax Returns That Don't Answer Health Insurance Question
Via Billy
How much difference does a single line on a tax form make? For Obamacare's individual mandate, the answer might be quite a lot.
Following President Donald Trump's executive order instructing agencies to provide relief from the health law, the Internal Revenue Service appears to be taking a more lax approach to the coverage requirement.
The health law's individual mandate requires everyone to either maintain qualifying health coverage or pay a tax penalty, known as a "shared responsibility payment." The IRS was set to require filers to indicate whether they had maintained coverage in 2016 or paid the penalty by filling out line 61 on their form 1040s. Alternatively, they could claim exemption from the mandate by filing a form 8965.
For most filers, filling out line 61 would be mandatory. The IRS would not accept 1040s unless the coverage box was checked, or the shared responsibility payment noted, or the exemption form included. Otherwise they would be labeled "silent returns" and rejected.
Instead, however, filling out that line will be optional.
How much difference does a single line on a tax form make? For Obamacare's individual mandate, the answer might be quite a lot.
Following President Donald Trump's executive order instructing agencies to provide relief from the health law, the Internal Revenue Service appears to be taking a more lax approach to the coverage requirement.
The health law's individual mandate requires everyone to either maintain qualifying health coverage or pay a tax penalty, known as a "shared responsibility payment." The IRS was set to require filers to indicate whether they had maintained coverage in 2016 or paid the penalty by filling out line 61 on their form 1040s. Alternatively, they could claim exemption from the mandate by filing a form 8965.
For most filers, filling out line 61 would be mandatory. The IRS would not accept 1040s unless the coverage box was checked, or the shared responsibility payment noted, or the exemption form included. Otherwise they would be labeled "silent returns" and rejected.
Instead, however, filling out that line will be optional.
More @ Reason
Shaffer “Absolutely” Believes That Obama Admin. “Directly Involved” With Flynn Leak & NSA Whistleblower Confirms Intelligence Community Is ‘Absolutely’ Tapping Trump’s Calls
Via Billy
Former CIA analyst and retired U.S. Army Reserve Lieutenant Colonel Tony Shaffer was interviewed on Fox on Wednesday and laid the blame for the leaks about former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn directly at the feet of the Obama administration.
From Washington Free Beacon:
“Risk and Reward” host Deirdre Bolton asked Shaffer whether he thought leaks from the Obama administration were “the problem.”
“Absolutely,” Shaffer answered, saying the Obama administration was “directly involved” with the leak.
Shaffer said the blame lay “squarely at the feet of” the former CIA director John Brennan, former director of National Intelligence Jim Clapper, and former deputy national security advisor Ben Rhodes.
Former CIA analyst and retired U.S. Army Reserve Lieutenant Colonel Tony Shaffer was interviewed on Fox on Wednesday and laid the blame for the leaks about former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn directly at the feet of the Obama administration.
From Washington Free Beacon:
“Risk and Reward” host Deirdre Bolton asked Shaffer whether he thought leaks from the Obama administration were “the problem.”
“Absolutely,” Shaffer answered, saying the Obama administration was “directly involved” with the leak.
Shaffer said the blame lay “squarely at the feet of” the former CIA director John Brennan, former director of National Intelligence Jim Clapper, and former deputy national security advisor Ben Rhodes.
More @ Young Conservatives
***********************************
Poll: Hispanics back Trump deportations, ending 'sanctuary cities'
Via Billy
Hispanic voters support President Trump's new focus on deporting illegal immigrants with criminal records and punishing some 300 cities that grant "sanctuary" to undocumented criminals, according to a new poll.
The survey for Secure America Now found that 56 percent of Hispanic voters approve of deporting criminal illegals. Some 31 percent don't.
What's more, they back the president's executive order to end the Obama administration's "catch and release" policy at the border.
Over all in the McLaughlin and Associates survey, 69 percent of all voters back the president's plans.
Hispanic voters support President Trump's new focus on deporting illegal immigrants with criminal records and punishing some 300 cities that grant "sanctuary" to undocumented criminals, according to a new poll.
The survey for Secure America Now found that 56 percent of Hispanic voters approve of deporting criminal illegals. Some 31 percent don't.
What's more, they back the president's executive order to end the Obama administration's "catch and release" policy at the border.
Over all in the McLaughlin and Associates survey, 69 percent of all voters back the president's plans.
More @ Washington Examiner
Kucinich(D) BLASTS Intel Community’s, ‘UNPRECEDENTED’ Effort to Upend Trump - OBAMA Gave NSA New Powers In Final Days As President That May Have Been Used To Sabotage Trump
Via Billy
When a DEMOCRAT is saying this, maybe we should take notice.
It’s good to see that there are still people out there more committed to the nation than they are to ‘Party Politics’.
Because it doesn’t take a lot of imagination to understand that not everything that hurts THEIR team actually helps YOUR team. Some things are bad for everyone… even if it hurts the other guys most.
Dennis Kucinich must have eaten his spinach. Because it takes some stones to stand up AGAINST popular opinion, and call ‘BS’ when people are being unfair with the OTHER side’s guy.
This is a welcome breath of fresh air compared to the lockstep enduring #NeverTrump outrage of sheep like Sally Kohn.
Watch:
Kucinich had some harsh words:
When a DEMOCRAT is saying this, maybe we should take notice.
It’s good to see that there are still people out there more committed to the nation than they are to ‘Party Politics’.
Because it doesn’t take a lot of imagination to understand that not everything that hurts THEIR team actually helps YOUR team. Some things are bad for everyone… even if it hurts the other guys most.
Dennis Kucinich must have eaten his spinach. Because it takes some stones to stand up AGAINST popular opinion, and call ‘BS’ when people are being unfair with the OTHER side’s guy.
This is a welcome breath of fresh air compared to the lockstep enduring #NeverTrump outrage of sheep like Sally Kohn.
Watch:
Kucinich had some harsh words:
More @ Clash Daily
*******************************
Intel Officials Are Withholding Information from Trump - Grassley: America’s Hands Are Just As Dirty As Russia’s
Via Billy
A report from the Wall Street Journal indicates that U.S. intelligence officials are withholding information from President Trump because they claim that they’re worried about the information becoming compromised or getting leaked according to officials.
From The WSJ:
In some of these cases of withheld information, officials have decided not to show Mr. Trump the sources and methods that the intelligence agencies use to collect information, the current and former officials said. Those sources and methods could include, for instance, the means that an agency uses to spy on a foreign government.
A White House official said: “There is nothing that leads us to believe that this is an accurate account of what is actually happening.”…
…It wasn’t clear Wednesday how many times officials have held back information from Mr. Trump.
A report from the Wall Street Journal indicates that U.S. intelligence officials are withholding information from President Trump because they claim that they’re worried about the information becoming compromised or getting leaked according to officials.
From The WSJ:
In some of these cases of withheld information, officials have decided not to show Mr. Trump the sources and methods that the intelligence agencies use to collect information, the current and former officials said. Those sources and methods could include, for instance, the means that an agency uses to spy on a foreign government.
A White House official said: “There is nothing that leads us to believe that this is an accurate account of what is actually happening.”…
…It wasn’t clear Wednesday how many times officials have held back information from Mr. Trump.
More @ The Gateway Pundit
**********************************
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)