Voted YES on the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008
(Jan 2008)
Total cost: $152 billion
This law provides for tax rebates to low- and middle-income U.S. taxpayers, tax incentives to stimulate business investment, and an increase in the limits imposed on mortgages eligible for purchase by government-sponsored enterprises (e.g., Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac). For this article, I will be focusing on the effect of the tax rebate on the economy.
The justification for this bill and in fact, all government spending, relies on the principles of the Keynesian Economic Theory. It states that government stimulation and control of the economy is necessary for its general health. In this bill's case, by increasing the money supply and sending everybody a check, people will be encouraged to buy things and, as a result, stimulate the economy. Sounds good, right? But it is this injection of new money into the market system, even when directly sent to lower income individuals, that creates artificial bubbles of prosperity resulting in a greater depression.
When people decide to spend a stimulus check in the market, they create a demand for items that they would not have usually purchased. As a result of this increase in sales and profits, entrepreneurs begin to reinvest the new money into their own store in an expectation to meet future demand. By this time, however, all of the stimulus money has been spent and the store owners are left with an overstock of items that people are no longer willing to buy. Entrepreneurs have now wasted precious capital and resources, and must sell their products at a loss only to eventually go bankrupt. That is, unless another stimulus bill is passed, which inevitably happens.
Nita Lowey's unwavering support of stimulus packages, like this one, leads to a constant injection of new money into the market. This not only destroys businesses, but also destroys the value of the dollar. She does not understand that real growth in an economy comes from savings. An increase in savings, increases the supply of lending capital and lowers interest rates naturally. It is at this time that businesses should be investing in new technology and products.
It is time that Nita Lowey is replaced by someone that understands the importance of a free market system and that will allow our economy to actually grow.
Friday, January 29, 2010
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
NITA LOWEY CREATES INFLATION
Voted YES on Congressional pay raise.
(Jun 2009)
Nita Lowey's salary: $174,000
The average United States citizen's income: $46,000
Want a raise? Don't beg your boss, just vote yourself one. That's what Nita Lowey did. While our government was in the process of increasing our debt by one trillion dollars in one of the worst economic crises, Nita Lowey thought it would be a good time to vote for a 2.8 percent pay raise for herself and her fellow Congressmen on Capitol Hill. This, of course, is just above the 2.7% inflation rate that the country faced in 2009 and cost the taxpayers $2.5 million. But isn't leadership like this worth it? Not at all.
The reason for this $4,700 increase was to compensate for the increase in the cost of living(COLA), which as we all know as the inflation rate. But it is important to know what causes inflation.
Inflation, in short, is an increase in the amount of money in circulation. Money is printed, some might say counterfeited, by the Federal Reserve and sold to the US government, who then distributes it to the most well-connected businesses. In the last year, this was Wall Street and the Auto Industry. With the increase of money in the system, people spend more, increasing the demand for goods. And since prices are determined by supply and demand, as demand goes up so do prices.
The people who receive the money first before the prices rise benefit. But the money takes time to trickle down to the working class and the poor, and their salaries do not adjust until after the price increases have taken effect. This indirect tax, is referred to as an inflation tax and is a major cause of the redistribution of wealth from the poor and the middle class to the politically well-connected.
The worst thing about this system is that as citizens, we can not do anything directly about inflation. It is caused by an injection of money into the economy by the Federal Reserve and the government. The only thing we can do is vote for a Congressman that has some economic sense about them. Sadly, Nita falls way short in this category having voted to spend:
Further Reading:
A Letter to Your Representative
The Life and Death of the US Dollar
(Jun 2009)
Nita Lowey's salary: $174,000
The average United States citizen's income: $46,000
Want a raise? Don't beg your boss, just vote yourself one. That's what Nita Lowey did. While our government was in the process of increasing our debt by one trillion dollars in one of the worst economic crises, Nita Lowey thought it would be a good time to vote for a 2.8 percent pay raise for herself and her fellow Congressmen on Capitol Hill. This, of course, is just above the 2.7% inflation rate that the country faced in 2009 and cost the taxpayers $2.5 million. But isn't leadership like this worth it? Not at all.
The reason for this $4,700 increase was to compensate for the increase in the cost of living(COLA), which as we all know as the inflation rate. But it is important to know what causes inflation.
Inflation, in short, is an increase in the amount of money in circulation. Money is printed, some might say counterfeited, by the Federal Reserve and sold to the US government, who then distributes it to the most well-connected businesses. In the last year, this was Wall Street and the Auto Industry. With the increase of money in the system, people spend more, increasing the demand for goods. And since prices are determined by supply and demand, as demand goes up so do prices.
The people who receive the money first before the prices rise benefit. But the money takes time to trickle down to the working class and the poor, and their salaries do not adjust until after the price increases have taken effect. This indirect tax, is referred to as an inflation tax and is a major cause of the redistribution of wealth from the poor and the middle class to the politically well-connected.
The worst thing about this system is that as citizens, we can not do anything directly about inflation. It is caused by an injection of money into the economy by the Federal Reserve and the government. The only thing we can do is vote for a Congressman that has some economic sense about them. Sadly, Nita falls way short in this category having voted to spend:
- $825 billion for the economic recovery package
- $192 billion in additional anti-recession stimulus spending
- $15 billion for the bailout of GM and Chrysler
Further Reading:
A Letter to Your Representative
The Life and Death of the US Dollar
NITA LOWEY DESTROYS JOBS
Voted YES on increasing minimum wage to $7.25.
(Jan 2007)
Although this may appear to be an economically sound vote in support of the low-skilled worker, it in fact, destroys jobs, eliminates opportunities to learn new skills and wastes resources. With an estimated 300,000 jobs destroyed by this wage increase and unemployment now hovering at 10%, it is time to vote Nita Lowey out of office and look to someone that will eliminate the minimum wage law.
Things Nita Lowey doesn't understand about minimum wage laws:
1. Reduces Future Earnings Unskilled workers use low paying jobs as a training ground to learn the skills they need to advance and increase their future earnings. Since having a job is one of the most important ways to acquire valuable skills, today's minimum wage-induced unemployment translates into tomorrow's reduced earnings.
2. Creates Underemployment Not only does it create unemployment, it also creates underemployment. Even if a higher minimum wage doesn’t manifest itself into lost jobs, it will lead to fewer hours, reduced benefits or both. Some workers who would have received paid training won’t. Employee discounts and other perks might fall.
3. Increases Prices A reduced amount of labor leads to increased prices. Because prices are determined by supply and demand, if less of a product is produced, it will become more scarce resulting in higher prices. If wages were allowed to fall to market level, there would be more jobs, output would be increased making the product less scarce, in turn, lowering the price and increasing everybody's real wage.
(A person's real wage is determined by the strength of the purchasing power of their dollar. For instance, even though you may not have received a raise this year, if prices fall, you're real wage actually went up because you can buy more than you did before. But when prices rise at a higher percentage than your wage does, your real wage actually goes down because your dollar can not buy as much.)
4. Discrimination Over the years, steady hikes in the minimum wage have priced out of the market the most vulnerable workers, including minorities, teenagers, and women with limited skills. The bias of minimum wage laws against disadvantaged minorities has been conspicuous ever since 1956, when the minimum wage shot up from 75 cents to $1.00 an hour. During the next two years, nonwhite teenage unemployment spiraled from 14 to 24 percent.
We must ask ourselves, if minimum wage laws are so bad, why would Nita vote for them?
I'm sure Nita can answer this question herself. You see, Rep. Lowey not only supports minimum wage laws but she is also a big supporter of labor unions.
Labor unions play a critical role in the minimum wage laws. Unions spend millions of dollars a year (a huge waste of valuable capital) lobbying congress to increase the minimum wage in the name of the "greater good."
But by increasing the minimum wage, unions are in fact, pricing unskilled workers out of the market. Where you might have once been able to hire 5 unskilled workers to do one job, it is now cheaper to hire one skilled union worker instead. An obvious example of this is an increase in the amount of self checkout areas in supermarkets. Once there might have been 5 cashiers ringing up customers, but now there is only the cost of one union worker to service the new machines. Sadly the cashier is going the way of the elevator operators and ushers of the 1950s.
No matter how Nita may word it: Unions, laws, and regulations do not increase the standard of living of the ordinary people. The real thing that protects the worker is the existence of alternative employers competing against one another for new workers. People do not look to stay at a minimum wage job. They use them to acquire the skills needed to obtain better jobs elsewhere. If Nita really cared about the workers she would do away with the minimum wage and support the creation of new jobs, by cutting taxes and getting rid of regulations that interfere with the creation of new businesses.
If wage increases were truly the only thing necessary for improved living, than why not push for $100/hr minimum wage?
(Jan 2007)
Although this may appear to be an economically sound vote in support of the low-skilled worker, it in fact, destroys jobs, eliminates opportunities to learn new skills and wastes resources. With an estimated 300,000 jobs destroyed by this wage increase and unemployment now hovering at 10%, it is time to vote Nita Lowey out of office and look to someone that will eliminate the minimum wage law.
Things Nita Lowey doesn't understand about minimum wage laws:
1. Reduces Future Earnings Unskilled workers use low paying jobs as a training ground to learn the skills they need to advance and increase their future earnings. Since having a job is one of the most important ways to acquire valuable skills, today's minimum wage-induced unemployment translates into tomorrow's reduced earnings.
2. Creates Underemployment Not only does it create unemployment, it also creates underemployment. Even if a higher minimum wage doesn’t manifest itself into lost jobs, it will lead to fewer hours, reduced benefits or both. Some workers who would have received paid training won’t. Employee discounts and other perks might fall.
3. Increases Prices A reduced amount of labor leads to increased prices. Because prices are determined by supply and demand, if less of a product is produced, it will become more scarce resulting in higher prices. If wages were allowed to fall to market level, there would be more jobs, output would be increased making the product less scarce, in turn, lowering the price and increasing everybody's real wage.
(A person's real wage is determined by the strength of the purchasing power of their dollar. For instance, even though you may not have received a raise this year, if prices fall, you're real wage actually went up because you can buy more than you did before. But when prices rise at a higher percentage than your wage does, your real wage actually goes down because your dollar can not buy as much.)
4. Discrimination Over the years, steady hikes in the minimum wage have priced out of the market the most vulnerable workers, including minorities, teenagers, and women with limited skills. The bias of minimum wage laws against disadvantaged minorities has been conspicuous ever since 1956, when the minimum wage shot up from 75 cents to $1.00 an hour. During the next two years, nonwhite teenage unemployment spiraled from 14 to 24 percent.
We must ask ourselves, if minimum wage laws are so bad, why would Nita vote for them?
I'm sure Nita can answer this question herself. You see, Rep. Lowey not only supports minimum wage laws but she is also a big supporter of labor unions.
Labor unions play a critical role in the minimum wage laws. Unions spend millions of dollars a year (a huge waste of valuable capital) lobbying congress to increase the minimum wage in the name of the "greater good."
But by increasing the minimum wage, unions are in fact, pricing unskilled workers out of the market. Where you might have once been able to hire 5 unskilled workers to do one job, it is now cheaper to hire one skilled union worker instead. An obvious example of this is an increase in the amount of self checkout areas in supermarkets. Once there might have been 5 cashiers ringing up customers, but now there is only the cost of one union worker to service the new machines. Sadly the cashier is going the way of the elevator operators and ushers of the 1950s.
No matter how Nita may word it: Unions, laws, and regulations do not increase the standard of living of the ordinary people. The real thing that protects the worker is the existence of alternative employers competing against one another for new workers. People do not look to stay at a minimum wage job. They use them to acquire the skills needed to obtain better jobs elsewhere. If Nita really cared about the workers she would do away with the minimum wage and support the creation of new jobs, by cutting taxes and getting rid of regulations that interfere with the creation of new businesses.
If wage increases were truly the only thing necessary for improved living, than why not push for $100/hr minimum wage?
Saturday, January 16, 2010
DEFEAT NITA LOWEY
"The need for bold and aggressive federal action to create jobs and restore confidence in our battered economy is clear."
-Nita Lowey, House Representative for the 18th District of New York
Dear Residents of the highlighted green area on the map, also known as the 18th district,
The above quote, pulled directly from Nita Lowey's website, is a statement that we should all fear. It is clear, it is concise, and it defines her stance on the role of government in our society. She believes that only through a larger government, direct and indirect taxation, and heavy federal spending, we will be able to get ourselves out of the current economic crisis. But what she fails to realize is that those are the exact reasons that we are now in this mess. Not once has fire ever been extinguished with more gasoline.
Nita Lowey, who is currently serving her 11th term and who has sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States for the past 22 years, has continually trampled on the natural rights of the American population through poor economic and political judgment.
She has repeatedly voted for the use of unnecessary military force overseas, that now costs the American tax payer over 1 trillion dollars a year to maintain.
She has voted for a government run health care system. An industry that was once affordable but now, since government intervention, has left millions unprotected.
She has destroyed jobs by taxing the very people that create them.
And most importantly, in the 22 years of her service, she has done nothing to limit or destroy the power of the Federal Reserve, the root cause for the purchasing power of our dollar to drop 95% in the last century.
These are all problems that can be fixed. We do not need to destroy the liberty and freedom of the American population to have affordable health care, a strong dollar, and low unemployment.
It is very important to remember that the government has no money. It produces nothing. It sells nothing. The only way that government attains money is by forcefully taking it from hard working Americans and then, in turn, misusing it in the name of the "greater good." Do not be fooled by this common cry of the American politician. It only requires a light scratching of the surface for the truth to be revealed and the hardships that are a result to be seen.
This is not a call for a destruction of the federal government. It is quite the opposite. A federal government is important, but it should be used in the way the Constitution intended...as a way to protect its citizens' natural rights of life, liberty, and the protection of property. And only by defending these rights will we be able to see America prosper once again.
It is impossible to make an entire case against Nita in one blog entry. It would be thousands of lines long, and would be a nightmare to read. That is why I will be dissecting Nita's voting record and political stances in separate blog entries. I will also be referring back to my other blog, The Eagle View, for a more in depth look on issues. Also, I want to challenge you to really examine what role you want the federal government to have in your life. I encourage any and all questions and if you would like me to address a certain policy sooner than later feel free to email me directly at defeatnitalowey@gmail.com.
Welcome to Defeat Nita Lowey.
The Eagle View
Highly suggested reading:
THE LIFE AND DEATH OF THE US DOLLAR
THE PATH TO SOCIALISM
-Nita Lowey, House Representative for the 18th District of New York
Dear Residents of the highlighted green area on the map, also known as the 18th district,
The above quote, pulled directly from Nita Lowey's website, is a statement that we should all fear. It is clear, it is concise, and it defines her stance on the role of government in our society. She believes that only through a larger government, direct and indirect taxation, and heavy federal spending, we will be able to get ourselves out of the current economic crisis. But what she fails to realize is that those are the exact reasons that we are now in this mess. Not once has fire ever been extinguished with more gasoline.
Nita Lowey, who is currently serving her 11th term and who has sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States for the past 22 years, has continually trampled on the natural rights of the American population through poor economic and political judgment.
She has repeatedly voted for the use of unnecessary military force overseas, that now costs the American tax payer over 1 trillion dollars a year to maintain.
She has voted for a government run health care system. An industry that was once affordable but now, since government intervention, has left millions unprotected.
She has destroyed jobs by taxing the very people that create them.
And most importantly, in the 22 years of her service, she has done nothing to limit or destroy the power of the Federal Reserve, the root cause for the purchasing power of our dollar to drop 95% in the last century.
These are all problems that can be fixed. We do not need to destroy the liberty and freedom of the American population to have affordable health care, a strong dollar, and low unemployment.
It is very important to remember that the government has no money. It produces nothing. It sells nothing. The only way that government attains money is by forcefully taking it from hard working Americans and then, in turn, misusing it in the name of the "greater good." Do not be fooled by this common cry of the American politician. It only requires a light scratching of the surface for the truth to be revealed and the hardships that are a result to be seen.
This is not a call for a destruction of the federal government. It is quite the opposite. A federal government is important, but it should be used in the way the Constitution intended...as a way to protect its citizens' natural rights of life, liberty, and the protection of property. And only by defending these rights will we be able to see America prosper once again.
It is impossible to make an entire case against Nita in one blog entry. It would be thousands of lines long, and would be a nightmare to read. That is why I will be dissecting Nita's voting record and political stances in separate blog entries. I will also be referring back to my other blog, The Eagle View, for a more in depth look on issues. Also, I want to challenge you to really examine what role you want the federal government to have in your life. I encourage any and all questions and if you would like me to address a certain policy sooner than later feel free to email me directly at defeatnitalowey@gmail.com.
Welcome to Defeat Nita Lowey.
The Eagle View
Highly suggested reading:
THE LIFE AND DEATH OF THE US DOLLAR
THE PATH TO SOCIALISM
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)