Koch: I'm Fighting to Restore a Free Society

[AvgGuyIA]

Most red states are thriving even in this pitiful obama economy. Yes, its our govt that's the problem.

Red States Are Welfare Queens


Flip to any news channel in the past three years, and you can almost be certain to see any number of Republican governors, blustering about how Washington spends too much money and how they'd never spend that much money if they were President. It's a lot of tough talk, really. But is there any truth to it?

Well, all of this tough budget talk from Republicans got me thinking about the central: who really benefits from government spending? If you listen to Rush Limbaugh, you might think it was those blue states, packed with damn hippie socialist liberals, sipping their lattes and providing free abortions for bored, horny teenagers.

The truth? Not so fast, Michele Bachmann.

As it turns out, it is red states that are overwhelmingly the Welfare Queen States. Yes, that's right. Red States — the ones governed by folks who think government is too big and spending needs to be cut — are a net drain on the economy, taking in more federal spending than they pay out in federal taxes. They talk a good game, but stick Blue States with the bill.

Take a look at the difference between federal spending on any given state and the federal taxes received from that state. We measure the difference as a dollar amount: Federal Spending per Dollar of Federal Taxes. A figure of $1.00 means that particular state received as much as it paid in to the federal government. Anything over a dollar means the state received more than it paid; anything less than $1.00 means the state paid more in taxes than it received in services. The higher the figure, the more a given state is a welfare queen.

Of the twenty worst states, 16 are either Republican dominated or conservative states. Let's go through the top twenty.

New Mexico: $2.03
Mississippi: $2.02
Alaska: $1.84
Louisiana: $1.78
West Virginia: $1.76
North Dakota: $1.68
Alabama: $1.66
South Dakota: $1.53
Kentucky: $1.51
Virginia: $1.51
Montana: $1.47
Hawaii: $1.44
Maine: $1.41
Arkansas: $1.41
Oklahoma: $1.36
South Carolina: $1.35
Missouri: $1.32
Maryland: $1.30
Tennessee: $1.27
Idaho: $1.21

Does anyone else notice the overwhelming presence of northern "rugged individualist" states, like Alaska, the Dakotas and Montana, along with most of the South? Why it's almost like there's a pattern here or something.

Where can we find liberal bastions California, New York, and Massachusetts? California is 43rd, getting back only $0.78 for every dollar it sends to Washington. New York is 42nd, and one penny better off, at $0.79 per dollar. Massachusetts is 40th, receiving $0.82 for every dollar it sends to DC.

Read more: Red States Are Welfare Queens - Business Insider

The problem I have with these stats is that they are too simplistic. I'd like to see an in depth study done.

Now that is not to say that a red state hasn't been on the gravy train for a long, long time. When I was checking out the financial history of Alaska my hair stood on end.

Holy toledo. Senator Ted Stevens was like a hog at the trough on steroids.

Just outrageous. And that type of "gouge the taxpayer so I can get my name on a bridge, highway or airport" behavior is criminal. Now I know he did do a lot of good things while he was alive, but I'm sorry. When you milk the taxpayers for all they are worth it's just not right. I don't care what side of the aisle you are on.

Bi partisan rant

. Take a drive through West Virginia sometime. I'm sure there's a Robert KKK Byrd Memorial Cowpath there as well.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

It's nothing of the kind, and nothing like a fact. The idea that you believe it to be is what makes you a moron.

It can easily be demonstrated.

Or lets just ask Edmund S. Phelps - 2006 Nobel winner in economic sciences

http://www.columbia.edu/~esp2/Critical Review Piece.pdf

No one has true Free Market Capitalism, sorry.

Could it be less regulated here and there, and more regulated in other places, yep. Go for it.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Koch: I'm Fighting to Restore a Free Society

Is that what he thinks he's doing? Interesting. I wonder how far he would have gotten had his Dad not built the company for him?

What difference would that make?

It probably would have made a huge difference, and he would not be rich today. Then again, he's motivated scum so in this country he was on his way.

I don't think one can maintain their billions of dollars if they're incapable of creating it in the first place.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

What difference would that make?

It probably would have made a huge difference, and he would not be rich today. Then again, he's motivated scum so in this country he was on his way.

I don't think one can maintain their billions of dollars if they're incapable of creating it in the first place.

Then you would be wrong. It happens all the time. And it's exactly why Adam Smith was opposed to transferring wealth like that. It does not motivate society correctly if you can just be handed the cash by being born.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

It can easily be demonstrated.

Or lets just ask Edmund S. Phelps - 2006 Nobel winner in economic sciences

http://www.columbia.edu/~esp2/Critical Review Piece.pdf

No one has true Free Market Capitalism, sorry.

Could it be less regulated here and there, and more regulated in other places, yep. Go for it.

Such breadth and depth.

The writing I posted talks specifically about the less dynamism countries, i.e the far more corporatist ones than the US, perform even more poorly than our "version" of capitalism. Which isn't capitalism at all as Phelps points out at the end. Government collusion within economic sectors creates less dynamism, more corruption, more monopoly, less innovation and ultimately stagnant and declining societies.

But I'll believe your one line nonsense over Phelps.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Wbat does any of that have to do with equality before the law?
You should be on your knees offering to service both Koch brothers for all the good they've done for this country. If you lived a thousand years you wouldn't have achieved one millionth of what they have.

Daddy Koch made his money by fracking the oil fields of the USSR. Still think the Koches love the USA or money???

He built cracking plants, moron. You don't know your ass from a hole in the ground. In those days, American journalists were telling the American public that the Soviet Union was a paradise, so why would any liberal turd object to an American doing business with them?

Koch Industries - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In 1925, Fred C. Koch joined MIT classmate Lewis E. Winkler at an engineering firm in Wichita, Kansas, which was renamed the Winkler-Koch Engineering Company. In 1927 they developed a more efficient thermal cracking process for turning crude oil into gasoline. This process threatened the competitive advantage of established oil companies, which sued for patent infringement. Temporarily forced out of business in the United States, they turned to other markets, including the Soviet Union, where Winkler-Koch built 15 cracking units between 1929 and 1932. During this time, Koch came to despise communism and Joseph Stalin's regime.[11][12] In his 1960 book, A Business Man Looks at Communism, Koch wrote that he found the USSR to be "a land of hunger, misery, and terror."[13] According to Charles G. Koch, "Virtually every engineer he worked with [there] was purged."[12]

Wow! Their daddy was a great man too.

 

[Moonglow]

Has he supported repealing them? There's your answer. But asking a liberal to think is asking too much. That's why it's stupid to vote for a liberal or to give them power over you.

so you are unable to answer a question without insult...carry on...

I did answer it, you couldn't understand it and I can't understand it for you.

I had no problemo with the answer, just the added B.S. you want to spew to show your hate..

 

[bripat9643]

It's nothing of the kind, and nothing like a fact. The idea that you believe it to be is what makes you a moron.

It can easily be demonstrated.

Then do so? I enjoy tearing to pieces the crap you guys live your twisted little lives by.

Someone has already done it:

Interventionism: An Economic Analysis by Ludwig von Mises

Go ahead, tear it apart. You'd actually have to read it to do that, and then you might actually learn something that isn't 100% horseshit socialist propaganda.

 

[Mojo2]

Charles Koch: I'm Fighting to Restore a Free Society - WSJ.com

I have devoted most of my life to understanding the principles that enable people to improve their lives. It is those principles—the principles of a free society—that have shaped my life, my family, our company and America itself.

Unfortunately, the fundamental concepts of dignity, respect, equality before the law and personal freedom are under attack by the nation's own government. That's why, if we want to restore a free society and create greater well-being and opportunity for all Americans, we have no choice but to fight for those principles. I have been doing so for more than 50 years, primarily through educational efforts. It was only in the past decade that I realized the need to also engage in the political process.

It's quite obvious to me why the bed wetters are so totally consumed with hatred for this man. I enjoyed the piece, and encourage anyone "sitting on the fence" regarding the Kock Bro's agenda to read it and make up your own mind.

This obviously excludes bed wetters, because they're programmed to reject information without thinking. Yet I'm sure we'll see plenty of their smarmy psuedointellectual parroting of "facts" found only on a Media Matters website, as opposed to reality.

Rush is talking about this article and subject right now!

 

[Truthseeker420]

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Or lets just ask Edmund S. Phelps - 2006 Nobel winner in economic sciences

http://www.columbia.edu/~esp2/Critical Review Piece.pdf

No one has true Free Market Capitalism, sorry.

Could it be less regulated here and there, and more regulated in other places, yep. Go for it.

Such breadth and depth.

The writing I posted talks specifically about the less dynamism countries, i.e the far more corporatist ones than the US, perform even more poorly than our "version" of capitalism. Which isn't capitalism at all as Phelps points out at the end. Government collusion within economic sectors creates less dynamism, more corruption, more monopoly, less innovation and ultimately stagnant and declining societies.

But I'll believe your one line nonsense over Phelps.

What you believe is irrelevant. I don't care much what he believes either but I'll check it our when I have time.

And what he concludes is it is Capitalism, I read the last page, but not his favored version of it. I'm okay with that, it's not mine either. Unlike you, he doesn't say it doesn't exist. He's not that dumb.

 

[Mojo2]

so you are unable to answer a question without insult...carry on...

I did answer it, you couldn't understand it and I can't understand it for you.

I had no problemo with the answer, just the added B.S. you want to spew to show your hate..

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGIY5Vyj4YM]I'm mad as Hell and I'm not going to take this anymore - YouTube[/ame]

You and your ilk dare promote your toxic waste and try to overthrow our country.

What the fuck do you expect?

We are not SHEEPLE.

 

[Pete7469]

Charles Koch: I'm Fighting to Restore a Free Society - WSJ.com

I have devoted most of my life to understanding the principles that enable people to improve their lives. It is those principles—the principles of a free society—that have shaped my life, my family, our company and America itself.

Unfortunately, the fundamental concepts of dignity, respect, equality before the law and personal freedom are under attack by the nation's own government. That's why, if we want to restore a free society and create greater well-being and opportunity for all Americans, we have no choice but to fight for those principles. I have been doing so for more than 50 years, primarily through educational efforts. It was only in the past decade that I realized the need to also engage in the political process.

It's quite obvious to me why the bed wetters are so totally consumed with hatred for this man. I enjoyed the piece, and encourage anyone "sitting on the fence" regarding the Kock Bro's agenda to read it and make up your own mind.

This obviously excludes bed wetters, because they're programmed to reject information without thinking. Yet I'm sure we'll see plenty of their smarmy psuedointellectual parroting of "facts" found only on a Media Matters website, as opposed to reality.

Rush is talking about this article and subject right now!

LOL,

Funny. The bed wetters say we parrot him.

Our entertainers parrot us, they parrot their entertainers.

 

[bripat9643]

It can easily be demonstrated.

Or lets just ask Edmund S. Phelps - 2006 Nobel winner in economic sciences

http://www.columbia.edu/~esp2/Critical Review Piece.pdf

No one has true Free Market Capitalism, sorry.

Could it be less regulated here and there, and more regulated in other places, yep. Go for it.

What do you imagine that proves? it's just a kneejerk retort liberals give whenever they can't discredit your argument using facts or logic. No country matches the liberal ideal either, whatever that is. The fact is that the more government interferes in economic and social matters, the more problems it causes. The recent sub-prime mortgage debacle is a classic example.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

No one has true Free Market Capitalism, sorry.

Could it be less regulated here and there, and more regulated in other places, yep. Go for it.

Such breadth and depth.

The writing I posted talks specifically about the less dynamism countries, i.e the far more corporatist ones than the US, perform even more poorly than our "version" of capitalism. Which isn't capitalism at all as Phelps points out at the end. Government collusion within economic sectors creates less dynamism, more corruption, more monopoly, less innovation and ultimately stagnant and declining societies.

But I'll believe your one line nonsense over Phelps.

What you believe is irrelevant. I don't care much what he believes either but I'll check it our when I have time.

And what he concludes is it is Capitalism, I read the last page, but not his favored version of it. I'm okay with that, it's not mine either. Unlike you, he doesn't say it doesn't exist. He's not that dumb.

He's quite clear, poindexter. "ACTUAL Capitalism in a country like the United States, I must emphasize, departs from the well-functioning dynamic capitalism I discussed."

He's making a distinction. For generations now people have blamed capitalism for something that isn't capitalism at all. He's just not coming out and saying it's corporatism, but it is. As he goes on to explain. I don't give a rats ass what you believe, because, frankly, you're full of shit. Parading around in a faux intellectual way. Except it's not convincing.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

It can easily be demonstrated.

Then do so? I enjoy tearing to pieces the crap you guys live your twisted little lives by.

Someone has already done it:

Interventionism: An Economic Analysis by Ludwig von Mises

Go ahead, tear it apart. You'd actually have to read it to do that, and then you might actually learn something that isn't 100% horseshit socialist propaganda.

Interesting but that has little to do with his position.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Such breadth and depth.

The writing I posted talks specifically about the less dynamism countries, i.e the far more corporatist ones than the US, perform even more poorly than our "version" of capitalism. Which isn't capitalism at all as Phelps points out at the end. Government collusion within economic sectors creates less dynamism, more corruption, more monopoly, less innovation and ultimately stagnant and declining societies.

But I'll believe your one line nonsense over Phelps.

What you believe is irrelevant. I don't care much what he believes either but I'll check it our when I have time.

And what he concludes is it is Capitalism, I read the last page, but not his favored version of it. I'm okay with that, it's not mine either. Unlike you, he doesn't say it doesn't exist. He's not that dumb.

He's quite clear, poindexter. "ACTUAL Capitalism in a country like the United States, I must emphasize, departs from the well-functioning dynamic capitalism I discussed."

He's making a distinction. For generations now people have blamed capitalism for something that isn't capitalism at all. He's just not coming out and saying it's corporatism, but it is. As he goes on to explain. I don't give a rats ass what you believe, because, frankly, you're full of shit. Parading around in a faux intellectual way. Except it's not convincing.

As I said, unlike you he doesn't say Capitalism in the US doesn't exist.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Or lets just ask Edmund S. Phelps - 2006 Nobel winner in economic sciences

http://www.columbia.edu/~esp2/Critical Review Piece.pdf

No one has true Free Market Capitalism, sorry.

Could it be less regulated here and there, and more regulated in other places, yep. Go for it.

What do you imagine that proves? it's just a kneejerk retort liberals give whenever they can't discredit your argument using facts or logic. No country matches the liberal ideal either, whatever that is. The fact is that the more government interferes in economic and social matters, the more problems it causes. The recent sub-prime mortgage debacle is a classic example.

That was Phelp's point. He simply used economic terms to make the distinction. using dynamism as a backdrop floor the separation from Europe and the US in their modeling.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The fact is that the more government interferes in economic and social matters, the more problems it causes.

That is not a fact, that is dogma.

 

[Mojo2]

Between a Government assuming they are better able to direct our lives than we are and which treats us like sheeple as they slimingly attack our freedom through our CHILDREN...

Or...

The Koch Brothers who proudly stand for our Constitution and God and traditional values...

You bet your ass we are better off with the Koch Brothers on our side than Obama, Hillary, Reid, Pelosi, Ayers and Alinsky!