We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
"Economics is not always intuitive – and that is what makes it such a fascinating and important discipline. Take what economists call “incidence” – the study of who actually bears the burden of a particular tax. It is obvious enough that employees pay income tax. But it is much harder to actually work out who really ends up paying for other taxes; voters are often fooled into thinking that somebody else, usually big business, is being hit by higher taxes while in fact it is them who are picking up the tab, albeit in a way that is impossible to detect."
Who pays taxes on business? The shareholders and the consumers. As of 2002, 49% of Americans owned equities.
My son was an utter scholastic failure, joined the army, and was deployed to Bosnia and Iraq. Since rejoining the civilian world he has earned a bachelor's degree and an MBA, in both cases in the top 2% of his classes. If asked about the turn-around he will reply that after experiencing actual combat he found school was quite easy.
Businesses don't pay taxes. They simply pass taxes on to their customers as higher prices. All so called business taxes are actually consumer taxes because the consumer of the product or service can't pass the tax on to anybody else and has to pay the tax.
Obama is expecting that most civilians won't know that exploratory oil and gas drilling is not the same as producing proven reserves. [You have to dig up to eleven or twelve dry holes for every proven reserve deposit you find.] After all, some years ago, exploratory drilling was done in ANWAR, that touch-me-not tree-hugger section of Alaska, and so far, not a single producing well has been dug. And that's what the present administration is planning for the off-shore drilling they say that they support. Lotsa exploratory wells which they will allow our oil and gas companies to spend tons of money drilling exploratory wells offshore, but no production wells once they have found proven reserves. See, you pacify the foolish civilians but then you can claim there's nothing there. And therefore the government can keep its strangle-hold on energy prices and keep them sky-rocketing. Obama is the guy, remember, who said in campaigning that he was going to "bankrupt the coal companies."
The Barnett Shale proven reserves of oil and gas, and those in that huge shale field in the upper Northeast that I can't offhand remember the name of, are already proven and ready to be produced, and they are right here inside the borders of the United States.
But that would be too easy. We would actually get mega amounts of natural gas and petroleum from these fields, and we wouldn't even have Russia breathing down our necks, as they will be in their projected drilling in the Gulf of Mexico Our government doesn't want us to have enough oil and gas produceable deposits to protect our supplies and keep our country running. That would mean that the government wouldn't be controlling our energy supplies, just as they now control our healthcare.
"What's wrong with Sousa?"
Easy. He was the head of a military band, and all things military (certainly US military) are bad - correct? This does not apply to the "Triumphal March" from Aida of course. Or the number I use as a ringtone, "Entrance of the Gladiators."
- - -
"Sexting" - criminal kid pr0n? Well... once released into the wild (aka internet) it can be used thus, but then so can the depictions of child-cherubs in religious art.
Note, the linked article is primarily about a case being brought against males for having/distributing pics but complains (among other things) not against the female originators: there are other places pursuing the girls/women as well as the males. Is that better, because less discriminatory, or worse because even more-stupid overkill?
Not to go off-topic, but Instapundit has a wonderful link to a guy who suggests that we not spend horrendous amounts of money on full-body-scan devices which embarrass the modest flying public. Instead, we should spend less amounts of money on little booths into which passengers step, which would automatically set off any explosives they might be carrying. "Muffled explosions" follow, and, in due time, the airline which the guilty passenger would have been flying on, announces that they now have a seat for one of its stand-by passengers.