Political Bias in Colleges

                     

Surveys at colleges indicate the overwhelming bias toward the Democrat party candidates over Republicans by faculty.

                       

Example: Surveys showed that close to 80% of faculty voted for Democrat John Kerry In 2004, About 1% voted for Ralph Nader, and only 20% voted for President George W. Bush. Social science professors, gave Ralph Nader about 20% of the 2004 vote, as large as that for President George W. Bush.

                       

That study is just the start. The pattern continued apace in 2006, 2008 and 2012 elections.

                       

And it gets more slanted when the study delves into specific areas. Liberals outnumber conservatives by 11 to 1 among social scientists and 13 to 1 among the humanities professors. As many as 25% of those who teach sociology consider themselves Marxist.

                       

At major graduate schools offering Ph.Ds, over 60% of faculty are Democrats, 30.% are independents and 10% are Republicans. (See the Earl J. Weinreb NewsHole® comments and @BusinessNewshole at Twitter.)

Misleading “Poverty”

                       

Thomas Sowell, one of my favorite economists, noted that “ If there were a contest for the most misleading words used in politics, ‘poverty’ should be one of the leading contenders...”

                       

Having grown up in poverty, and oppressive discrimination, Mr. Sowell knows well of what he speaks.

                       

But the “poverty-stricken” of the U.S. today, for the most part, have cars, color cable TVs, air conditioners, their own homes and other amenities, that the poor of other nations would never dream of ever possessing.

                       

As Thomas Sowell says, “ This is not just a question of

semantics. The whole future of the welfare state depends on how poverty is defined. 'The poor are the human shields behind whom advocates of ever bigger spending for ever bigger government advance toward their goal.”

                       

After all, how would the liberals sell their bigger government without poverty propaganda? (See the Earl J. Weinreb NewsHole® comments and @BusinessNewshole at Twitter.)

Graduate School Liberal Educators

                          

Further to my ongoing comments on predominant liberal professors, the problem is not confined to undergraduate schools.

                       

At major graduate schools offering Ph.Ds, over 60% of faculty vote Democrats, 30%  independents and only 10%  Republicans.

                       

This demonstrates the problems in attempting to educate

those who become our future teachers, community leaders, and members of the media.

                       

A further surprise: Business school professors who are believed to be chiefly conservative, actually vote as liberals.

                       

My experience on Wall Street indicates that many there tend to be liberal. This is, of course, contrary to what the media tries to impress on the general public. (See the Earl J. Weinreb NewsHole® comments and @BusinessNewshole at Twitter.)

Does it Cost the Government to Cut Taxes?

                       

Capital gains and dividends at only 15% are said to “cost” the government well over $400 billion each year. Capital gains at death are $200 or so billion. But what if there were no capital gains and dividend taxes?

                       

The political left continues to think of tax "cost” in terms of “static" accounting. That is, they think solely in terms of what the government gives up first in tax elimination, but not in potential revenues from such action.

                       

However, past experience indicates that lower tax rates produce higher tax revenues. A look at gigantic tax revenue increases after the Reagan tax cuts is but one positive proof. The George W. Bush tax cuts are another.

                       

For reasons known only to those who want higher tax rates because they produce more massive government, the left thus persists in mouthing antiquated tax “costs” jargon. (See the Earl J. Weinreb NewsHole® comments and @BusinessNewshole at Twitter.)

The “Taxing the Rich” Diatribe

                                           

Whenever a politician utters the magic phrase “Tax the Rich” I suggest you put on your thinking cap and remember these facts:

                       

About 9 million Americans earned $10 million dollars or more a year. They sure are rich. If you taxed those scoundrels 100% of their earnings, every penny they were “lucky” to get, the government would come up with about $250 billion. That lasts Uncle Sam a few weeks.

                       

The truth: The top 1% earners pay about half of taxes, so if some folks are getting away with not paying enough taxes, it’s not the ‘RICH’

                       

Furthermore, most of the rich earn, not inherit their wealth, thus taxes are a burden on the entrepreneurial, job- producing economy. (See the Earl J. Weinreb NewsHole® comments and @BusinessNewshole at Twitter.)

Inept Rich and Poor Measurements

                       

There is a big difference between rich and poor groups in the U. S.. However, folks within the actual numbers are not the same each time the statistics are noted.

                       

Individuals move from one category to another within groups. The poor people measured at one time may not be the same that are being counted in the following survey. They may no longer be poor.

                       

Millions keep constantly moving from one income category to another. Thus, you may have been in the poor bracket in the first measurement, but have now moved into to a higher level.

                       

This throws much of liberal political policy into a loop, whenever they talk about handouts for the poor, or the need for a livable wage for the poverty-stricken, or for those earning a minimum wage.

                       

The Left conveniently goes on the assumption that earnings of those they measure are static. That it’s the same folks entrenched in constant financial mire. And that they need a hand to move out of the poverty group. Most have already left with each measurement.

                       

The truth is, in the U.S. most are moving outward and upward. (See the Earl J. Weinreb NewsHole® comments and @BusinessNewshole at Twitter.)

1930’s Tax Lessons Still Not Learned

                      

Increased taxes were a major part of Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal, during the 1930’s, along with an expansion of strict political controls. Merely started by President Herbert Hoover, the actions devastated the American economy in the 1930’s.

                       

All this central planning around open and hidden taxes is where we are mired under this Administration. Yet, with financial history for us to learn from, we have not acquired any practical lesson from the 1930’s Great Depression.

                       

The Administration has attempted to tax the U.S. out of a recession, right into stagflation. Where we suffer from a lack of decent, private-industry jobs, amidst higher prices. (See the Earl J. Weinreb NewsHole® comments and @BusinessNewshole at Twitter.)