Posts Tagged ‘Economy’

Why it’s Compassionate to Oppose Government Handouts

Thursday, August 15th, 2013

Compassion. Justice. Inequality. These hefty words have been hijacked by Leftists. Christians are struggling to get them back. But we are having a hard time shaking the nasty names being hurled our way in the battle of entitlement programs (a.k.a. government handouts) You know the insults: uncompassionate, heartless, and selfish. Ironic labels, considering Christian conservatives have dedicated their lives to a faith whose golden rule is “Love thy neighbor as thyself.” A misnomer to say the least.  whichreligioncaresabouthome

Name-calling may seem irrelevant to you bold, unflinching activists out there. This is true. Concerned Women for America (CWA) members know silly insults will never deter us from speaking truth (evidenced by the ridiculous and crude tweets I receive on a regular basis over my blogs).  But to the younger generation still trying to crack the code of their ideology, false accusations like “unjust” and “selfish” can be effective — albeit petty — tools used by Liberals to silence us.

The college classroom environment can be especially daunting for conservative students. Trust me. I remember how it stunk to stand up in front of my political science class and call for cut backs in government handouts to the so-called “needy.” A certain liberal student, who hadn’t even read the assignment, proceeded to stand up and tell the entire class that I obviously do not care about the poor, the sick, the elderly and the helpless. How could I retaliate? The liberal student sat down, thoroughly pleased with himself as roaring applause ensued. I even vaguely remember a standing ovation as I, the defeated greedy scrooge-of-a-conservative, slumped back into my seat. Alright, my memory may be exaggerating the standing ovation.

The point is that tackling entitlement reform is a dreaded topic for young conservatives. But all it is going to take for young conservatives to get over this fear and oppose government handouts is to know the truth and explain it simply and accurately.

For example: I have a friend who is an alcoholic. He constantly asks me for Vodka. In an effort to show him compassion, I buy his Vodka every week. But a stranger came along and told me I shouldn’t buy my friend’s Vodka anymore, because it was only causing more harm to my friend. Would you call that stranger uncompassionate? No. You would call him wise. You would, however, call me — the one providing my alcoholic dependent friend with Vodka free of charge — a bad friend.

Liberal activists and politicians are not stupid nor are they more interested in helping the less-fortunate. Building dependency means building a voter base for liberal politicians. They are not concerned with dependency’s impact on the debt crisis.

The Obama Administration and their cronies have perfected the welfare argument. TV commercials and radio ads tell us simple, pitiful stories of helpless individuals who cannot survive without the government’s support. But these are just politicos depending on dependency in order to maintain political power, not to care for the poor. If that were the case, then their priority would be solving the debt crisis through spending cuts and entitlement reform.

Here’s the kicker: Conservatives have proven themselves more generous and “compassionate” than Liberals. Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise. According to a 2006 ABC News piece by John Stossel and Kristina Kendall, research shows that conservatives donate 30 percent more to charities than do liberals, even though conservative families typically make less money. In the words of brilliant economist Thomas Sowell, “Being willing to donate the taxpayers’ money is not the same as being willing to put your own money where your mouth is.”

Record Number of Millennials Live with Parents

Friday, August 2nd, 2013

millenialsblogWe’ve all grown used to the fact that there are record numbers of people living on government assistance and that record numbers of women are unmarried. Now comes a simple headline that a record number — 36 percent — of young adults aged 18-31, the Millennials, are living with their parents. A just-released Pew Research study boils the data down to reveal that nearly 22 million young adults are unable to afford to become independent adults. The current 36 percent is a “slow but steady” climb from 32 percent in 2007 and 34 percent in 2009.

The percentages of young adults who have jobs or are in college also followed the same type of pattern. More young adults are going to college, and fewer are working in paying jobs. In 2007, college enrollment rose to 35 percent and to 39 percent in 2012. The number of Millennials with jobs was 70 percent in 2007 and only 63 percent in 2012.

More and more young people are choosing not to marry because they don’t think they can afford to get married; instead, far too many become promiscuous or they cohabitate serially.  These are the young people who will be underwriting ObamaCare well into their old age and who were the focus of the president’s “Hope and Change” campaign rhetoric. They are learning, the hard way, the importance of listening carefully to politicians and comparing rhetoric to reality.

Unfortunately, their lessons are coming too late and will exact a very high price, not just on them individually, but also on the broader society as well. While many Millennials are sleeping around, they are accumulating emotional and psychological baggage from abortions and physical damage from STDs (record numbers there, too, with nearly 20 million new STD cases annually, with most of them affecting 15- to 25-year-olds). Those who are cohabiting are raising record numbers of children in unstable relationships, and the number of single mothers and children in fatherless homes is setting records as well.

These are not cultural changes that bring hope; instead, they are changes that will wreak lifelong damage on today’s generation and continue emotional, spiritual, and physical havoc well into future generations.

Once again, a simple headline fact screams out, for those in the know, ramifications that affect us all.

First Family’s Lavish Trips a Slap in the Face

Wednesday, June 19th, 2013

It’s called “economizing,” Mr. and Mrs. Obama. Let’s all try it. (After you get back from your lavish $3,300-a-night stay in Dublin, of course.)

As her husband mingles with political leaders from the world’s wealthiest countries at the annual G-8 Summit, first lady Michelle Obama is living like a queen, enjoying an all-expense-paid vacation in Dublin, Ireland, courtesy of you, the hard-working taxpayer. And as the number one political concern among Americans remains focused on the growing $16 trillion debt, taxpayers are outraged by the price tags resulting from the first family’s atrocious spending habits.

The White House is justifying Mrs. Obama’s posh Irish trip as diplomatically necessary. However, the first lady’s official itinerary, reported by the Irish Times, includes zero ambassadorial events. Instead, Mrs. Obama and her two daughters, Malia and Sasha, are slated to visit the Trinity University Library to peruse their Irish family lineage, attend a performance of Dublin’s famous Riverdance Troupe, and stroll the Wicklow Mountains National Fobamasafariorest.

The real question is, don’t Americans already pay the State Department millions to take care of our foreign affairs? It’s a superfluous waste — and downright dishonest — to justify the cost of Mrs. Obama’s Dublin get-away as necessary for the stability of American-Irish relations. Oh, but wait. Perhaps State Dept. officials are tied up for the moment due to that nasty sex-trafficking scandal. Sure, that’s it.

As previously stated, Mrs. Obama is reportedly staying in a $3,300-a-night Dublin Hotel suite. She has reserved no less than 30 rooms for her entourage.  But this is chump change, really.  Next month brings with it a full flung African excursion that will be among the priciest first family trips in U.S. history with costs estimated between $60 and 100 million. The trip is labeled as a “Good Will” tour, but it’s interesting to note the itinerary included a family fun day on a Tanzanian safari. I fail to see the diplomatic implications of a safari day, and apparently so did the Washington Post and other major outlets who questioned both the purpose and enormous costs for security detail (animal snipers, et al). As a result of intense scrutiny from both sides of the political aisle, the White House put its proverbial tail between its legs and cancelled the outdoor excursion.

And lest we forget, these two trips follow on the heels the Obama’s 2012-2013 Hawaiian Christmas vacation, which cost taxpayers $7 million dollars.

Political partisanship, dear reader, should not cause you to dismiss the Obama’s vacation expenses. The fact is that our currently dismal economic climate — exacerbated by the Obama Administration — prevents most American families from taking a single vacation this year, let alone multiple trips.  Democrats, Republicans, liberal whack jobs, and conservative purists alike should be reeling over the wasteful spending habits of our president.  After all, the rest of America has learned how to budget, especially as a record-breaking 47.8 million Americans are on food stamps, the cost of living continues to soar, and millions of Americans are out of work.

Maybe it’s time the first family try a “stay-cation” — or a “no-cation” — for once.

Poverty Rises in the War on Women

Thursday, July 26th, 2012

Nearly all Americans have been hard hit by the recession, but women have been hit the hardest. A shocking 17 million women are now in poverty on President Obama’s watch, and almost 7.5 million women are in extreme poverty.

And reports of financial woes continue to rise. According to one study, 84% of women experience difficulty paying a bill on time, and 75% are having trouble making their rent or mortgage.

Share this infographic if you agree that it is time for our elected officials to recognize the real economic hardships American women are facing instead of propagating their false version of the “War on Women.”  (For a full-size version of this infographic, click here or on the graphic above.)

 

 

 

Rising Health Care Costs and the War on Women

Wednesday, July 25th, 2012

President Obama promised us that his health care reform would lower costs for women, but in reality, the law raises insurance premiums by $900 per year and imposes 21 new or higher taxes, increasing health care spending by 6.1%!

Everyone agrees that our health care system is broken, but President Obama’s health care law is just not the solution we need.

Share this infographic if you believe American women deserve real reform that reduces costs and increases the quality of American health care.  (For a full-size version of this infographic, click here.)

 

 

College Tuition and the War on Women

Tuesday, July 24th, 2012

Millions of American girls dream of going to college. And now-a-days, that dream is a reality for the 15 million women in college. However, the cost of college has increased by thousands of dollars each year, and as women outnumber men in college, they are feeling the brunt of these tuition hikes.

President Obama’s “student loan relief” plan promised hope, but it’s turned out to be an election-year mirage that doesn’t even attempt to tackle the real problem of soaring tuition costs, not to mention helping the millions of recent graduates who are unable to find work in the dismal economy of the last four years.

Instead of President Obama’s current policies — we need sound, free-market solutions that will create jobs for college graduates and lower the cost of college for women and men.

Share this infographic if you want to see America’s college graduates find good-paying jobs when they graduate! (For a full-size image, click the one above.)

 

 

The Real War on Women?

Monday, July 23rd, 2012

Recently, President Obama and fellow Democrats have been accusing conservatives of waging a “war on women.” Well here’s the funny thing, there really is a war on women going on — and it’s called the economy of the past four years.

To bring this stark fact to life, we have created seven different graphics showing how the current economic malaise is hurting women.

We’ll release one graphic a day for the rest of the week, starting today: Under President Obama there are 780,000 more unemployed women, an increase of eight percent.

To turn our economy around, we must support elected officials who will oppose job-killing regulations and wasteful government spending, and instead implement pro-growth economic policies that will create good-paying jobs for American women and men.

Please take a minute to share today’s graphic with your friends and family to help spread the word about the REAL war on women.  (The full-size version is available by clicking the graphic above.)

 

 

“You Didn’t Build That”

Tuesday, July 17th, 2012

President ObamaMany were shocked when President Obama said to an audience in Roanoke, Virginia this Sunday that, “If you’ve got a business—you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.” But why the surprise? Didn’t the Obama campaign already show its opposition to individual success when it unveiled “Julia,” a picture presentation of how women are better off thanks to President Obama’s policies.

In a slideshow spanning her whole lifetime, Julia comes off less as a successful woman than as a poster child for big government bureaucrats who’d rather have a say in who succeeds and who fails. For every part of her life, there’s no question that someone else makes things happen.

It’s an insult to women everywhere. The campaign stands by their story line. The question is: why does the Obama campaign paint every American with the same brush? Does he think we’re all equally in need of his assistance?

Mr. Mom and the Mancession

Tuesday, January 10th, 2012

The nation is supposedly in an economic recovery period; some are calling it the post-”Great Recession.”  Others are calling this time a “mancession,” because the trends are defying the norms of gender roles, child rearing, and employment trends.  Oddly, the new domestic realities here in the U.S. are global trends existing in most of the developed countries.  While these new changes – including gender shifts – are troubling here in our country, other nations are facing far more complex ramifications.  For example, in Japan, women face an increased burden as breadwinners, giving young women less incentive to marry and have children in a country that already has the fastest-aging population in the world.

According to the Pew Research Center, “From December 2007 to May 2011, the employment of men has decreased from 70.7 million to 66.1 million, or by 4.6 million. For women, employment has fallen from 67.3 million to 64.9 million, or by 2.4 million. Thus, while men have taken an early lead in the recovery, they still have far more ground to cover than women to return to pre-recession employment levels.”

The U.S. Census Bureau provides corroboration, “one in three fathers with working wives is now a regular source of care for their children, the number of dads regularly caring for children age 15 and under increased from 26% in 2002 to 32% in 2010, and one-fifth of fathers with preschool-age children now serve as the primary caregiver.”

To put it in laymen’s terms, as Dr. Mark J. Perry, professor of economics and finance at the University of Michigan, notes, “Despite the recent job gains for men since early 2010, the Great Recession has still had a disproportionately and significantly negative effect on men compared to women, and it’s not even close: For every 100 jobs lost by women since January 2008, men have lost 192 jobs, so it’s still very much of a ‘mancession,’ despite the recent ‘hecovery’” (emphasis mine).

Statisticians and economists aren’t the only ones focusing on the recent gender role changes; the media and entertainment industries have brought the issue into America’s homes with TV shows like NBC’s “Up All Night,” a series about a professional woman, her supportive stay-at-home husband, and the adjustments they make with the birth of their new baby.  Then there’s ABC’s “Work It,” which debuted January 3, 2012, and “centers on two unemployed men who believe that the current economic recession and job shortage affect men more than it does women.  Lee Standish then decides to apply for a job at Coreco Pharmaceuticals dressed as a woman and is hired.  Character development, starting in the first episode, involves the guys learning how to be more ‘sensitive.’”

Even the retail fashion industry has recognized the ramifications of the current “mancession” with the launch of a National Suit Drive by specialty retail giant Men’s Wearhouse, which collected over 102,000 items of donated professional clothing and matched each of the 22,746 suit donations with a new dress shirt and tie to help men “suit up” for job interviews in an attempt to offset the “mancession.”

Such are the trends as feminists celebrate the 40th anniversary of Ms Magazine.  Seeing men emasculated by these cultural trends reminds us of our frequent warnings about predictable unintended consequences of public policy and cultural changes.

Our guest blogger today is Elizabeth Waller.  Elizabeth serves as a research fellow for Concerned Women for America‘s Beverly LaHaye Institute.

Government’s “Can’t Do” Spirit Will Kill Us All

Tuesday, December 13th, 2011

Want to start up a small business? At the federal, state, and local levels of government, you’ll be responsible for 43 forms each year, some of which have extremely expensive penalties attached if you are late.

In the 1930s, Ruth Briscoe, a young woman from a poor minister’s family, was trying desperately to become a teacher.  Struggling like everyone else, simply buying food was a hardship.  In the midst of the Great Depression, Ruth could not find anyone to hire her.  But instead of relying on the government, Ruth relied on her creativity and sheer determination to earn money.  She created her own job by going door to door, selling fruit and candy she made in her humble kitchen.  Ruth’s home venture was so successful that the profits she made were enough to help her through that dark period in America’s history.

Recently, President Obama appeared on 60 Minutes to discuss our nation’s current and extraordinarily deep recession with unemployment rates at nine percent and, really, 17 percent when counting all the people who are no longer looking for jobs or working part-time, and he used the opportunity to blame Republicans in Congress for blocking his policy efforts and stifling job growth.

One wonders why more people don’t take a cue from Ruth Briscoe’s entrepreneurial spirit and start their own business, thus, creating their own job?  Clearly, the growth of small businesses is the key to getting out of this fiscal mess. But things are different now.

In reality, small business creation is now plagued by government regulation costs and increased taxes at every level of government, lending truth to the popular maxim, “It takes money to make money.”  Yet, for many Americans on a shoe-string budget, overbearing government interference limits their economic freedom to innovate and develop jobs.

Today, if Ruth wanted to start up her small business in my town, she would be responsible for 43 forms each year at the federal, state, and local levels of government.  Some of those forms have extremely expensive penalties attached if you are late.  Some areas of the country are even more burdensome.  And this doesn’t take into consideration all the other regulations she would incur.  God forbid if she doesn’t have a commercial kitchen in which to make that candy.

Thanks to overregulation by state health departments, it’s virtually impossible to start up home businesses that revolve around homemade goods.  Now, I get that there are a lot of people out there who don’t share my sanitary cooking practices and the protection of public health is appropriate, but the amount of nightmarish regulations the U.S. Food Safety and Inspection Service (USDA) and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) have created are overwhelming.

To legally run her home-based business today, Ruth would need to install a brand new kitchen in her home, complete with separate stainless steel sinks, counters, and expensive oven exhaust hoods.  Then Ruth would need to be sure her neighborhood is within local commercial zoning limits before she could even think about selling her goods.

The total cost of government regulations is reportedly $1.75 trillion each year with new rules and costs appearing every day.  It’s little wonder so many Americans who are trying to keep their small businesses afloat hire illegal immigrants in order to sidestep all the regulatory red tape.

Americans realize there must be an overhaul in government regulation, tax, and spending reform before citizens have the ability to create their own jobs and success like Ruth Briscoe did.  A new poll by the Polling Company, on behalf of Concerned Women for America (CWA), was conducted of Republican caucus voters.  It reveals that 94 percent of Iowa voters, 89 percent of New Hampshire voters, and 87 percent of voters in South Carolina agree that our burdensome government is stifling economic opportunities and employment solutions for Americans.

The government needs to butt out of private business.  In the end, it will not be heightened government rules that recover the nation; it will be the ingenuity, drive, and freedom of everyday men and women to take risks that will ultimately end this dim economic period and continue the legacy of American prosperity and success for future generations.

Ruth Briscoe lived to be a wonderful teacher, wife, and mother to three children, including my husband’s mother.  Thank God she had that American “can do” spirit that she passed on to her children and grandchildren.