))
…..and State-Run Media cheer it on and on and on.

Another favorite Lib hurdy-gurdy. In theory, this makes a little more sense than building bridges-to-nowhere (or breaking windows, as in the old broken-window illustration); in fact, it is akin to tax cuts.

There are still some problems, though. It seems attractive because, after all, aren’t we keeping these poor people from starving? Actually, no. No one is starving in America.

By “giving it to the poor” we actually do two unfortunate things: first, we discourage the poor from getting real jobs; second, we give to people who are not making really sound financial decisions. They are likely to spend poorly – frequently for things they cannot afford, and will be repo’d (like big-screen HD TVs).

“The Poor”, by and large, are people who have made choices (often, the express choice to live without attempting to earn an income), but who are still capable of improving their lot by being motivated to make better choices. Give-aways do not motivate better choices.

Then they’ll have money to buy things, thereby stimulating the economy the old-fashioned way.

They don’t give it to the poor. If you have ever tried to get help, because you have nothing else you can do… you don’t get it. So that Mom and lady, should be replaced with special interests or other bailouts… because it isn’t getting to us.

Toby, it’s awesome.

Toby, it’s awesome.