Welcome to the second installment of my page-by-page rebuttal of Trevor Thomas's "plan". I was forced to split this up into sections due to the sheer size of Trevor's tome of a "plan" for West Michigan, and the amount of time it takes to call him out on some of his sheer inconsistent lunacy. Without further ado, I'll begin by covering Section 2: "Investing in a West Michigan for Tomorrow".
Page 9: (Infrastructure spending, Social Security)
- In order to "invest in tomorrow" (Man, this guy is just chock-full of politician-ese), we have to "invest in growing industries that will support the jobs of tomorrow". Subsidy Man, you're back already! It also includes "giving our children a world-class education", likely translating to more unconstitutional federal spending and control on education.
- What's more, Trevor wants to "preserve West Michigan's natural environment", which ultimately translates into regulations and restrictions of property rights, undermining one of the three cornerstones of our American Republic (the other two being life and liberty). IN addition, he wants to "ensure Michigan is getting its fair share of federal funding". So, instead of trying to curb the unconstitutional power of the Federal Government, Trevor would rather beg for handouts from them.
- Oh, this just gets funnier and funnier. "Investments in infrastructure create jobs now". First off, Trevor, they don't. All these "jobs" do is take money from the taxpayers (and the private sector), give it to the government, and the government then uses the money to create roads. There is no increase in wealth in this scenario. It is redistribution, plain and simple.
- What's more, Trevor wants to be "an advocate in the nation's capital who can work to ensure federal funding...to lay a strong foundation for our local communities." So, according to Trevor, without the federal government spending piles of money on public works, our entire society will crumble. Subsidy Man to the "rescue"!
- He will also fight to "provide further aid to states and localities to supplement local budgets". In other words, loot from the national treasury to pay for reckless state and local spending. It's just a spending extravaganza when Trevor's around, or should I say Subsidy man. For those of you who haven't had the fortune of reading Frederic Bastiat, I highly recommend his relevant essay, "Government", wherein he makes the obvious assertion that in order for the state to distribute funds, it must first steal the funds it distributes.
- That's all Trevor wants, to steal money from hard-working, tax-paying Americans to blindly throw out at corrupt local and state government offices, subsidies, public works, and a whole host of other idiotic ways to spend federal tax money.
- And next to bat, it's Statist Man, close ally to Subsidy Man. "I believe in Social Security, and I will fight for its continued sustainability and success." So, Trevor. You ever hear of the Constitution? You know, that thing all elected officials swear an oath to?
“I, (name of Member), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and
defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic;
that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation
freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well
and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter.
So help me God”
- Unlike Justin Amash, who follows this oath better than almost any other elected official in our nation's history, Trevor Thomas would override his oath, and his word, for the sake of, you guessed it, votes. For those of you wondering on the Constitutional authority for Social Security, there isn't one. Amendment X is a pretty strong warning against it, in fact. As Justice McReynolds said in his vote against it, “I can not find any authority in the Constitution for making the Federal Government the great almoner of public charity throughout the United States”.
- So, instead of logically allowing young people (like me) opt out of a system they have yet to pay into and don't want (again, like me), he'd rather force it down our throats with his "reforms", which would ultimately lead only to bankruptcy. That's where Trevor Thomas will lead you, folks. Bankruptcy and the dissolution of the American government.
- Right out of the gate, Trevor is calling for more regulation, this time with student loans. (What's that, you say? He's just doing that to try to curry the favor of college students, and their votes? Why, that's ridiculous! (Not)).
- He is "appalled" at the "recent inaction" by "some" to "allow student loan interest rates to double." In other words, those that support a free market are the bad guys, here. Sure they are, Subsidy Man/Regulation Man/Statist Man. Sure they are.
- "I will fight in Congress next year to bring down interest rates and establish a rate freeze". In other words, money lenders aren't allowed to dictate the terms to which they lend out their money, all because Trevor Thomas has such a bleeding heart for all these poor widdle college students. Ugh. You make me sick, Trevor.
- "Education is an economic issue as much as it is a moral issue." ...What. You're trying to tell me that education is a moral issue? I'm not sure how to respond to that. In addition to his blatant pro-union, pro-spending platform, he will also "fight for education funding". Yes, this is just the kind of man we need to go to Congress...look at all his "brilliant" plans.
- According to Trevor, if educators do not "feel valued in our society and are empowered to do their jobs well", society will crumble and we'll all be living in caves, eating stewed chickweed and acorns. Oh, surprise surprise, he directly takes a jab at one of my pet positions! "I oppose undermining our education system by pulling money out of the public schools through vouchers." In other words, his union overlords don't want to lose their monopoly on government funding (that is, stolen tax money) for education. So, rather than doing something that's good for the students, he'd rather blindly support the union, as he's been trained to do for his entire life.
- This one is oddly specific and leads me to assume that he's got some PAC money squirreled away. Michigan needs to "attract investments in advanced batteries", in order to make West Michigan "The Lithium Battery Capital of the Nation." He also proudly supports the blatant subsidy/distortion of the free market found in the act of Michigan companies being granted $450 million from the Department of Energy. Unconstitutional subsidy from an unconstitutional federal department, that's the Trevor Thomas way.
- What's more, Michigan also needs "investment" to be a leader in Wind Power. He supports subsidy for wind power production. Gee, I wonder who's supporting him now?
- For once, I agree with Trevor, but for all the wrong reasons. He wants to eliminate tax subsidies to oil companies, but instead of giving oil companies subsidies, wants to give them to battery manufacturers and wind power producers instead. Boy howdy, Subsidy Man, you get more and more inconsistent as time goes on, don't you? And you're still not even in Congress!
- He also spends half a page rambling on about Asian Carp in Lake Michigan, which I'm sure is a vital and Constitutional role of the federal government. (Hint: It's not).
- He begins with a heading of "Regulation of Oil Pipelines to Protect our Natural Resources". Great way to start, Trevor. "We must be committed to smart and reasonable regulation". No, no we musn't, Trevor. We should be committed to NO regulation. Like reasonable human beings.
- In addition, he wants to give the federal government (and the EPA) more control over Michigan, all for the sake of "protecting out natural resources".
- Oh, good gravy Subsidy Man, you're starting to hurt my head. "The federal government can help states transition to renewable energy sources by continuing to invest in research and development of these sources." Or, YOU KNOW, let the free market work. But sure, Subsidy Man, blindly throwing money at things is always your go-to solution.
- This is at least the tenth time he's paid lip service to "President Obama" in voicing his support for some asinine policy of his or another. It's starting to get tedious, Trevor.
- For a guy who claims to want to end subsidies (for one specific group of companies), he sure will throw even more money at different companies for the sake of votes. No wonder this guy worked for Granholm. Weasel is as weasel does.
- He now spends a half page elaborating on "climate change" and "carbon pollution", which as I'm sure you know is just code for "regulation" and "restriction". For someone who claims to want to create jobs, Trevor Thomas sure does blindly support measures that will make it incredibly difficult for companies to make a profit.
- And if anyone doesn't believe in man-caused global warming (such as myself), he claims that we are "folks who continue to recklessly dispute basic scientific facts." Say, Trevor, did you know economics is a science, too? If you like scientific facts so much, you should probably drop your support for subsidy, regulation, restriction, and disruption of property rights. After all, you are reckless disputing basic scientific facts!
- Oh, this is a fun one. Up until a few days ago, I had no earthly idea what "Fracking" was, and why everyone seemed to be talking about it so much. Apparently, it's a method of oil/natural gas drilling that some people are flipping their lids over. I support is wholeheartedly (as these businesses should be free to do whatever they see fit on property they own in order to turn a profit, provided it does not directly infringe on the life/liberty of others. You can't make a business selling tickets for your Death Arena, after all.)
- In any case, he specifically states his desire to "regulate fracking". He also claims, hilariously to stand up to special interests, when in fact the last four pages were him paying lip service to all the special interests supporting him, including alternative energy producers and unions.
No comments:
Post a Comment