AOC’s ‘Tax The Rich’ Dress Maker Aurora James is IRS Deadbeat in Multiple States

AOC was mocking the little people. Partying with the filthy rich, shaking her ass at the little people.

The ‘Tax the Rich’ dress designer whom Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez  went to the Met Gala with:

• Owes $103,220 in back taxes
• Received $41,666 in PPP
• Has ‘legions’ of unpaid interns
• Owes $62,722 in workers comp
• Still found $250,000 for a table at the Met Gala

AOC’s ‘Tax the Rich’ dress designer Aurora James owes debt in multiple states

By Jon Levine and Kathianne Boniello, NY Post, September 18, 2021:

Designer Aurora James called her “Tax the Rich” dress for Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez a “powerful message” — but it’s not one she has taken to heart.

The 37-year-old fashionista who made waves at the Met Gala with Democratic-Socialist AOC last week is a notorious tax deadbeat with unpaid debts dogging her in multiple states, records show.

Most of luxe-living James’ arrears center on Cultural Brokerage Agency, an LLC she formed in 2011 to serve as the parent company of her fashion brand, which today is known as Brother Vellies. It’s a favorite of people like Beyoncé, Rihanna, and Meghan Markle.

The company racked up three open tax warrants in New York state for failing to withhold income taxes from employees’ paychecks totaling $14,798, the state Department of Taxation and Finance told The Post. The debts — which were incurred before the pandemic — stem from 2018 and 2019. The company has been hit with 15 warrants in total since 2015.

Front page of the New York Post on Sept. 19, 2021.Front page of the New York Post on Sept. 19, 2021.

The company got into a deeper hole with the feds. Between April 2018 and April 2019, the Internal Revenue Service placed six federal liens on Cultural Brokerage Agency totaling $103,220. The liens specifically cite the company’s failure to remit employee payroll taxes.

The IRS declined to comment on their current status.

“Just because they take it out of your paycheck doesn’t mean they’re sending it to the government,” David Cenedella, a Baruch College taxation lecturer explained after reviewing the liens. “It’s certainly not something you want. I would not say your average business out there has this. Something went wrong.”

Aurora James has a new home in California.

Aurora James owes $2,504 in property taxes on this home.

While James apparently has no problem stiffing the Taxman, she isn’t shy about taking money from taxpayers — her company received in $41,666 in pandemic relief aid.

Over the years Cultural Brokerage Agency has also faced multiple legal challenges as a result of habitual nonpayment of worker benefits.

In October 2019 the state Worker’s Compensation Board slapped the company with a $17,000 fine for not carrying worker’s-comp insurance between March 2017 and February 2018. The company currently owes $62,722 and no payments have been received to date, a rep for the board told The Post. Workers’ comp is paid out when an employee is hurt at work and misses time.
The interior of Aurora James’ home in Los Angeles.
The interior of Aurora James’ home in Los Angeles.

Ex-staffers blasted the operation as a sweatshop that relied on legions of unpaid interns working full-time jobs.

“I experienced a lot of harassment when I worked for her,” one former contract employee told The Post. “Aurora would ask me to do things that were not in anyone’s job description, like scheduling her gynecological appointments. The work environment was so hostile that I was afraid to ask for my check.” The employee was ultimately terminated.

An ex-intern called James “quite cold,” adding that “she never gives recognition or acknowledgement to her team.”

James is also an alleged rent deadbeat, records show.
Aurora James and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez attend The 2021 Met Gala Celebrating In America: A Lexicon Of Fashion at Metropolitan Museum of Art on September 13, 2021 in New York City.Aurora James called her “Tax the Rich” dress for Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez a “powerful message” — but it’s not one she has taken to heart.Getty Images

In August 2020, James’ landlord filed papers to evict Brother Vellies from their location at 71 Franklin St. in Brooklyn, as well as demanding more than $25,000 plus interest for staying beyond the end of her lease. The case was settled.

She was sued by a previous landlord in February 2018 for more than $5,000 in unpaid rent at her shop’s old address at 209 West 38th Street in Manhattan.

“Aurora, obviously we did not want it to come to this, but you never have paid your rent in a timely manner,” wrote Matthew Mandell, a rep for her Manhattan landlord in a frustrated March 2018 email. “We have been more than patient.”

Though AOC proudly labeled James a “working class” designer as they waltzed down the Met Gala red carpet, her lifestyle has been anything but. As the pandemic raged across America, igniting a deep recession, James scooped up a $1.6 million residence in Los Angeles in September 2020.

The Tudor-style home with cathedral ceilings, a master-bedroom fireplace and backyard hot tub sits on 7,095 square feet in the posh Hollywood Hills, according to RedFin.

True to form, the property is already listed as “delinquent” by the Los Angeles County assessor’s office, which told The Post James owed $2,504 in property taxes.

Though AOC was comped tickets to the annual ball for boldfacers, entry to the famously exclusive Met Gala runs $35,000 a head. James attended the bash with Benjamin Bronfman, a rumored boyfriend she’s frequently spotted with. Bronfman, 39, is a scion of the powerful Bronfman family and its distilling empire. He is worth an estimated $100 million.

Photos from the event show the pair smiling broadly with Ocasio-Cortez and her boyfriend Riley Roberts.

James’ unpaid bills belie her champagne tastes. She frequently jets off to exclusive locations, her Instagram richly decorated with photos from Jamaica, Morocco, France, Indonesia, Mexico, Italy, the United Kingdom and The Hamptons.

The 37-year-old fashionista who made waves at the Met Gala with Democratic-Socialist AOC last week is a notorious tax deadbeat with unpaid debts dogging her in multiple states.

She also found money to make a $2,700 donation to Hillary Clinton in 2016.

“It’s the height of hypocrisy when socialists attend a $30,000 per ticket gala with a message of ‘tax the rich’ while wearing an overpriced dress by a luxury designer who doesn’t pay taxes,” Republican Staten Island Congresswoman Nicole Malliotakis told The Post. “What happened to everyone paying their fair share?”

Both James and her reps did not respond to multiple requests for comment from The Post.

James pushed progressive causes long before making headlines for dressing America’s most famous socialist. After the death of George Floyd in May 2020, she created the 15 percent pledge, demanding that major companies commit to buying 15% of their products from black-owned businesses. The idea took off with major companies like Bloomingdale’s, Vogue, Sephora, and Crate & Barrel, according to a 15 percent pledge website.

“This is the least you can do for us. We represent 15% of the population and we need to represent 15% of your shelf space,” James said in an Instagram post announcing the idea.

Ocasio-Cortez, who has made a career out of demanding better worker wages and benefits, and taxing the rich to pay for her budget-busting federal programs, did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

Pelosi Says Capitalism Has Not Helped U.S. Economy, Argues ‘We Have To Correct That’

This is a communist coup on America.

Ayn Rand on Capitalism, 

“Capitalism did not create poverty — it inherited it.” For much of human history, the vast majority of the population was mired in poverty. All too often, the average individual lived in unimaginably wretched conditions. It was only in the nineteenth century, and then only in the West, that the masses started to enjoy prosperity because of capitalism.

“The nineteenth century was the ultimate product and expression of the intellectual trend of the Renaissance and the Age of Reason, which means: of a predominantly Aristotelian philosophy. And, for the first time in history, it created a new economic system, the necessary corollary of political freedom, a system of free trade on a free market: capitalism.”

“No, it was not a full, perfect, unregulated, totally laissez-faire capitalism—as it should have been. Various degrees of government interference and control still remained, even in America—and this is what led to the eventual destruction of capitalism. But the extent to which certain countries were free was the exact extent of their economic progress. America, the freest, achieved the most.”

“Never mind the low wages and the harsh living conditions of the early years of capitalism. They were all that the national economies of the time could afford. Capitalism did not create poverty—it inherited it. Compared to the centuries of precapitalist starvation, the living conditions of the poor in the early years of capitalism were the first chance the poor had ever had to survive. As proof—the enormous growth of the European population during the nineteenth century, a growth of over 300 per cent, as compared to the previous growth of something like 3 per cent per century.”

“The flood of misinformation, misrepresentation, distortion, and outright falsehood about capitalism is such that the young people of today have no idea (and virtually no way of discovering any idea) of its actual nature. While archeologists are rummaging through the ruins of millennia for scraps of pottery and bits of bones, from which to reconstruct some information about prehistorical existence—the events of less than a century ago are hidden under a mound more impenetrable than the geological debris of winds, floods, and earthquakes: a mound of silence.”

“Capitalism is a social system based on the recognition of individual rights, including property rights, in which all property is privately owned.”

“The recognition of individual rights entails the banishment of physical force from human relationships: basically, rights can be violated only by means of force. In a capitalist society, no man or group may initiate the use of physical force against others. The only function of the government, in such a society, is the task of protecting man’s rights, i.e., the task of protecting him from physical force; the government acts as the agent of man’s right of self-defense, and may use force only in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use; thus the government is the means of placing the retaliatory use of force under objective control.”

“The moral justification of capitalism lies in the fact that it is the only system consonant with man’s rational nature, that it protects man’s survival qua man, and that its ruling principle is: justice.”

“In a capitalist society, all human relationships are voluntary. Men are free to cooperate or not, to deal with one another or not, as their own individual judgments, convictions, and interests dictate. They can deal with one another only in terms of and by means of reason, i.e., by means of discussion, persuasion, and contractual agreement, by voluntary choice to mutual benefit. The right to agree with others is not a problem in any society; it is the right to disagree that is crucial. It is the institution of private property that protects and implements the right to disagree—and thus keeps the road open to man’s most valuable attribute (valuable personally, socially, and objectively): the creative mind.”

“Capitalism demands the best of every man—his rationality—and rewards him accordingly. It leaves every man free to choose the work he likes, to specialize in it, to trade his product for the products of others, and to go as far on the road of achievement as his ability and ambition will carry him. His success depends on the objective value of his work and on the rationality of those who recognize that value. When men are free to trade, with reason and reality as their only arbiter, when no man may use physical force to extort the consent of another, it is the best product and the best judgment that win in every field of human endeavor, and raise the standard of living—and of thought—ever higher for all those who take part in mankind’s productive activity.” 

Pelosi Says Capitalism Has Not Helped US Economy ‘As Well As It Should,’ Argues ‘We Have To Correct That’

By Brianna Lyman, Daily Caller, September 17, 2021:

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said Friday capitalism “has not served our economy as well as it should” but insisted it is a system to improve rather than abandon.

“In America, capitalism is our system, it is our economic system, but it has not served our economy as well as it should,” Pelosi said at a Chatham House event in the United Kingdom, according to Reuters. “So what we want to do is not depart from that, but to improve it.”

Pelosi said “stakeholder capitalism” has historically been beneficial to the states as it has allowed both workers’ wages and management’s to rise as productivity increases, according to The Washington Post. Pelosi, however, criticized “shareholder capitalism” which she says causes employees’ salaries to remain the same despite a growth in productivity.

“You cannot have a system where the success of some springs from the exploitation of the workers and springs from the exploitation of the environment and the rest, and we have to correct that.”

Pelosi has remained steadfast in her commitment to capitalism, albeit with some adjustments to the system.

When asked by a left-leaning student in 2017 whether Democrats should move farther left with “a more stark contrast to right-wing economics,” Pelosi immediately clarified Democrats are capitalists.

“I have to say, we’re capitalists, that’s just the way it is,” she responded, according to NYU Local. “However, we do think that capitalism is not necessarily meeting the needs with the income inequality that we have in our country.”

“We’re a capitalist system. The free market is – is a place that can do good things.”

RELATED ARTICLES:

Top Senate Republican Grills Biden EPA Nominee Over ‘Resist Capitalism’ Tweet

With Multiple Crisis’ Looming, Bloody Biden Takes a Long Weekend Vacation

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

New Plan Would Push Top Tax Rate to Almost 60 Percent In These 4 States

If Congress’s new tax hikes come through, successful residents in high-tax states will be placed in a terrible position.


Successful residents of high-tax states are in for an ugly surprise if new tax legislation passes in Congress. Democratic legislators are currently proposing a multi-trillion-dollar tax hike to raise revenue for a massive welfare and climate change spending plan. Proposed tax hikes include raising the corporate tax rate, higher taxes on cigarettes and vaping products, raising the capital gains tax rate, and higher individual income tax rates.

On the last front, the proposed income tax increase would apply to income over $400,000 for an individual and raise the rate from its current 37 percent to 39.6 percent. The proposal also includes a 3 percent surcharge on all income above $5 million. The tax hikes could push Americans in states like New York, California, New Jersey, and Hawaii up to nearly 60 percent top income tax rates.

“For New Yorkers earning more than $5 million, the combined city, state and federal tax rate would skyrocket to 61.2% under the House plan,” Fox Business reports. “The combined rate in California, meanwhile, would spike to 59.7%, while the wealthiest individuals living in New Jersey could pay a rate as high as 57.2%. In Hawaii, the combined marginal rate would be an estimated 57.4%.”

That’s right: High-earning residents of these states could end up paying nearly 60 percent tax rates on their income earned above a certain level. That’s an obscene and fundamentally unfair level of taxation. But such punitive levels of taxation are also highly impractical and certain to have adverse economic consequences.

For one thing, successful residents can simply move to another state. It is only the combination of high federal income taxes and high state-level income taxes that leads to these combined rates of nearly 60 percent. Yet some states, such as New Hampshire and Florida, have no income tax at all.

We’ve already seen an exodus of wealth, people, and major businesses from states like California, and that trend will only accelerate if taxes are sent even higher by this new plan. It’s only logical: states that heavily tax something are discouraging it, while states that don’t tax it at all are welcoming it. Why would anyone want to discourage income-earning?

Punitive taxation has ramifications for more than just the high-earning individuals and families directly impacted by higher tax rates. If they leave the state, they take with them jobs, investment funds, and spending that would otherwise go back into their communities.

It’s true that not all high-earners will flee states with these punitively high taxes. Some, for a variety of reasons, will stay. But even for these individuals, the high tax rates will backfire, because they’ll create perverse incentives and discourage economic activity above a certain level.

Why?

Well, people make economic decisions “on the margin.” What this means is that they evaluate each additional hour worked on the basis of whether the potential benefits exceed the costs. Then, they work up until the point where the costs begin to exceed the benefits.

When the government applies 60 percent tax rates to income above a certain point, it drastically reduces the benefits of additional labor subject to that tax. Yet the costs of working remain the same. As a result, far less economic activity will happen beyond that threshold.

Think about it like this. A successful entrepreneur founded a restaurant and when it did well, opened up two other locations. Does he add a fourth or rest on his laurels?

Well, if he will only get to keep 40 percent of the income he earns from new locations, because he’s now already making $400,000, he probably won’t bother to expand. Who would want to work more and hustle harder only to hand over 60 cents of every dollar to the government? This economic disincentive hurts more than one entrepreneur—it means jobs never created, customers never satisfied, income never earned, and a community never enriched.

Another problem with highly progressive tax rates is that they discourage economic investment. The same “rich” citizens who would face these 60 percent tax rates are those who would otherwise save and invest that money into the economy. (Rather than simply spend it as low-earners tend to do). As the economist Ludwig von Mises put it, “Progressive taxation of income and profits means that precisely those parts of the income which people would have saved and invested are taxed away.”

Ultimately, 60 percent tax rates are confiscatory, unfair, and economically indefensible. If Congress’s new tax hikes come through, successful residents in high-tax states will be placed in a terrible position. Luckily, they have the option to move to less hostile states. Don’t be surprised when many take it.

WATCH: New Biden Vax Mandate Doesn’t Make ANY Sense (Here’s Why)

COLUMN BY

Brad Polumbo

Brad Polumbo (@Brad_Polumbo) is a libertarian-conservative journalist and Policy Correspondent at the Foundation for Economic Education.

Like this story? Click here to sign up for the FEE Daily and get free-market news and analysis like this from Policy Correspondent Brad Polumbo in your inbox every weekday.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

AOC Defends Tax the Rich’ Dress at $30,000 Per Ticket Met Gala

“It’s My ‘Responsibility’ To Party With Elites, ‘Haters’” – Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (D-NY)


Tax AOC.

She makes Marie Antoinette look like a public advocate. She parades herself in front of millionaire pop stars, wealthy actors, New York socialites, trust fund society swans and members of the glitterati where Individual tickets were $35,000 and tables started at $200,000.

AOC who makes an annual salary of $174,000 as a congresswoman was wearing a “Tax the Rich” dress at an elitist event held in New York City. An event that cost $30k a ticket. In fact, some of the tables reportedly cost more than $275,000. And do you think the folks attending this event were wearing the masks, that they demand the rest of us wear? It’s such a joke. Naturally, the corrupt mainstream media will not expose this blatant hypocrisy.

AOC Defends: It’s My ‘Responsibility’ To Party With Elites, ‘Haters’

By Daily Wire, September 14, 2021

Far-left Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (D-NY) tried to defend herself online after she was swarmed with criticism for wearing an emblazoned “Tax the Rich” dress to the Met Gala, where tables could reportedly cost more than $275,000 and individual tickets are priced at around $30,000.

AOC scolded “haters” about the criticism and contended that going to the fancy event with rich elites was actually her just doing her job as a congresswoman in New York City.

“And before haters get wild flying off the handle, New York elected officials are routinely invited to and attend the Met due to our responsibilities in overseeing and supporting the city’s cultural institutions for the public,” the representative wrote via Twitter. “I was one of several in attendance in this evening.”

In the same Twitter thread, Ocasio-Cortez rationalized that the “medium is the message” and emphasized that her designer is a “Black woman immigrant designer.”

“The medium is the message,” read a screen-capped image from AOC’s Instagram account.

“Proud to work with @aurorajames as a sustainably focused, Black woman immigrant designer who went from starting her dream @brothervellies at a flea market in Brooklyn to winning the @cfda against all odds – and then work together to kick open the doors at the Met,” she wrote. “The time is now for childcare, healthcare, and climate action for all. Tax the Rich.”

“And yes, BEFORE anybody starts wilding out – NYC elected officials are regularly invited to and attend the Met due to our responsibilities in overseeing our city’s cultural institutions that serve the public. I was one of several in attendance. Dress is borrowed via @brothervellies,” the post continued.

For good measure, AOC added, “All-BIPOC/women/LGBT+ team.”

Ej Dickson, senior writer at Rolling Stone, posted: “Am I the only one who thinks this is really f***ing stupid[?] 1) The dress is ugly, 2) She’s at a $35k per person event and this isn’t nearly the own she thinks it is. 3) The dress is ugly. I mean I love her but come on this is so dumb. Peak girl boss s**t.”

“I’m not even mad at the lack of self awareness or hypocrisy anymore. At this point it’s just hilarious. These people are a giant joke,” Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) tweeted.

“What makes @AOC a bigger fraud: The ‘tax the rich’ dress while she’s hanging out with a bunch of wealthy leftwing elites or the lack of masks after spending the past 18 months as one of the biggest authoritarian mask Karens in the country?” highlighted Donald Trump Jr.

“A pathetic self-aggrandizing hypocrite,” Megyn Kelly railed against AOC.

“Meanwhile our kids are muzzled & six feet apart all day long while trying to learn but she & these other ‘Rules for Thee but Not for Me’ pols can parade around maskless & in top of each other at the Met Gala bc, SCIENCE,” she added.

RELATED ARTICLE: AOC Proves She’s the Dumbest Member of Congress After What She Wore to EXPENSIVE Gala

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

Democrats Want To Punish Americans With $2.9 Trillion More In Taxes

Unsustainable. We the people are no longer self governed. This is punitive. 20% of Americans pay majority of taxes. 61% paid zero fed taxes last year. It’s the 20% that gets the shaft. But we’re all tapped out.

$200 billion in more IRS funding for tax enforcement.

Dems Want To Hit Americans With $2.9 Trillion More In Taxes

By: Hank Berrien • Daily Wire •Sep 13, 2021

Democrats on the Ways and Means Committee have drafted a proposal that would hit the American public with an additional $2.9 trillion over 10 years in tax revenue. Here are some of the increases sought by the massive proposal:

Increase the top individual rate to 39.6%. This marginal rate applies to married individuals filing jointly with taxable income over $450,000, to heads of households with taxable income over $425,000, to unmarried individuals with taxable income over $400,000.

Increase the top corporate tax rate to 26.5% . Increase the top capital gains rate 20% to 25%.

Expand the net investment income tax to cover net income derived in the ordinary course of a trade or business for taxpayers with greater than $400,000 in taxable income (single filer) or $500,000 (joint filer).

Increase the holding period for which a taxpayer must qualify for capital gains treatment from 3 to 5 years.

Increase the rate of tax on tobacco products.

Reduce the deduction on Foreign-Derived Intangible Income from 37.5% to 21.875%.

Provide $80 billion over the next ten years for IRS funding for tax enforcement related to high income taxpayers.

The Daily Wire reported on Friday:

President Biden and the Democrats’ $3.5 trillion budget plan means to monitor gross inflows and outflows from Americans’ bank accounts, prompting concern that the federal government would be willfully violating the 4th Amendment.

“The proposal would require banks to report to gross inflows and outflows to the IRS, including transactions from Venmo, PayPal, crypto exchanges and the like in an effort to fight tax evasion,” the Daily Mail noted, adding, “The IRS would know how much money is in an individual’s bank account in a given year, whether the individual earned income on that account and exactly how much was going in an and out.”

Patrick Hedger, vice president of policy at the Taxpayers’ Protection Alliance, blasted the idea, saying, “The IRS is first and foremost, a law enforcement agency and the Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures in pursuit of, of looking for wrongdoing and criminal actions, so I think this is going to run into severe Fourth Amendment headwinds.”

He added:

You’re going to push more folks into small cash transactions, you’re going to push more banking offshore … the big fish out there that do have sizable assets that are that are eligible for taxation offshore. This is the ultimate regressive tax. You’re going to end up punishing the worst off among us … the lower income folks in this country have historically been the targets of aggressive IRS audits because they don’t have the CPAs and the lawyers to be able to fight back.  I don’t see why they need to be going after people, you know, just the average, the average Joe and start stooping on, you know, a $600 payment. It doesn’t make any sense, these, this is, I mean this is beyond trying to pick out low hanging fruit.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

Manchin: Schumer ‘will not have my vote’ on $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill

Bernie Sanders and the Democrats seeks to inject socialism into America with this monstrosity of a bill. In addition, it has been discovered that this bill would allow the IRS to monitor bank transactions, potentially violating the 4th Amendment. The bill will also grant amnesty to millions of people who have entered the United States illegally. And the bill would provide free community college to Americans, while funding  radical “green” projects in the years ahead. This bill must be stopped. Keep calling Senator Manchin and tell him to vote no.

Manchin: Schumer ‘will not have my vote’ on $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill

By Fox News, September 12, 2021

Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., said Sunday that he will not vote in favor of his party’s $3.5 trillion budget reconciliation package, which is a central part of President Biden’s Build Back Better agenda and needs the support of all 50 Democratic senators to pass.

Appearing on CNN’s “State of the Union,” Manchin was asked by anchor Dana Bash to respond to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., who said Democrats were moving “full speed ahead” on the package for which Manchin previously called for a “pause.” Manchin, who sits on the Senate Appropriations Committee, said his main issue with the package is its hefty price tag.

“He will not have my vote on 3.5 and Chuck knows that,” he said, adding that it should be more like $1.5 trillion. “It’s not going to be three and a half I can assure you.”

Manchin said the bill that Democrats should be primarily focused on is the $1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill that passed in the Senate and is awaiting House action. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said a vote on that bill would be held on Sept. 27, but progressives have threatened to vote against it if the reconciliation bill is held up in the Senate.

Manchin said there is “no way” the reconciliation will pass this month, and he said progressives are making a big mistake if they follow through on their threat.

“They have to do what they have to do,” he said. “And if they play politics with the needs of America, I can tell you America will recoil.”

Appearing later on ABC’s “This Week,” Manchin criticized Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., after the senator declared on Twitter the day before: “No infrastructure bill without the $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill.”

“I just respectfully disagree with Bernie,” Manchin told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos. “I’ve never seen this in legislation. I never thought the purposes of the progress we make in legislation was basically to hold one hostage over the other.”

Sanders, who appeared later on the same show, fired back, saying “the real question” is whether it is “appropriate for one person to destroy two pieces of legislation.”

Sanders said that regardless of the party infighting, he expected both bills to eventually pass.

Budget reconciliation rules prevent Republicans from filibustering the $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill, so Democrats only need a simple majority to pass it. With a 50-50 Senate, Democrats need every senator in their party to vote yes, with Vice President Kamala Harris breaking the tie.

RELATED ARTICLES:

House Progressives Unveil Massive Multi-Trillion Dollar Tax Hike

Bernie Sanders calls Manchin’s refusal to back $3.5 trillion spending plan ‘absolutely not acceptable’

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

New Study Vindicates States that Canceled Expanded Unemployment Welfare Early

This new study simply confirms what common sense and basic economics alike always predicted.


ebate over the welfare state is once again making headlines. On Monday, the expanded unemployment welfare system was finally allowed to expire after more than a year. Originally created as a “short-term” measure authorized for a few months in March 2020 then repeatedly extended, these benefits paid many of the unemployed more than their former jobs, with benefits reaching up to $25/hour in dozens of states.

Dozens of Republican-led states chose to end the benefits early. This week’s termination of enhanced benefits was in the Democrat-run states that maintained the expanded payouts, and with their lapse, the debate over whether these benefits were disincentivizing work was reignited.

The Wall Street Journal even published a news article, widely circulated among welfare advocates, claiming that “states that cut off enhanced unemployment benefits early didn’t see a significant boost in job growth.” This was a bizarre spin given that the article itself notes that “economists generally agree the enhanced benefits caused some people to stay out of the labor market” and contains several pieces of evidence suggesting they did have a significant effect. But the skewed reporting is consistent with a broad pattern in media coverage and political commentary that has attempted to downplay and deny any drawbacks of the welfare expansion.

New research makes the obvious work disincentive even more difficult to deny. A new report by Mercatus Center economist Michael Farren and Christopher M. Kaiser analyzed data from the Current Population Survey and found that states which ended the expanded benefits saw twice as much job growth compared to states which maintained them.

The results “show that higher UI benefits tend to discourage employment, whereas the end of UI eligibility appears to motivate more workers to become employed,” the Mercatus researchers note. They pointed out that this is consistent with a long and extensive economic literature finding that unemployment benefits—which effectively subsidize joblessness—lead to increased unemployment.

This new study simply confirms what common sense and basic economics alike always predicted. States that ended ultra-generous benefits earlier had more job growth, while those which continued to disincentivize work had weaker job growth. But don’t expect welfare state advocates to acknowledge this reality any time soon, lest their big-government worldview begin to fall apart.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Like this story? Click here to sign up for the FEE Daily and get free-market news and analysis like this from Policy Correspondent Brad Polumbo in your inbox every weekday.

Biden’s Handlers Want You to Cough Up $6.4 Billion to Resettle 94,000 Afghans in the U.S.

My latest in PJ Media:

Old Joe Biden’s handlers have asked Congress for $30 billion, which means that you better brace yourselves for significant tax increases in the near future. According to NBC News,  $23.6 billion of this is slated to go to deal with the devastation from Hurricane Ida and other natural disasters; the other $6.4 billion, meanwhile, is to cover the expenses of resettling 94,000 Afghans in the United States. And really, now, what could possibly go wrong?

NBC explained that “the U.S. anticipates bringing 64,000 Afghans to the U.S. by the end of this month and 30,000 over the next 12 months, the official said. Of the funding for the refugees, $2.4 billion will go to pay for the Defense Department’s operations overseas where the Afghans are being held and processed. An additional $1.7 billion will go to the Department of Health and Human Services to provide funding and resources to the Afghans to help them set up a new home in the U.S.”

This U.S. taxpayer money would also “go to support transportation costs between overseas processing sites and the United States, security screenings, humanitarian assistance, public health screenings and vaccinations. The administration official said Afghans ‘will receive similar benefits to refugees.’ After 12 months in the U.S., the Afghans will be eligible to apply to become LPRs — lawful permanent residents — and receive so-called ‘green cards.’”

And of course all of the applicants will get those green cards no matter what they have done, up to and including slitting the throat of a woman for committing the crime of having a job, as an Afghan migrant did a few days ago in Germany. What are Western authorities going to do — deport them back to Afghanistan? With the Taliban reaching new lows in human rights abuses practically every day, there is zero chance of that. The Afghan evacuees are here to stay.

While this may thrill naïve multiculturalists and Catholic bishops, there are good reasons to temper our enthusiasm about all this. Let’s assume, although we don’t really have any good reason to do so in light of the Biden administration’s refusal to admit the reality of the global Islamic jihad, that the security screenings this $6.4 billion will pay for are completely, one-hundred-percent effective. Does that mean that the people who will soon be our neighbors will have no trouble whatsoever adjusting to American society?

Consider, for example, the fact that according to a Pew Research Center survey in 2013 (and there is no reason to think anything has changed since then), 73% of Afghans believe that Islamic law, Sharia, is not devised by human beings, but is the perfect and unalterable law of Allah. There are plenty of people in America now who believe that, but fully 99% of the Afghans surveyed stated that they believed Sharia should be the law of the land. Might any of them be among Biden’s handlers’ 94,000 evacuees? Might they have difficulty accepting a secular republic in which the government derives its authority not from Allah, but from the consent of the governed?

There is more. Read the rest here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Afghanistan: Taliban bring back their Ministry for Propagation of Virtue and Prevention of Vice

Taliban Paint Over George Floyd Mural in Kabul

White Muslim CNN Contributor Claims His ‘White Card’ Was Revoked After 9/11

Why Leftists Hate Clint Eastwood So Much

France: Jihadi begins trial by professing Islamic faith, former president says jihadis just want to ‘divide us’

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

TAKE ACTION: Senator Manchin, and other moderate Democrats, are threatening passage of $3.5 trillion socialist spending bill.

The House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, is trailed by reporters as she departs a meeting with fellow House Democrats about Joe Biden’s sweeping plan to expand spending on social programs, at the US Capitol on Monday. Photograph: Jonathan Ernst/Reuters

Please see bottom of article for individual emails prepared for you to send to the senators.

CNN published an article titled:  Manchin upends Democrats’ push to enact Biden’s agenda this month, calling for ‘pause’ on $3.5 trillion bill.  The article reports in part:

Sen. Joe Manchin, the most pivotal Democratic swing vote in the Senate, threw a major wrench in his party’s carefully crafted plans to pass a massive $3.5 trillion bill by month’s end, demanding they take a “strategic pause” before considering a sweeping bill to implement much of President Joe Biden’s agenda.

Manchin, who has long been skeptical of the staggering price tag, made clear Thursday that he’s also opposed to the timeframe Democratic leaders had been charting out for months, a position that now threatens both the larger Democratic-only proposal but also the $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill that passed the Senate earlier this summer.

In a strongly worded op-ed published in the Wall Street Journal on Thursday, the moderate senator called on fellow Democrats to “hit a strategic pause on the budget-reconciliation legislation,” referring to the bill that can be approved in the Senate by just a simple majority — meaning all 50 members of the Senate Democratic Caucus have to support the bill or it will collapse since all 50 Republicans are expected to oppose it.

“Instead of rushing to spend trillions on new government programs and additional stimulus funding, Congress should hit a strategic pause on the budget-reconciliation legislation,” he wrote in the op-ed. “A pause is warranted because it will provide more clarity on the trajectory of the pandemic, and it will allow us to determine whether inflation is transitory or not.”

High inflation and gas prices caused by recent excessive congressional spending are hurting millions of American families and threatening our economy.   Fox News Poll reports: “83% worry about inflation, majority says benefits hurting economy.  Inflation tops the list of economic concerns for voters– ahead of taxes, unemployment, the federal deficit, and interest rates.”   The increasing gasoline prices and energy costs will likely go even higher with the left’s obsession with the New Green Deal which is part of the $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill.

It is fiscally irresponsible for congress to throw more money on the inflation fire that will break the budgets of more American families and burden them with entitlement programs that will endure forever.   Additionally, the $3.5 trillion plan will require much more money from the private sector to pay for more entitlement programs thus pushing America even closer to socialism while hurting our robust economy.  This bill will increase energy costs and our dependence on foreign oil thereby weakening national security.

Florida Family Association has prepared emails for you to send to encourage Senator Manchin and other moderate Democrats to stand firm against the socialist spending bill.  This is our chance to try to slow fiscal insanity and socialism.  It is important for your influence in this situation that each senator receives their own email without inclusion of email addresses for the other representatives.  Florida Family Association urges you to take the few minutes that will be needed to send all seven emails for this important situation.

PLEASE SEND THE PREPARED EMAIL TO ENCOURAGE THE FOLLOWING SENATORS TO STAND FIRM AGAINST THE $3.5 TRILLION SOCIALIST SPENDING BILL.  

Unfortunately, the United States Senate is blocking Florida Family Association’s email server that is used to send action emails.  Therefore, Florida Family Association has prepared an email for you to send that will open in your email client.

Click here to send email to Senator Manchin.
Joe Manchin, West Virginia
Wesley Kungel, Legislative Director
wes_kungel@manchin.senate.gov

Click here to send email to Senator Sinema.
Kyrsten Sinema, Arizona
Meg Joseph, Chief of Staff
meg_joseph@sinema.senate.gov

Click here to send email to Senator Kelly.
Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz.
Jennifer Cox, Chief of Staff
jennifer_cox@kelly.senate.gov

Click here to send email to Senator Hassan.
Sen. Maggie Hassan, D-N.H.
Marc Goldberg, Chief of Staff
marc_goldberg@hassan.senate.gov

Click here to send email to Senator Hickenlooper.
Sen. John Hickenlooper, D-Colo
Kirtan Mehta, Chief of Staff
kirtan_mehta@hickenlooper.senate.gov

Click here to send email to Senator Feinstein.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.
David Grannis, Chief of Staff
david_grannis@feinstein.senate.gov

Click here to send email to Senator Leahy.
Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.
John Dowd, Chief of Staff
john_dowd@leahy.senate.gov

These emails will open in your email browser because the United States Senate is blocking normal form emails sent through the Florida Family Association email server.  If the above link does not open in your email browser or if the email is returned to you please prepare an email using the suggested subject line, content and email addresses provided below. Please feel free to change the wording.

Suggested subject line:

Please oppose the inflationary and oppressively burdensome $3.5 trillion spending plan.

Suggested content:

Dear Senator (enter last name),

I urge you to oppose the $3.5 trillion spending plan because it will throw more money on the inflation fire that will break the budgets of more American families, burden the private sector with entitlement programs that will endure forever  and eventually hurt our current robust economy.  This bill will push America closer to socialism than ever before.  It will increase energy costs and our dependence on foreign oil thereby weakening national security.

To call your states’ United States Senators click here and look up the phone number for your state’s senators.

EDITORS NOTE: This Florida Family Association column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Question Isn’t if Biden Will Fund the Taliban, The Question is How Will He Fund the Taliban

The question isn’t if Biden will fund the Taliban, the question is how will he fund the Taliban.

There’s a split on that with National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan suggesting that US aid may go directly to the Taliban. (Whether it goes directly or indirectly, the Taliban will still unquestionably cash in.)

Sullivan also would not rule out giving the Taliban aid in the future. He said that the US will continue to provide humanitarian assistance “directly” to the Afghan people, which, he said, would not flow through the Taliban but through international institutions like the World Health Organization and other nongovernmental organizations.

But, going forward, aid to Afghanistan through the Taliban directly will be conditioned upon the Taliban’s behavior, including whether the remaining Americans are able to safely evacuate.

“That will be about the Taliban’s actions. It will be about whether they follow through on their commitments, their commitments to safe passage for Americans and Afghan allies, their commitment to not allow Afghanistan to be a base from which terrorists can attack the United States or any other country, their commitments with respect to upholding their international obligations. It’s going to be up to them. And we will wait and see by their actions how we end up responding in terms of the economic and development assistance,” he said.

Then it was Jen Psaki’s turn to insist that Sullivan hadn’t said what he had said.

Q    And then on — on the future aid to the Taliban that Jake Sullivan was talking about this morning.

MS. PSAKI:  Yeah.

Q    He said, when it comes to economic and development assistance, the relationship with the Taliban will be about Taliban actions.  Should we understand that to mean that economic and development assistance could translate to taxpayer money eventually going to the Taliban at some point?  I know that’s different from the humanitarian aid we’ve been talking about — the World Food Programme and things like that — but these specific references that Sullivan made this morning.

MS. PSAKI:  Well, I would — I would just go back to kind of the earlier question on this.  There’s an enormous amount of money they have at the federal — in the Federal Reserve — I shouldn’t say “they” — the government of Afghanistan has in the Federal Reserve, which they don’t have access to right now.  That’s actually their money that’s being held there.  So that’s one of the questions here.

There are also sanctions that are in place on a number of leaders.  Obviously, that prevents them from doing business in various parts of the world.  I think that’s really what Jake Sullivan was referring to.

That’s not what Sullivan was referring to since he mentioned “economic and development assistance”.

But few in the media bother calling out Psaki on her constant stream of lies.

Psaki calls the money in the Federal Reserve, “their money”. As I reported in, “Biden Tried to Send Pallets of Cash to the Taliban as Kabul Fell”, that’s not really accurate.

Ahmady estimates that $7 billion of DAB’s assets are being held by the Federal Reserve which includes the gold, the bills and bonds, $300 million in cash, and another $2.4 billion in World Bank funds for aiding developing countries.

A whole lot of money came from us in the first place.

The question is whether Biden is bargaining with the Taliban using the money we already had been giving to Afghanistan or whether he’s playing with new taxpayer monies.

As I wrote…

The Taliban were hoping to get their hands on Afghanistan’s money, but much of it is in the United States. The most tangible part of Afghanistan’s assets, $1.3 billion in gold, is sitting in downtown Manhattan, a little bit south of Ground Zero, in the vaults of the Federal Reserve. If there were any justice, that money would be used to compensate the police officers, firefighters, and workers who died on that day or later on from ailments related to 9/11.

COLUMN BY

RELATED ARTICLES:

Idiots: After Pakistan Helps Taliban Take Power, Biden’s Handlers Ask Pakistanis to Help Fight Jihadis

Some Afghan Evacuees Brought Their Child Brides to the U.S. With Them

Taliban holding US citizens on six planes, demanding payment to allow planes to leave Afghanistan

British Border Force admits some Afghan evacuees have forged papers

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

San Francisco To Pay Violent Criminals Not to Shoot Each Other

Only the rational people of California can put an end to this madness by voting to recall Governor Newsom on September 14th.

San Francisco to Fight Rising Gun Crime by Paying People Not to Shoot Each Other

By Breitbart, September 2, 2021

San Francisco will roll out a pilot program in October that will pay “high risk” individuals not to shoot one another, Fox News reported.

The program, which is sponsored by the Dream Keeper Fellowship, will pay 10 people “who are at high risk of being on either end of a shooting” $300 per month to forego the violent crime. Notably, the Dream Keeper Initiative is part of San Francisco Mayor London Breed’s (D) plan to divert $120 million from the city’s law enforcement budget to projects aimed at helping the city’s black minority.

“These small investments can transform the lives of individuals, but they can also transform communities,” Sheryl Davis, executive director of the Human Rights Commission, told Newsweek.

In August, Mayor Breed said she believes the program will cut down on violent crime in the city, which has skyrocketed this year.

According to Fox News, there have been 119 recorded gun crime victims in the first six months of 2021, “which is double the number during the same timeframe in 2020.” In 2020, homicides rose 35 percent.

Richmond, California, reportedly instituted a similar program, which the media called “cash for criminals.”  A 2019 study concluded that the program helped reduce gun homicides in the city by 55 percent, the report states.

Fox News continued:

Critics of the program have pointed out that similar initiatives haven’t been very successful, with the Washington Examiner‘s David Freddoso saying in a Wednesday op-ed, “It was also tried in Sacramento, where its promoters boast that ‘only’ 44 percent  of participants were subsequently arrested on new charges — well, as long as you don’t count about one-third of the participants who dropped out or were arrested in its first six months.

California also recently decided to throw money at its drug problem by paying people to stay sober, something Gov. Gavin Newsom called “contingency management.” He asked the federal government for permission to use tax dollars to pay for it through Medicaid.

RELATED TWEET:

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

Biden’s America-Last Administration: U.S. Aid Will Keep Flowing to Taliban

My latest in PJ Media:

The war is lost, but no one is going to be held accountable and the same blinkered woke dopes are in charge. In fact, the one whose very name is Blinken, the secretary of State, explained Monday how the Taliban could gain the “international legitimacy and support” that is obviously such a high priority for them, and explained that even if it didn’t become the Leftist woke paradise of Blinken’s imagining, the American money will still flow. Of course. It always does.

Blinken claimed risibly that henceforth, the America-Last administration of Biden’s handlers would be guided by a concern for something that has never appeared on its list of priorities up to now: “our vital national interests.” Yeah, sure, Tony. Pull my other leg. More plausibly, Blinken assured the world that despite the last few weeks of catastrophe and humiliation, the American taxpayers will still be filling their cars with $4-a-gallon gasoline and driving to their pathetic nine-to-fives so that the elites can demonstrate their concern for the people of Afghanistan: “If we can work in the new Afghan government in a way that helps secure those interests … and in a way that brings greater stability to the country and the region, and that protects the gains of the last two decades, we will do it.”

The gains of the last two decades? What were those? Blinken didn’t say. He was too busy promising the Taliban American money: “The United States will continue to support humanitarian aid to the Afghan people. Consistent with our sanctions on the Taliban, the aid will not flow through the government, but rather through independent organizations, such as U.N. agencies and [non-government organizations.] And, we expect that those efforts will not be impeded by the Taliban or anyone else.”

Of course the Taliban won’t impede the money flow. They’re much more likely to appropriate it. Just as UN agencies in Gaza are wholly compromised by Hamas, it strains credulity to think that UN will be able to operate freely and independently of the Taliban in Afghanistan, or will even try to do so. But in Antony Blinken’s blinkered world, the UN is an incorrupt and thoroughly uncorruptable organization, and so no American taxpayer should object to his or her or xer money going to UN outposts in the Taliban’s Afghanistan. Really, what could possibly go wrong?

Blinken demonstrated his lack of acquaintance with reality yet again when he explained that if the Taliban wanted international approval, it would have to become a Leftist nanny state like the U.S. and its allies, all concerned with diversity and inclusiveness: “The Taliban seeks international legitimacy and support. Our message is: any legitimacy and any support will have to be earned.”

Is that right? And exactly what leverage do you have on the Taliban if they don’t earn it, Mr. Secretary?

There is more. Read the rest here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Kinder, Gentler Taliban Murder Afghan Folk Singer, Because Music Is Un-Islamic

Marjorie Taylor Greene Excoriated as ‘Islamophobic’ for Saying ‘Islam Is Not a Religion of Peace’

Taliban moving U.S. military vehicles to the Islamic Republic of Iran

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez urges Biden’s handlers to take in ‘no less than 200,000’ refugees

Staggering amounts of US hundred-dollar bills left for Taliban

Afghanistan: Taliban hold military parade with US equipment

Al-Qaeda top dog returns to Afghanistan

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Stanford Study: More Businesses Have Already Fled California This Year Than in All of 2020 [Video]

California is in decline. The Golden State lost population in 2020 for the first time in decades, and the exodus included celebrity entrepreneurs like Elon Musk and Joe Rogan. A long list of businesses, some as well known as Disney, Hewlett-Packard, Nestle, and Toyota, have either relocated or sent some jobs outside of the state in recent years.

But just how bad have things really gotten in California? A new study from the Hoover Institution at Stanford University analyzes the anecdotes and finds a damning trend.

Authors Joseph Vranich and Lee E. Ohanian examined available reports of companies relocating their headquarters outside of the Golden State. They find that 265 major companies have moved on to greener pastures since January 1, 2018.

The study also reports that the rate at which businesses are leaving the state is rapidly accelerating. For the first six months of 2021, the rate is nearly twice as high as it was last year. That means more businesses have already left California this year than in all of 2020.

The authors note that this count is, if anything, an enormous underestimate. Many small businesses exiting the state do not receive media coverage and are not required to file compliance reports, so many of their exits go uncounted in the analysis.

These businesses take more than just jobs with them when they leave the state. The local communities lose out on investment, income for local businesses, tax revenue, philanthropic work, and much more. So, it’s of the utmost importance to analyze why businesses are leaving California en masse.

Per the study, major reasons for leaving include “high tax rates, punitive regulations, high labor costs, high utility and energy costs, and declining quality of life for many Californians which reflects the cost of living and housing affordability.”

These issues all ultimately trace back to the state government. California has regulated and taxed its once-thriving economy into a coma. The state now ranks as the 50th-worst state to do business in, according to Chief Executive magazine’s 2021 survey. Meanwhile, the Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council ranks the Golden State the 49th-worst state to do business in. And the Tax Foundation reports that California has the 49th-worst business tax climate in the country.

It’s little surprise that top destination states, per the study, include Texas, Tennessee, Arizona, and other states that have taken markedly different policy approaches.

The great thing about a federalist, 50-state system is that different states can try different things. But this new Stanford study exposes the devastating results of California’s experiment with big government and welfare-state largesse. When empowered to vote with their feet, citizens and businesses alike choose freer markets over centralized government control.

COLUMN BY

Brad Polumbo

Brad Polumbo (@Brad_Polumbo) is a libertarian-conservative journalist and Policy Correspondent at the Foundation for Economic Education.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. Like this story? Click here to sign up for the FEE Daily and get free-market news and analysis like this from Policy Correspondent Brad Polumbo in your inbox every weekday.

One of the Biggest Welfare State Expansions in U.S. History Just Got Approved By the House

And the whopping $3.5 trillion price tag could even be an underestimate.


It’s another day that ends in y, so, Congress just nonchalantly voted to spend trillions of taxpayer dollars. On Tuesday, the House approved a $3.5 trillion spending resolution on a party-line vote, with Democrats backing the measure and Republicans uniformly opposing it.

“House Democrats passed a $3.5 trillion budget resolution on Tuesday, 220-212, advancing the party’s effort to pass a sweeping economic package that would expand the nation’s social safety net,” Axios reports. “Democrats now will be able to use the budget reconciliation process to pass a bill — likely later this fall — by a simple majority, tackling key priorities like health care, child care and climate change.”

The so-called “Human Infrastructure” plan paves the way for further bills allocating these trillions toward enormous expansions of the welfare state across many different areas and industries. It includes education measures like taxpayer funding for “free” community college and “universal” pre-school, as well as healthcare expenditures like expanding Obamacare subsidies—even for the wealthy—and adding more people to government healthcare programs. It also has climate schemes like huge electric vehicle subsidies, the creation of a “Civilian Climate Corps” to supposedly create “green jobs,” and much, much more.

It would honestly be easier to list what’s not in the proposal than what is.

The expense here is truly mind-boggling. Remember that this spending plan comes on the heels of more than $6 trillion in ostensibly-pandemic-related welfare spending and in addition to a $1+ trillion transportation infrastructure bill. And this is all in light of a $28.6 trillion—and counting—national debt. This additional $3.5 trillion bill amounts to, roughly estimated, about $24,400 in new spending per federal taxpayer.

If enacted, this plan would be one of the biggest expansions of government and the welfare state in American history. To put it into context, consider President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal, the legendary set of government programs enacted in the 1930s that created Social Security and many other forms of welfare still with us today.

Well, the New Deal cost $41.7 billion at the time. And, roughly translated, that’s about $875 billion in today’s dollars. So, the welfare spending plan House Democrats just approved is several times bigger in total cost than the inflation-adjusted New Deal!

The crazy thing is that the $3.5 trillion price may actually be an underestimate.

One of the major provisions in the spending plan is further extending the recently-expanded “child tax credit,” an expensive welfare program that sends regular checks with taxpayer money to families based on how many kids they have.

The $3.5 trillion resolution, when eventually fleshed out into full spending legislation, is likely to reauthorize the tax credit for 2 to 4 years. However, the White House and leaders in Congress have openly said they want to make it permanent. So, we can expect them to simply re-extend it in a few years. They are most likely only doing a shorter extension in this bill to keep the sticker price of the legislation down.

According to American Enterprise Institute senior fellow and Rowe scholar Matt Weidinger, this means the spending plan could ultimately cost up to $1 trillion more than currently advertised. That’s right: the already-exorbitant $3.5 trillion price tag could really be more like $4 trillion or $4.5 trillion in practice.

“If they only extend something for two years but want to make it permanent, all that means is that in two years, someone else is going to have to figure out how to pay for the extension,” Weidinger told me in a phone interview. “But it’s no less of an expectation that they want to make it permanent… they can just only squeeze so much sugar into this 5-pound sack that they’ve created for themselves today.”

Yet, given the sad normalization of profligate spending in Washington DC, some people might unfortunately be unfazed by the prospect of trillions more going out the door. But we should still be alarmed.

“Money doesn’t grow on trees, and somebody has to pay for this,” Weidinger argued. “Whatever the spending promises are today, they will be matched by some tax hikes—including in this legislation—but not nearly enough to actually cover the true cost of this. So, if you want bigger government, more disincentives for people to be working and supporting themselves, and if you want to leave bigger bills for our children and grandchildren to pay, you’re going to love this plan. [If not], you should be quite skeptical of this plan.”

Of course, the headlines and Americans’ attention are understandably concentrated elsewhere, as chaos grips Afghanistan and the pandemic persists. But we cannot afford to lose sight of the fact that Congress is all the while voting away trillions from our pockets and expanding the scope of the welfare state to unprecedented new heights.

COLUMN BY:

Brad Polumbo

Brad Polumbo (@Brad_Polumbo) is a libertarian-conservative journalist and Policy Correspondent at the Foundation for Economic Education.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Like this story? Click here to sign up for the FEE Daily and get free-market news and analysis like this from Policy Correspondent Brad Polumbo in your inbox every weekday.

Leftists in U.S. and UK Want Reparations Paid to the Taliban

My latest in PJ Media:

Richard Burgon, a member of the British Parliament for the far-Left Labour party and Secretary of the Socialist Campaign Group of Labour MPs, demonstrated Tuesday that the Left’s commitment to the redistribution of wealth is indefatigable: He declared that what the West really needs to do now is start forking over money to the Taliban. Burgon tweeted: “The crisis in Afghanistan is the result of 20 years of disastrous military intervention. Just as in Iraq & Libya, backing US-led invasions led to a huge loss of life. There is no military solution in Afghanistan. The focus now should be on reparations and supporting refugees.”

Yes, reparations. Paying reparations to Afghanistan would essentially mean funding the Taliban, which has a billion-dollar budget as it is and has no need of the largesse of British or American taxpayers. And Burgon is not alone. Britain’s far-Left Stop the War Coalition issued a statement Sunday demanding that the British government “take a lead in offering a refugee programme and reparations to rebuild Afghanistan, an act which would go a great deal further in advancing the rights of the Afghan people, women in particular, than continued military or economic intervention in the fate of the Afghanistan.”

The call for reparations to the Taliban has been heard on this side of the Atlantic as well. Shabana Mir, an associate professor at American Islamic College in Chicago, first implied that Afghanistan didn’t need any help from the West: “The Western savior narrative vis-a-vis Afghanistan is a framing of Afghanistan as in need of Western help, as dependent on Western help — rather than as a Western-exploited and Western-ravaged people and land.” Then, however, she added: “The U.S. owes s**tloads of reparations to Afghanistan.” The U.S. should have no say in how this money is used: “I have hopes that Afghans can build, if military contractors and the U.S. would get the hell out of the way.”

Meanwhile, far-Left Canadian “journalist” Paul Jay believes that “there must be significant reparations paid to the Afghan people to be administered by the U.N.” Another Leftist “journalist,” Spencer Ackerman, who was primarily responsible ten years ago for getting all mention of Islam and jihad removed from U.S. counterterror training, asked: “What do we owe the Afghan people? We owe them a life they can live, resettling them in the United States if they so choose, and we owe them reparations. Reparations is a charged word, and I do not use it here to suggest that reparations for the descendants of the enslaved ought to wait until we pay reparations for the War on Terror. I mean here that throughout history, the losers of wars have had to pay reparations, though typically to the regimes and not people. But it is people whom the U.S. owes, not regimes.”

There is more. Read the rest here.

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Pakistan: ‘Pray to Allah that American forces leave Afghanistan and we kill Hindus’

Taliban rename captured radio station ‘Voice of Sharia’

US State Department sent out BLANK US visas, which are then filled out by anyone in Kabul, including Taliban

Afghanistan: Taliban shot, stabbed, and gouged out eyes of pregnant woman because she had a job

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.