The Laffer Curve was part of the reasoning behind the Reagan tax cuts. The left sold the idea that it was false because the deficit continued to grow after the cuts. The truth is Democrats grew spending faster than the economy could grow because of the tax cuts. Leftists can always spend faster than even they can steal (tax), which is why government depends upon the printing press, not taxes to finance itself.

the comment section for this piece is good reading also.

Any economy, every economy, is composed of individuals making choices in the moment, based upon a multitude of conditions, actual and perceived. Increasing taxes is the equivalent of a bee sting, you recoil from pain which interrupts your progress. It is shocking to see that it took almost 45 years for something so honest as the Laffer Curve to be acknowledged. Economics is human behavior on display, action, reaction. If I am stung by higher taxes I have less to spend on my neighbor's output.

 

 shows the direct correlation between tax rates and tax revenue. The graph suggests that there is a certain tax rate the government should impose. To better understand the graph, you have to understand where placing the tax rate at either end of the X-axis would mean. If the government imposed a tax rate of 0 percent, the government would not collect any revenue. If the government imposed a tax rate of 100 percent, individuals would no longer work and businesses would no longer produce goods as there would be no incentive to do so. While there are varying schools of thought from economists on where the tax rate should be placed, economic principles show that lowering the tax rate gives more of an incentive to produce and can grow the economy.

We are finally seeing the Laffer Curve applied in real policy, as well as the predicted results. The new tax plan has significantly lowered taxes and helped stimulate growth for the economy.

 

It is not good to play another "anthem" our society is crumbling. But Jesus will still be in control.

Grandview went 12-2 in football and is rocking along in basketball. impressive.

5 minutes ago, Ty Cobb said:

This is not a bad thing.  title 9 is on my list of 3 worst laws ever.

The trade-off for title ix has not been a good one.

Since title ix we have fewer men attending college, and everything in girls sport if not gay is not straight, up honest either. 

why have weight classes if gender does not matter.

It is the end of title ix. 

20 hours ago, REBgp said:

What happened to (to quote a Star Trek movie), "the needs of the many outweighs the needs of the few"?  And what I can't figure out, what has taken common sense out of the human equation?  Was it our educational system?  Was it the TV shows they watched as kids?  Or just to much TV?  As bad as Trump may be in his personal life, how could anyone support, or even defend Hillary is beyond my understanding.  I've never heard a democrat admit anything bad about her, except Hoops.  And, imo, the gun control, homosexuals, gays & TG are merely means to an end.

It is the advance of humanistic secular reasoning in which morals are based on what man says ( moral relativism) rather  then what God has revealed through scripture and nature (moral absolutes).

this podcast talks about it. 

 

hat does a free society look like to you?

Is it an anarcho-capitalist utopia where individuals are free to shoot fully-automatic AK-47s at their 1040 EZs in their private marijuana fields? Is it a harmonious society free from bureaucratic central planning, where people freely trade and engage in commerce? Is it your own apartment, with nobody yelling at you to do the dishes?  

What components are necessary to exist in a free society? Is it trust, independence, toleration, or peace? Is it the rule of law and the triumph of negative rights? Is it the absence of coercion?

It’s a fun thought experiment, but I would ask you to add one thing to your vision. A free society is impossible without a healthy dose of responsibility.

I know I sound like your dad, but just hear me out, okay?

The Absence of Responsibility Is Chaos

Liberty and responsibility are inseparable. At first glance, this might seem like a paradox due to responsibility being an inherent constraint on liberty. Responsibility is the absence of flexibility and free-flowingness. However, those who truly want liberty also want the self-responsibility entailed.

If they do not pick up the burden of being responsible, then the world falls into a chaotic place.

•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  

 

In each person being their own master, that person also has to accept that the actions they take produce real consequences. That person then has to choose carefully what actions they take as they are the owner of the consequences. Without a fair sense of responsibility, self-directed individuals would not be able to produce a prosperous society.

Having to carry the burden of consequences forces each individual to pick up their own weight and make each corner of their world a better place. For if they do not pick up the burden of being responsible, then the world falls into a chaotic place, a place of disregard. It is in this sense that responsibility is a necessary component of liberty.

Responsibility Is Choice

F.A. Hayek dedicates a whole chapter to responsibility and freedom in his book The Constitution of Liberty. He states that “Liberty and responsibility are inseparable.” He expands on this statement by claiming,

“A free society will not function or maintain itself unless its members regard it as a right that each individual occupy the position that results from his action and accept it as due to his own action. Though it can offer to the individual only chances and though the outcome of his efforts will depend on innumerable accidents, it forcefully directs his attention to those circumstance that he can control as if they were the only ones that mattered.”

Here we see why responsibility is a necessary condition for liberty. But why do we even want to live in a society where individuals are burdened with responsibility? Why should we let individuals decide their own path? Would it not be better to live in a world with a philosopher king deciding which morals and roles people should undertake, due to the fact that some people just don’t have the capacity to be responsible for themselves? To that issue, Hayek says:

“This does not mean that a man will always be assumed to be the best judge of his interests; it means that we can never be sure who knows them better than he and that we wish to make full use of the capacities of all those who may have something to contribute to the common effort of making our environment serve human purposes.”

This is why we should take liberty and responsibility seriously. Even though a man may not know what is best for himself, nobody besides himself knows better. It means that we let individuals decide how to use their capacities in the best possible way to better serve society.

Responsibility and Comparative Advantage

It allows for human flourishing in terms of comparative advantage. That is, we let people hone their skills and unique abilities to then utilize those skills in a particular sect of the world. You could be an amazing musician, a talented carpenter, an intellectual, or a graphic designer among other skills. Basic economics tells us that the world is better off if countries trade freely the goods they are best able to produce, so why not extend that logic towards individuals?

Hayek also says,

“The belief that success depends wholly on him is probably the pragmatically most effective incentive to successful action; whereas the more a man indulges in the propensity to blame others or circumstances for his failures, the more disgruntled and ineffective he seems to become.”

Self-responsibility allows for humans to cultivate their best skills, virtues, and capacities. Without self-responsibility, there is everybody's responsibility. And with everybody's responsibility, there is nobody's responsibility. That is the land of inaction. If we want an effective, capable society, then we allow for liberty and responsibility to exist.

Responsibility Leads to Learning and Meaning

This belief in success depending wholly on yourself is also the best way to learn. It is the acceptance of responsibility which allows you to learn through consequence. If we weren’t held responsible for our actions, whether they be right or wrong, we wouldn’t learn to change our actions to influence outcomes.

This is the problem with social welfare policies, bank bailouts, and other situations involving moral hazard. Benefits are internalized, and costs are externalized. It allows companies and people to fail time and time again, only to continue earning a guaranteed profit. It is no wonder that our systems are inefficient; nobody is held accountable for failure. A society built on responsibility for one’s own shortcomings is the only way we can learn, and by learning we are incentivized to create better results for ourselves and, in turn, better systems.

In addition, responsibility isn’t just conducive towards learning and building productive societies, it is also what 

“the thing that gives life meaning.”  

"Life has meaning with responsibility. The more responsibility you take on, the more meaning your life has. The higher degree of responsibility that you agree voluntarily to try to bear, the richer your life will be."

There it is. Is your life lacking in meaning? Is your life full of nihilism? Are you resentful? Try Dr. Peterson's healthy dose of responsibility. This might pull you out of that depressive rut you’ve been stuck in for quite a while and allow you to see the light of the world. Picking up responsibility means having something worth suffering, it means having a place in the world, it means preserving beauty in the all-consuming reality of entropy.

Frankl's Proposed Statue of Responsibility

Don’t believe in the importance of responsibility just yet? Let me direct your attention towards Austrian psychiatrist, esteemed author, and holocaust survivor Viktor Frankl. Frankl was born in Vienna in 1905. He went to the University of Vienna where he studied medicine and later specialized in neurology and psychology.

In 1942, Frankl was deported to the Nazi Theresienstadt Ghetto. He spent his time there working as a psychiatrist helping fellow prisoners overcome the grief and tragedy that came with the imprisonment. He was later deported to Auschwitz concentration camp and then to a few more until he was liberated in April 1945.

After Frankl’s time in the concentration camps experiencing abject suffering and the darkest depths of human misery, he went on to write Man’s Search for Meaning. In the book, he chronicles his experiences but also talks about how it is possible to find meaning within suffering. He talks about responsibility being a piece of that puzzle. Frankl believed in the power of responsibility so vehemently that he even proposed a “statue of responsibility.”

“Freedom, however, is not the last word. Freedom is only part of the story and half of the truth. Freedom is but the negative aspect of the whole phenomenon whose positive aspect is responsibleness. In fact, freedom is in danger of degenerating into mere arbitrariness unless it is lived in terms of responsibleness. That is why I recommend that the Statue of Liberty on the East Coast be supplemented by a Statue of Responsibility on the West Coast.”

Here is the powerful thing: if a man such as Frankl can be subject to extreme despair in concentration camps and come out with an optimistic attitude about meaning and responsibility, then you, too, are capable of finding meaning in your life. Quit making excuses for your pitfalls and adopt as much responsibility as you can. If people can witness their beloved ones starved to skin and bone only to have their suffering ended by gas chambers, then you can get past whatever troubles you have and live a life of purpose. It’s not an easy thing, but you can start by adopting small responsibilities today. It is an actionable philosophy.

Liberty and responsibility are inseparable. Not only is responsibility a necessary condition for a free society to prosper, it will also help you become the best person you can be. Responsibility allows for you to cultivate the skills you are best at and then to share those skills with the world. This creates a better society and a meaningful existence. Having responsibility gives you a sense of purpose. Create a better you, create a life of meaning, and by that process, you will be part of creating a better world.

 

19 hours ago, indian15/16 said:

I know exactly the young man you are referring to as a result of a couple of conversations I had with Coach Foster during those state runs. Coach Foster said he would have been the most talented player on those particular rosters at the time and those rosters included the likes of Angel Bullock, Benson Williams, Trent Williams, and Joseph Williams, just to name a few. And it in no way was any disrespect to any of those incredible players but rather a show of great respect to the young man's talents that unfortunately couldn't pull his life together of the court.

Goes to show how great of person coach Foster  is and how great of coach he is also.  

I am a member 

6 hours ago, REBgp said:

I wish I could find fault with your post Coach, but other than a smidgen of doubt (hope?) at one or two things, I can't.  I'll say this for the democrats, when they made a big left turn many years ago, they stayed the course, allowing Republican Presidents to be elected, knowing that they'd get their chance.  Now, with Feinstein and Pelosi being labeled moderate by most in the Party (I guess moderate now is just an ultra liberal, which is what they are), by any definition what you have left is Marxist.  And your last two paragraphs are prophetic.

All of us can see what Obama has done to the judiciary.  Imo, about the only thing holding our country together is the SCOTUS, and only by a hair.  Imagine what would happen if we had seven Ginsburgs on it.  Give the Marxist enough time, that's what will happen, then it's pretty much all over.  Funny, old Khrushchev was right,  Again, jmo

Marxist are always redefining word's in order to advance their beliefs. If they told the truth people would see their evil, but if they hide their agenda and redefine "moderate" to be an ultra-liberal, then over time (like you said) what is perverted becomes accepted. Look at the redefining of marriage. We are not even fighting homo-sexuaity anymore, we have boys claiming to be girls and beating the dog mess out of girls in wrestling. In 1970's if you would have said that Title IX would be used by the government to mandate that boys and girls share the locker room, it would have never passed.

Chuck Collson said “It turns out the man who witnessed to me, Tom Phillips, then the president of the Raytheon company, had been converted at a Billy Graham Crusade at Madison Square in New York City in 1968. How unlikely are God’s ways. Here was the head of one of the largest corporations in America going forward with a stream of repentant sinners and then returning to his business where four years after I left the White House, I returned to be his Washington counsel. Phillips shared his faith with me at the darkest moment in my life. And from that encounter has come my experience in prison and then the launching of a ministry that is now active in 88 countries, reaching into literally thousands of prisons, touching countless hundreds of thousands of lives. This is how the gospel spreads: Graham to Phillips to Colson.”

you should read the utter disgust, some people have for Christ thus they pored it out on Billy also.

made me think of  John 15:18

John 15:18 New King James Version (NKJV)

The World’s Hatred

¹⁸ “If the world hates you, you know that it hated Me before it hated you. ¹⁹ If you were of the world, the world would love its own. Yet because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you.

Movie about his early life.
 

 

20 hours ago, PAMFAM10 said:

Cars were invented to be driven guns to kill.

 

but as the gun bans in europe has taught us, cars can intentionally be used by for mass killings with just as much evil as a gun ever thought of doing.

On 2/17/2018 at 10:56 AM, StateChamp17 said:

Kind of mentioned this on another post in another section. BUT man Nederlands facilities are a turd sandwich. NOT BUSTING on Nederland but I am being honest. By far the worst track and field I've ever seen hosting a high school event. THOSE KIDS DESERVE BETTER. It literally isn't even about looking good. Track meet last night..I was worried someone was going to break an ankle. Kids running in the dark on the curves because no lights reach that far. Bathrooms full of mud and standing water. Jumping pit boards not even close to level..just old rotten out wood. Looking at the field I can't say much more....field, track and everything out there just peaks and valleys. I watched an out of town couple from one of the Houston area schools walking into the facility and they actually stopped and looked and said "OMG, this is horrible." I felt horrible for the Nederland students. They deserve better. You can't paint a turd gold and tell me it's 24 carat.

Who has it worse in the area?? Anybody?

That is why you don't have track meets in February 

On 2/17/2018 at 11:39 PM, TxHoops said:

You seriously find the most interesting reads.  Thanks for sharing. 

Read this thinking mans article.

8 hours ago, PAMFAM10 said:

Are we ready to expect mass shootings as American culture? 

Not only do the rates of mass murder (and attempted mass murder) in England more than rival the United States, but in England, the rates are climbing fast, prompting many English leaders to call this

.  Can you imagine living in a city where mass killings are so common that the Mayor of that city, rather than denounce the killings, tells the public to get used to it?  That’s London.  That’s what everyone here wants to emulate.

Unless someone is less dead when killed by a bomb or run over by a van than when shot by a gun, England has a far bigger problem than we do.

It’s not all about jihad either.  England has a 

 that rivals the United States, even withoutcounting jihad, when one considers the comparable sizes of England and the United States.  The British seem to prefer using bombs, and fire, as mass-murder weapons, but if anything it turns out that bombs and fire can kill more people than can guns.  The British also like using knives to kill each other, with a rate of knife homicides that is so bad that  .  A look at a common London newspaper shows that  , in terms of murder rates, as are any of our cities.

On 2/17/2018 at 11:39 PM, TxHoops said:

You seriously find the most interesting reads.  Thanks for sharing. 

 

On 2/17/2018 at 9:06 PM, TxHoops said:

I am embarrassed to say I haven’t.  That’s gonna change in the next few weeks though. 

let me know when you get it.