The Right Stuff: Getting what we pay for or not?

By Jim McCully: published December 5, 2022 American citizens should get what we pay exorbitant taxes for. We do not. Taxes are intended to fund citizens’ constitutionally directed needs and nothing more. State and federal governments should be efficient, effective and as small as possible. They should exist solely for citizens’ benefit lest it become an out-of-control monster.

The monster revealed itself in California on May 12. Journalists Nichole Nixon reported the state had an over-collection of $97.5 billion. Will Gov. Gavin Newson and what I call the Democrat Socialist Progressive Peoples Party-controlled Legislature return this over charge to the people? Unlikely.

Our philosopher king, Gavin the first, and his merry band of followers, the Democratic Party, will object. Most likely there will be a piddling refund with the balance earmarked for spending on whatever will help keep them in power. A case in point, King Gavin is urging California’s Legislature to levy a windfall-tax capping oil company profits above his self-decreed ceiling.

In 1835, the French political philosopher Alexis de Tocqueville chronicled his views in his famous book “Democracy in America.” He listed five values, espoused by Americans, which defined our national character: Liberty, egalitarianism, individualism, populism, and laissez-faire capitalism making us different, unique and more successful than other nations.

His overarching fear for America was “The Tyranny of the Majority,” which could lead to America’s demise. The last sentence in his referenced book is: “It depends on themselves whether equality is to lead to freedom or servitude, knowledge or barbarism, prosperity or wretchedness.”[...read more]

The Right Stuff: Should America serve as the world’s cop?

By Earl Heal : published November 27, 2022

The conflict in Ukraine has again illuminated the historic American debate favoring isolation or military action when diplomacy fails, and war potential arises.

A strong isolationist group has opposed entering each major American war – the Revolutionary War against England, the Civil War over slavery, World War I and World War II. History confirms America’s entry in each produced admirable solutions although our delayed entry into both world wars significantly increased suffering and financial loss for all participants. With world peace restored after World War II, America implemented the Marshall Plan to hasten rebuilding the decimated European nations. The free world looked to America for leadership, so the United Nations accepted America as the defacto world cop. When the USSR – the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics – appeared anxious for conflict soon after World War II, American and European leaders strengthened allied support through organization of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and America promptly developed a strong deterrence named Fortress America. Hundreds of B-47 jet bombers were built for a one-way mission to bomb Russia.

In the 1960s Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara developed a new concept named Mutual Assured Destruction. The belief was that maintaining an equal force with the enemy would cancel their fear of invasion and they would terminate their aggression. This only extended the Cold War indefinitely. Fortunately, President Ronald Reagan in 1981 proclaimed MAD as suicidal and promoted a winning concept, “We win, You Lose.” Russia’s economy could not match America’s and the USSR collapsed.[...read more]

The Right Stuff: Newsom’s Clean Energy Act doesn’t add up

By Roger Oberbeck: published November 21, 2022 California’s Clean Energy, Jobs and Affordability Act of 2022, with a commitment of $54 billion to establish 90% clean energy by 2035 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2045, has these goals:

• Cut air pollution by 60%. • Reduce state oil consumption by 91%. • Reduce fossil fuel use in buildings and transportation by 92%. • Cut refinery pollution by 94%, Are these goals attainable? No. Here are the data. Senate Bill 1020 establishes clean electricity targets of 90% by 2035, 95% by 2040 and 100% by 2045. California used 277.7 gigawatt hours (GWH) of electricity in 2021. (One GWH would power 1.15 million California houses annually). Of that total, 35% was non-carbon producing energy, (i.e., nuclear, hydroelectric, wind and solar), but one-third (11% of the total) of that quantity was imported from neighbor states. California must increase its non-carbon emitting electricity production by 181.8 GWH by 2045.

Gov. Gavin Newsom plans on having 20 gigawatt rated capacity of offshore wind turbines by 2045. This will require 6,667 3 megawatt wind turbines which will produce 52,209 gigawatt hours of electricity. Assuming California’s energy use will remain constant, California must increase zero carbon-emission electricity production by 129,591 GWH, which will require an additional 50 GWH of annual electricity generation, i.e., an additional 16,667 3-megawatt, or 5,000 10-megawatt wind turbines.[...read more]