Astounding news: millionaires are not dummies and will act in their own self-interest

The New Neo Posted on by

Yes folks, believe it or not, it’s true [emphasis mine]:

In the 2009-10 tax year, more than 16,000 people [in Britain] declared an annual income of more than £1 million to HM Revenue and Customs.

This number fell to just 6,000 after Gordon Brown introduced the new 50p top rate of income tax shortly before the last general election…

It is believed that rich Britons moved abroad or took steps to avoid paying the new levy by reducing their taxable incomes.

George Osborne, the Chancellor, announced in the Budget earlier this year that the 50p top rate will be reduced to 45p from next April.

Since the announcement, the number of people declaring annual incomes of more than £1 million has risen to 10,000.

However, the number of million-pound earners is still far below the level recorded even at the height of the recession and financial crisis.

Last night, Harriet Baldwin, the Conservative MP who uncovered the latest figures, said: “Labour’s ideological tax hike led to a tax cull of millionaires.

Far from raising funds, it actually cost the UK £7 billion in lost tax revenue.

We don’t know what really happened to all those millionaires, or why. But that up-down-up-down pattern is mighty indicative that the tax-raise and tax-cut were partly or even mostly to blame.

And it’s “interesting” that a lot of people don’t seem to get the difference between tax rates and tax revenues, the difference that makes a difference. So, why don’t they get it? One reason is that tax rates are something you can legislate, whereas the tax revenues that result can only be estimated (often wrongly), calculated ex post facto, and any drop can be blamed on some other factor.

What’s more, tax rates are what politicians campaign on. Lately the public seems to like to stick it to the rich, and so liberals who advocate such tactics (such as our very own president) are often elected. What happens later in terms of actual revenues is easier to ignore and/or explain away—and after all, what we are really interested in these days is the show, the narrative, the appearance of things (fairness! reducing income inequality!) rather than the actual long-term results.

[NOTE: And yes, I’m aware of all the brouhaha around the blogosphere lately about the fact that the higher rate is not paid on the millionaires’ entire incomes. I’m not going to get into that issue right now, except to say that there’s disagreement among more expert pundits than I on the subject of how much the tax hikes really affect the rich. Here’s a summary of some of the major points, and also see this.]

Perceptions about the Republican Party

The New Neo Posted on by

Since we exist here in somewhat of a bubble on the blogospheric right, it can be easy to lose sight of how widespread and influential opposition propaganda about Republicans has been, and how certain Republican positions—largely misunderstood—feed right into it. The results of this election have brought it home though, loud and clear. I don’t have a solution for the problem, because propaganda is simple and the response to it is complex and much less likely to be listened to. But I still think it’s interesting to see what’s out there.

In particular, there were some startling comments to this article about why Asian Americans voted so strongly Democratic this year despite the fact that they would seem to be a constituency to which Republican principles would appeal. No one is saying that the loss of the Asian American vote caused the Republican loss in 2012, but I think some of the comments shed light on how it could be that a majority of voters could say they trusted Romney more with the economy (or that they wanted less federal government), and yet vote for Obama.

Here, in no particular order, are some of those comments that I found especially interesting:

As an Asian-American, the questioning of Obama’s American-ness really strikes a raw nerve. (This is perhaps the one experience that unites Asian-Americans ”” being treated as a foreigner in our homeland).

With the birther conspiracy theory and muslim quips this year, you can add “racist” and “exclusionary” to that long list of reasons why Asians didn’t vote Republican.

Even if lower taxes might benefit the small business owners and successful professionals, there’s a strong sense that you’re not a real American in the Republican view point, unless you’re white. Definitely not if you’re a half Kenyan raised in Indonesia. And not if your parents struggled for 10 years to navigate the immigration process to the US from Taiwan.

Republicans are recognized here and worldwide as Bible thumping, anti-gay, anti-abortion creationists ”“ true, but they are also seen as being sexist, racist, religiously intolerant, gun toting and trigger happy. And yes, their social agenda outweighs any actual sense being spoken of in the financial realm.

I am an Asian American whose household income is >$250k. I am attracted to arguments of fiscal discipline, less government interference in daily life, greater personal responsibility, and free enterprise. However, I refuse to vote for Republicans because I am so put off by the positions and rhetoric of social conservatives. Republicans are indeed the party of Bible-thumping, anti-gay, anti-science, anti-abortion creationists. Although I am not crazy about the Democrats’ confiscatory and redistributionist policies, I am much more concerned about the Republicans’ irrational, anti-liberal social policy and their general aversion to facts and science. And when it comes down to it, Republicans lie when they say they are for “smaller government”. In fact, they are all advocates of a bloated military, many cannot get enough pork barrel spending and farm subsidies, and they have no problems sticking their dirty noses into women’s privates and peoples’ bedrooms.

For these reasons, I vote for Libertarians unless I feel that the Republican has a chance of winning, in which case I vote for the Democrat.

Why aren’t[Asian Americans] Republicans?

Ummm . . . maybe because they believe in science (I’m sure in your statistics there somewhere there’s something about the overrepresentation of Asians in scientific fields) and the GOP has been hostile to science ever since it allowed itself to be taken over by a bunch of religious zealots.

There’s lots more, but you get the picture. Unless the comments section has been taken over by a bunch of sock puppets, I’ll assume these are all different people and bona fide commenters. What’s going on here (and I know it is not limited to Asian Americans) is that, even though economic issues are seen as important, the propaganda about Republicans as racist anti-science zealots eager to restrict people’s private sex lives has taken hold and flourished.

We can state all we want that it’s not true, that these people are picking and choosing a few Republicans who don’t represent the whole, and that the Republican positions and goals aren’t really as they perceive, but the message is not getting through. These voters see the reality of Republicans as matching liberal rhetoric about Republicans, and until that is somehow corrected it will be difficult to counter such perceptions and win national elections. And it also comes through loud and clear that, at least at the present level of economic hardship, social and cultural issues and perceptions trump economics. If that seems counter-intuitive, so be it.

Cutting off your toes to spike your feet

The New Neo Posted on by

I doubt the practice is very popular. I certainly hope it’s not very popular. But it seems that some women are actually having their pinkie toes amputated, or having other toes shortened, in order to fit more easily and painlessly into stiletto high heels.

There’s a long tradition of severely or slightly altering the human body for fashion or other custom and belief, sometimes done by and to women (foot binding, female genital mutilation), or by and to males (circumcision), as well as unisex practices (lip, ear, and neck stretching; tattooing and scarification).

You might think we can do quite nicely without a pinkie toe. And it seems we can. But ugh! And you may be as surprised as I was to discover that the practice of removing the pinkie toe because of problems with offending footgear didn’t originate recently with women and stilettos:

Believe it or not in the old days in the National Football League certain players would get very painful corns on their fifth toes and instead of having pain or a potential wound-from all the action and the toe rubbing on rock-hard shoes-a small amount of players would have their 5th toes amputated.

I’ve never been able to wear stilettos even when I was young—too painful—and high heels have gotten even higher since then. Now it’s out of the question for me, although when the occasion’s right I still get out some of my regular high heels, slam them on my feet, and manage to walk around for the evening without too many difficulties.

Toe amputation in order to wear stilettos is such an extreme act that it reminds me of nothing less than the old Grimm version of “Cinderella.” If you’re only familiar with the sanitized one, let me just say that the original Grimms earned their surname honestly:

The King’s son picked it [the shoe Cinderella had left behind] up, and it was small and dainty, and all golden. Next morning, he went with it to the father, and said to him, “No one shall be my wife but she whose foot this golden slipper fits.” Then were the two sisters glad, for they had pretty feet. The eldest went with the shoe into her room and wanted to try it on, and her mother stood by. But she could not get her big toe into it, and the shoe was too small for her. Then her mother gave her a knife and said, “Cut the toe off; when thou art Queen thou wilt have no more need to go on foot.” The maiden cut the toe off, forced the foot into the shoe, swallowed the pain, and went out to the King’s son. Then he took her on his his horse as his bride and rode away with her. They were, however, obliged to pass the grave, and there, on the hazel-tree, sat the two pigeons and cried,

“Turn and peep, turn and peep,
There’s blood within the shoe,
The shoe it is too small for her,
The true bride waits for you.”

Then he looked at her foot and saw how the blood was streaming from it. He turned his horse round and took the false bride home again, and said she was not the true one, and that the other sister was to put the shoe on. Then this one went into her chamber and got her toes safely into the shoe, but her heel was too large. So her mother gave her a knife and said, “Cut a bit off thy heel; when thou art Queen thou wilt have no more need to go on foot.” The maiden cut a bit off her heel, forced her foot into the shoe, swallowed the pain, and went out to the King’s son. He took her on his horse as his bride, and rode away with her, but when they passed by the hazel-tree, two little pigeons sat on it and cried,

“Turn and peep, turn and peep,
There’s blood within the shoe
The shoe it is too small for her,
The true bride waits for you.”

He looked down at her foot and saw how the blood was running out of her shoe, and how it had stained her white stocking. Then he turned his horse and took the false bride home again. “This also is not the right one,” said he, “have you no other daughter?”

And yes, I’m aware there’s lots of symbolic sexual stuff in “Cinderella” and many other Grimm stories, but I’ll leave it at that.

Totten on Morsi

The New Neo Posted on by

Michael Totten gets around, and yesterday he talked about what’s been going on lately in Egypt:

[Morsi’s] already being called the new Pharaoh. It makes no difference that he was elected. Democracy isn’t just about getting elected. A democratic election is not a one-time plebiscite on who the next tyrant is going to be.

Well worth reading.

It’s Cyber Monday

The New Neo Posted on by

Whatever that is.

So there are lots of sales at Amazon. Click on this link and see if there’s something you can find that would be a great gift for someone you love. You can even treat yourself; I won’t mind a bit.

I happen to have a mad passion for this stuff, not always that easy to find except online. And although this particular item has gotten a bad bad rap, I have a sneaking fondness for it as well.

Now go ahead and mock me.

And about that anti-Gramscian march…

The New Neo Posted on by

I see that my earlier post today has already sparked a bunch of comments to the general tune of “all is lost; they’ve won the Gramscian march through education and there’s nothing to do about it.”

I was going to respond in the comments section there, but then I thought a brand new post just might be the best way to handle it.

Since the election I’ve noticed a very gloomy and defeatist mindset circulating on the right, and not just on this blog. Those who hold that view tend to think they’re merely being realistic, however.

To a certain extent I share the gloom, and why not? After all, not only did I fervently want Obama to be defeated by Romney, but I spent many a long hour writing on this blog in order to do my small although probably insignificant bit to further that goal. I even understand the realism of the idea that it may be too late.

What I don’t understand, and don’t share, is the view that it’s not worth it to try. Education is one of the most important—perhaps the single most important—front in this battle. I am speaking in particular of education in the fields of history and government (or what used to be called “civics”), as well as the general leftist domination of the entire educational enterprise. If the right gives up that battle, it may be that nothing else the right does will ever do a particle of good.

Since when can a long-term campaign only be fought on one front? Does trying to take back education, bit by little bit (beginning, I believe, in grade schools and with school boards and textbooks especially in red and purple states), preclude other options and other approaches? Of course not.

And speaking of “bit by little bit,” whatever happened to patience? Remember that the phrase “the Gramscian march” usually contains the adjective “long,” as in “the long Gramscian march.” When the left began that endeavor, it probably looked impossible, but they were undaunted and they were very, very, very patient.

And before you say “but the situation is different now—the right was asleep then and the left is not, and the left knows exactly what they’re doing and will fight tooth and nail” let me just say that I am aware of that. But if the right has no stomach for a fight, even a very difficult one, then all is most definitely lost.

Let’s hear from Churchill, who was talking about a different fight:

If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a small chance of survival. There may even be a worse case: you may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

What would FredHjr say?

The New Neo Posted on by

Many of you probably remember FredHjr very well. But for those of you who weren’t around this blog in his heyday, you should know that he was one of the most brilliant and prolific commenters here. Tragically, he died in June of 2009, and here’s a portion of a tribute I wrote shortly after hearing the terrible news:

Even though none of us actually met Fred in the real world, most of the regulars here knew FredHjr as I knew him””a brilliant mind containing knowledge of unusual depth and breadth, and demonstrating a rare ability to articulate his thoughts with precision, grace, and logic; a staunch patriot and passionate defender of liberty who never pulled his punches; a “changer” who had been a Marxist in his youth and held a vast storehouse of expertise on how the Left thinks and operates; a seeker of truth with an almost inexhaustible interest in the world around him; and a man of strong religious faith and great and abiding love for his family.

As the years have passed since Fred’s death, I’ve often thought of him and wondered what he would have said about the way things have turned out. And the other day, just by chance—when I linked to an old post of mine from April of 2008—I came across a comment of his that reminded me of what a sharp and prescient mind Fred had. Remember, this was written about seven months before the 2008 election:

The problem is that the demographics of the country do not favor the Republicans and McCain. A MAJOR reason why the country has slid to the Left is because the WWII generation is dying in big buckets, being replaced by an under-40 crowd that is strongly liberal-Left and was well indoctrinated rather than educated. Most of those Depression-WWII era citizens were Democrats at one time and after four years of Jimmy “Dhimmi” Carter they had enough, voted Republican thereafter. In fact (not including yours truly, initially) many of the younger Boomers defected over to the Republican Party at the same time (I’m a younger Boomer who stayed Left until about 1986-87).

The long Gramscian march through the institutions has worked. The Older Boomers who were/are still Leftists have pretty much controlled education, media, and law, and have hand-picked their GenXer successors to take their places in those jobs where the Left’s influence can be extended. There no longer is academic freedom, thanks to these people. Our under-40 crowd is the product of Outcome Based Education, “self-esteem,” and the dumbed-down political correctness regime that has created a milieu within which Obama can succeed.

I don’t really know what Fred would have had to say at this point, but I’m pretty sure his observations would have been exceptionally lucid, insightful, and helpful. But it seems to me it’s time to begin our own anti-Gramscian march through those same institutions. Actually, it’s way past time. An ounce of prevention would have been worth a ton of cure.

“Great Escape” tunnel found

The New Neo Posted on by

A reader has alerted me to the news that the tunnel “Harry” featured in the movie “The Great Escape” has been found (not the movie set tunnel; the real deal).

If you’ve loved that movie for many decades, as I have, this will bring back memories not only of the film, but of the courageous and resourceful real-life men who were interned in that camp and who managed to devise an ingenious way to escape.

If you’ve never seen the movie, you should do so. It takes a few liberties with historical fact (the Steve McQueen character is a fictional one, for example, but that can be forgiven because it gives us the opportunity to watch him on a motorcycle). But the gist of the plot is accurate, and you’ll be lost in admiration for these men who truly deserve the appellation “heroes.”

I somehow doubt that our current population could accomplish something similar, even if they had the guts to do so. People of earlier times were more likely to have varied skills at working with their hands, and to be more resourceful at devising clever mechanical fixes for problems they encountered along the way.

I pondered long and hard over what scene from the movie to feature here, but this one will have to do to whet your appetite. Note the use of German and French without a translation into English or the use of subtitles, which at the time was unusual and made a deep impression on me:

The entire film is available on YouTube, if you want to watch it that way. I saw it when it first came out, on a big screen in a movie theater, and that’s the best way to go. But since it’s almost never shown that way anymore, a small screen should suffice. And if you’re interested—as I am—in historic accuracy, here’s a documentary on the making of the film, and the interface between fact and fiction:

[NOTE: Bumped up.]

The cover-up of the Benghazi cover-up…

The New Neo Posted on by

…is described here.

There are many reasons for the success of the coverup. One is the nicely coordinated set of messages from the administration and the MSM. Another is the complexity of the story; people have to be motivated enough to follow the twistings and turnings, and most people are not.

The public has been distrustful of the MSM for quite some time, which has lulled the right into a false sense that the public will reject the media’s message. That turns out to be wrong—people are still influenced by it greatly, including the constant refrain that Fox News is bogus and unreliable. If it’s only Fox singing a different song and describing what happened in Benghazi and afterward, why pay attention? Especially when life can be stressful and there are so many things that are more distracting.

And by the way, I’m not really knocking the public that much over this. It’s just human nature. It’s political junkies like us who are the weird ones. We happen to be really really interested in this sort of stuff, so much so that we might spend a few hours a day reading about it. We happen to think it’s extremely important, and it is. But to most people it’s a question of tanks versus pears, and their attitude is that of Karel’s mother.

Tanks versus pears? Karel’s mother? Whatever am I talking about? I’m quoting a passage from Milan Kundera’s The Book of Laughter and Forgetting (which I wrote about previously here):

One night, for example, the tanks of a huge neighboring country [the USSR] came and occupied their country [Czechoslovakia]. The shock was so great, so terrible, that for a long time no one could think about anything else. It was August, and the pears in their garden were nearly ripe. The week before, Mother had invited the local pharmacist to come and pick them. He never came, never even apologized. The fact that Mother refused to forgive him drove Karel and Marketa crazy. Everybody’s thinking about tanks, and all you can think about is pears, they yelled. And when shortly afterwards they moved away, they took the memory of her pettiness with them.

But are tanks really more important than pears? As time passed, Karel realized that the answer was not so obvious as he had once thought, and he began sympathizing secretly with Mother’s perspective”“a big pear in the foreground and somewhere off in the distance a tank, tiny as a ladybug, ready at any moment to take wing and disappear from sight. So Mother was right after all: tanks are mortal, pears eternal.

One of the reasons people should be paying a lot more attention to the “tanks” (Benghazi) is that the tanks can end up influencing our lives (the “pears”) greatly. Power-hungry and/or incompetent politicians count on the ignorance and/or inattention of the public. Sometimes the press functions to hold those politicians in check by informing the public what’s going on, but not now—at least, not where the Democrats are concerned.