They Call Him Comrade

John Ransom
Posted: Apr 22, 2012 12:01 AM

Doctor Roy wrote: I asked this question somewhere last week but didn't get an answer. If Corporations don't really pay income taxes- but instead pass it on to consumers- if a particular corporation pays little or no income tax (and there are many of them) could it then be possible that they are just using the statutory rate instead of their actual rate as an excuse to raise prices and outsource jobs overseas?- Obama's Solution to High Taxes: Even Higher Taxes

Dear Comrade Roy,

To paraphrase the movie Billy Madison, I think we are all a little dumber for having listened to your question here today. Your question is another shining example why liberals should NEVER have anything to do with our economy.

Corporations may pass along corporate taxes to customers, but that doesn’t mean that the tax has no effect on them. When a corporation is saddled with high taxes, they raise the price of the products they sell, which means that they sell fewer products and they do so at a lower profit margin.   

Corporations write checks to the government all the time to pay for taxes on their profits.

If you looked at the financial pages all week last week, companies were reporting “earnings;” that is profits. And profits are what really drive the market.   

There are few GEs out there that pay nothing.

Even assuming that your blended mash of words makes some sense, one should ask why companies are going overseas to start with? Why are other countries lowering their statutory tax rates, as you call them, if it doesn’t make the companies more competitive?

Take Illinois for example- where you live.

Why did the state cut deals with Caterpillar and CME and Jimmy Johns to give them tax breaks AFTER raising the so-called statutory tax on corporate profits? The did it because they realized that if they didn’t those companies would leave the state.

Blair wrote: Back in the early 1980s, (81, or '82), Paul Harvey quoted a study that said the editors and reporters of both newspapers, and the then-three major networks, ABC, CBS, and NBC, were more liberal than their readers and viewers. The study went on to say that of the general population, about 70% are religious, compared to the majority of people in the media who are secular. Of those in the media who are religious, the figures are much lower, about 10% of the editors and correspondents are religious. The study was conducted by the Columbia School of Journalism. - The Obamunist-Controlled Press Has a Job to Do on Jobs

Dear Blair,

Newsrooms- and the liberals who run them- believe in diversity in everything except the diversity that really matters: diversity of opinion.

And there really is no other diversity that counts, but that of opinion. Ethnicity, race, religion and gender really aren’t but skin deep, so to speak.

Gray Ghost wrote: I wonder if anything can be done to punish the main stream media? Are there any laws that can be used to criminally prosecute these liars? - The Obamunist-Controlled Press Has a Job to Do on Jobs

Dear Ghost,

I’m not supportive of anything that would criminalize the expression of opinion or the free exercise of the First Amendment rights.

The best thing that we can do is what we have been doing, which is we have been supporting non-traditional media outlets like, Breitbart, Red State, etc.

Media companies have shareholders that they have to take care of, and as shareholders see companies like the NYTimes and the Denver Post lose subscribers to conservative online outlets, change will eventually come.

Lois01 wrote: Capital-ISM; Conservat-ISM; Patriot-ISM; National-ISM; International-ISM; Deconscructiv-ISM; Antidisestablilshmentarian-ISM; Yes, all ISMs are exactly the same. - The Obamunist-Controlled Press Has a Job to Do on Jobs

Dear Comrade Lois,

I didn’t say that all isms are exactly the same.

What I wrote was: “Obamunism has the same problem that most isms share. People picked it based on emotion and have spent their lives- and their credibility- trying to justifying it based on logic. And emotion, in these cases, always wins out.”

Obamunism, unlike some of the isms that you pointed out (capitalism, conservatism, patriotism, nationalism) is a relatively short lived invention.

Let’s see it can make it even four more years.        

WotanofAZgard wrote: Always funny when GOP twits like Ransom cite the NYT as a credible source when its reporting can be used for rightwing propaganda. -Stop the Liberal Presses: New York Times/CBS Poll Finds Trouble for Obama

Dear Comrade Odin,

It’s nice when you take a break from listening to Zeppelin tunes in the basement and drop the Mein Kampf to make one of your intellectual arguments here on Townhall. You might be the last living person who actually thinks that calling someone a “twit” is going to carry an argument.

There are much better words than “twit.”

You should broaden your vocabulary.

For example, if I was that kind of guy who called names, I would call you names like: piker, pinhead, lemonhead, clod-patted moron, doofus, progressive pig-dog, lickspittle, ignoramus, dunce, dunderhead, or even the cystic mystic.

But instead I call you… comrade. Da?

I actually use the New York Times a lot in my articles.

In this particular case I was citing a poll in which the known New York Times’ liberal bias would tend to buttress my claim that Obama is in trouble.  

Chris in Kalifornia wrote: Something I don't understand about republicans. We voted in a pretend republican in Bush, twice and that led us to Obama. Now we are apparently voting in another pretend republican in Romney. Why? Any of several of the other candidates would have been better presidents and even candidates. What is it about the pretend republicans that seems to get people's votes? -Stop the Liberal Presses: New York Times/CBS Poll Finds Trouble for Obama

Dear Chris,

That’s not fair to George II.

I think he was right on some things. When you are a war-time president, you unfortunately do some things that you wouldn’t do otherwise.

But saying that, I think you are generally confused about the Republican Party.

It’s not necessarily the party of small government, as we can plainly see from history.

It’s not really a conservative party in the sense that it is trying to conserve what is best of the past.

It’s time for people to understand that.

The Republicans got exactly who they wanted.

They always do.

And they always will when we pretend opportunistic politicians like Jan Brewer, Marco Rubio and Chris Christie are conservatives.   

Will352 wrote: John, I think you have a good idea in there. Ransom/Nugent 2012- Beware: In Obama’s Global Tax Scheme Americans are “the Rich”

Dear Will,

Are you talking Hunting Party ticket?

John in Gwinette, GA wrote: Trolls are quiet on most of the articles. The messiah and his admin are really messing things up and they are waiting for talking points to be posted by the DNC. I have never seen TH so vacant of trolls at a certain time. Change is on the way!- The Pee Wee President’s Awfully Big Campaign

Dear John,

I’ve noticed that. If it gets any quieter, I’m going to have to scrap the email-hate mail pieces.

It’s been going down hill for sometime.

Question to readers: Is it all of Townhall or just finance?

Raymond (Ret) wrote: Yeah, but John it is a proven fact of Keynesian economics that government spending stimulates the economy. (Sure hope my spouse does not apply that concept to our finances while shopping.) Even seemingly useless government spending such as Keynes himself stipulated by saying we could stimulate the economy by paying people to dig holes and then paying them again to fill them back up. Which begs the question, why is it these same people content that the government spending on the war in Iraq got us into this mess? - The Pee Wee President’s Awfully Big Campaign

Dear Comrade Ray,

Sure spending temporarily stimulates the economy. But here’s the thing: government spending is the most wasteful, least productive way to spend money possible. While it does generally have a return on investment, it doesn’t get nearly the return private investment does.

That’s because government doesn’t spend money with the idea of return on investment. Their return is always and will always be a political return.     

We see this in the so-called stimulus measures that Obama enacted.

Repaving existing roads twice is a great way of supporting union jobs in construction, but it doesn’t make the kind of returns that, say, starting a bank would, or a new cyber security company that has new technology that stops spam, or a new biotech company that promises a new small molecule that fights cancer.

Plus, liquidity hasn’t really been a problem. Companies, which will always be were job creation really happen, have cash.

What they don’t have is confidence to spend that cash.

I think that we will narrowly avert a recession. But it still won’t be pretty.

And that will only change when the Deomcrats completely renounce Obama after he gets his butt kicked in November.             

Jim440 wrote: Great shot from the church, John, and YES....there is GOD! My family and I used to live just down the road on 86 on the north side of the road, in the valley across from Founders Village. Beautiful country. - The Pee Wee President’s Awfully Big Campaign

Dear Jim,

Very beautiful place to live. I’m very lucky that I get to live outside the beltway bulge.

Even luckier that I live in such a great place in general.

That’s it for this week,



"Like" me on Facebook and you'll get sneak peaks of columns and, as an added bonus, I will never raise your taxes. Send me email and I just might mention you on Sunday.