Hillary Clinton’s 38-Year History of Sleaze and Corruption

International Liberty

I’ve written before about Hillary Clinton’s unethical and (presumably) illegal actions, both in terms of her email server and the Clinton Foundation.

We’ve probably only seen the tip of the iceberg, but one thing that can be said with confidence is that there is strong scent of corruption, cronyism, and insider dealing that surrounds Mrs. Clinton.

Every day seems to bring new evidence. Writing for the Wall Street Journal, Kimberly Strassel puts it in blunt terms.

A Hillary Clinton presidency will be built, from the ground up, on self-dealing, crony favors, and an utter disregard for the law. This isn’t a guess. …It comes in the form of a memo written in 2011 by longtime Clinton errand boy Doug Band, who for years worked simultaneously at the Clinton Foundation and at the head of his lucrative consulting business, Teneo. It is astonishingly detailed proof that the Clintons do…

View original post 2,395 more words

Advertisements

Hillary Clinton Wants to Lose a Fight with the Laffer Curve

International Liberty

Based on what she’s been saying during the campaign, Hillary Clinton is a big fan of class warfare. She has put forth a series of “soak-the-rich” tax hikes designed to finance bigger government.

Her official plan includes provisions such as an increase (“surcharge”) in the top tax rate, the imposition of the so-called Buffett Rule, an increase in the tax burden on capital gains (including carried interest), and a more onerous death tax.

The Tax Foundation explains that this plan won’t be good for the economy or the budget.

Hillary Clinton’s tax plan would reduce the economy’s size by 1 percent in the long run. The plan would lead to 0.8 percent lower wages, a 2.8 percent smaller capital stock, and 311,000 fewer full-time equivalent jobs. …If we account for the economic impact of the plan, it would end up raising $191 billion over the next…

View original post 761 more words

In One Chart, Everything You Need to Know about Big Government, the Welfare State, and Sweden’s Economy

International Liberty

Sweden punches way above its weight in debates about economic policy. Leftists all over the world (most recently, Bernie Sanders) say the Nordic nation is an example that proves a big welfare state can exist in a rich nation. And since various data sources (such as the IMF’s huge database) show that Sweden is relatively prosperous and also that there’s an onerous fiscal burden of government, this argument is somewhat plausible.

A few folks on the left sometimes even imply that Sweden is a relatively prosperous nation because it has a large public sector. Though the people who make this assertion never bother to provide any data or evidence.

I have five responses when confronted with the why-can’t-we-be-more-like-Sweden argument.

  1. Sweden became rich when government was small. Indeed, until about 1960, the burden of the public sector in Sweden was smaller than it was in the United States. And…

View original post 720 more words

Rhino for President?

Fight for Rhinos

Throughout history people have been so fed up with their political choices, they have sometimes opted to vote for an animal instead.

In 1959 , as a protest, the voters of Sao Paulo, Brazil voted for Cacareco, the rhino at the Sao Paulo zoo.  With over 500 candidates running for the seat on the City Council, the five-year old black rhino won by a landslide.

cacareco-rhino-by-gina-famania Cacareco, source: Gina Famania

Her campaign for the election was traced back to a group of students who were fed up with living conditions, food shortages and overall political corruption. Although her win was thrown out and a new election took place, she made history.

“Vote Cacareco” became a slogan to signify political protests, and she became the inspiration for the Rhinoceros Party of Canada.

View original post

Crying (but also Laughing) about Clinton and Trump

International Liberty

One interesting feature of this election is that many voters, grappling with the unpalatable choice of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, are dealing with the feelings of dismay and despair that libertarians experience almost every election.

All I can say is, “welcome to my world.”

Though I admit our experiences aren’t the same. Ordinary voters presumably are agitated by Hillary’s corruption and Donald’s buffoonery.

As a free-market policy wonk, by contrast, I’m more concerned that both Clinton and Trump are statists. Heck, I’d tolerate some unseemly behavior and sleaze if a politician actually reduced the burden of government (hence, my bizarre ex post facto fondness for Bill Clinton’s presidency).

But since Hillary isn’t Bill and Trump isn’t Reagan, the dark cloud that we’re facing doesn’t have any silver lining.

Unless, of course, you’re a fan of political humor. In which case the 2016 election is Nirvana.

And…

View original post 269 more words

America’s Miserably Anti-Competitive Tax System

International Liberty

A couple of days ago, I wrote about the new rankings from the World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Report and noted that America’s private sector is considered world class but that our public sector ranks poorly compared to many other developed nations.

To elaborate on the depressing part of that observation, let’s now look at the Tax Foundation’s recently released International Tax Competitiveness Index.

Lots of data and lots of countries. Estonia gets the top score, and deservedly so. It has a flat tax and many other good policies. It’s also no surprise to see New Zealand and Switzerland near the top.

If you’re curious about America’s score, you’ll have to scroll way down because the United States ranks #31, below even Belgium, Spain, and Mexico.

If you look at how the U.S. ranks in the various categories, we have uniformly poor numbers for everything…

View original post 357 more words

CITES Recap: the good, the bad and the ugly

Fight for Rhinos

The CITES (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) 2008-2020 vision states
*they will be contributing to the conservation of wildlife as an integral part of the global ecosystem on which all life depends,
*as well as promoting transparency and wider involvement of civil society in the development of conservation policies and practices

cites-17

Are they following their vision?

Well, here’s a recap. The animals who reaped ‘benefits’ from increased protection are:

*Pangolins (trade was completely banned, and the most highly trafficked animals in the world were given highest protection status)

*African Gray Parrots (trade was completely outlawed)

*Sharks and Rays (Thirteen species of rays and Thresher and Silky sharks were given highest protection status)

In addition, proposals to grant legal trade in ivory and/or horn in Namibia, Zimbabwe and Swaziland were denied.

But the disheartening news was the denial of…

View original post 365 more words