• Newt Gingrich gets things right on occasion; when he does, he does a great job.
  • Blowing up the tax code sounds like a pretty solid plan.  There is absolutely no reason it needs to be this complex.  My ideal tax code (which happens to be the most economically efficient) would be a head tax:  each person pays $X per year.  I’d probably have a graduated head tax:  parents with children under the age of 5 pay $x1, between 5-13 pay $X2, and 13-17 pay $X3; then, all adults pay $X4.  Naturally, this tax would never fly politically.
  • Jindal’s attitude in the above link is also excellent:  focus on returning to growth, eliminating policies which have us stuck in malaise.  I will say, though, that I like having a party of austerity (if only Republicans actually were!); would it really be that scary to return to the levels of government spending we saw in, say, 1998?
  • Balancing the budget in 10 years gets Republicans closer to reasonable, but Vero de Rugy points out that the current iteration of the Ryan plan has some room for improvement.  The Republican Study Council has an actual
  • On the bright side, Republicans might actually end up winning the sequester debate.

Finally, Steve Sailer points out something important:  white, married people vote for Republicans.  This seems like a pretty sound conclusion and holds much better than a “gender gap” in general.  Therefore, it would make sense for Republicans to create incentives for people to get married, stay married, and have children.  Instead, we see this.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s