Trump’s Child Care Plan: Why It’s a Better Option than Welfare

ivanka-trump-tax-child-careFrom Facebook,

Objectivists for President Trump

An Objectivist friendly friend took me to task over Trump’s Child Care plan. The central thesis of the argument is that child care is not a national obligation. It is a personal responsibility. The secondary criticism is that Donald Trump is not merely giving tax cuts, but giving cash to “low income families,” whatever that means. Also he wants to include employer “incentives” which sound close to mandates, to grant child care or dependent care leave. Finally, the “higher pay” and “equal pay for equal work” language is liberal speak for pandering promises of entitlements.

I understand all that.

I have three responses:

  1. These are *better* options than expanded welfare programs. Reducing taxes is better than promising free stuff, creating new bureaus, and regulating people and businesses.
  2. This will encourage intact families, instead of breaking up families.
  3. This gives stay-at-home mothers a reward for staying at home. It mitigates what feminism has done to child-rearing.

Objectivism is an idealist philosophy, but we are a damaged society that is still burdened with the legacy of 100 years of progressive policy. If this aids all families with small children equally, is it not an acceptable compromise?


Update, September 15, 2017: 
Ivanka Trump has been pretty quiet on the child care tax credit and paid-leave program since her father was elected President. She has been pushing, but has been met with polite resistance, even from supporters.  I have the sense that this “feel good” proposal was mostly a sop to the moderate liberals to get them hop on the Trump train and to keep Ivanka busy.  It is obvious that she is just one of many promoting yet another child care program, but she is not empowered to do much more than lobby, and doesn’t carry a suitcase full of 100-dollar bills to make it happen.  Her connections to her embattled father, The President Donald, doesn’t seem to get her much more than an audience with a senator or two. Evidently, the $500 billion this plan would cost is not attractive to the Republicans who are looking to rein in the budget, not expand it out even further.

Still, don’t expect this issue or Ivanka to go away any time soon. She is just waiting for the right time to make her move. Like everything else, she is a pawn on the great chess board of American politics.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Ethics of Genghis Khan

Was Genghis Khan the cruellest man who ever lived?

Not many think of Genghis Khan, but they should. More than thirty-five million people living today are his descendants.  He was, at one time, the most powerful man on earth, and more than likely, one of the cruelest.  During his reign of terror, he may have killed forty million people, approximately one tenth of the earth’s population of 400,000,000 in the 12th century AD, and approximately a third of the population of Asia in the lands that he controlled.  His army consisted of 129,000 men in 1227. The Mongol empire was the largest ever, covering 24 million contiguous square miles — the Roman Empire was a mere 5 million square miles — and stretched from the western edge of Russia to the Korean peninsula. (Japan resisted succumbing to the Khan’s invasion only because of the vastness of the Great China Sea.)

Before he became The Great Khan, he was a poor farmer’s son named Temujin. The future “Ruler of the Universe” was known for being ruthless and ambitious. At sixteen, he killed his brother, in front of his mother, over possession of a fish.  He formed an army, initially to seek revenge on his enemies, but quickly grew it to an incredible size in a short amount of time by promising the men all the women and wealth they could carry in their campaign of terror.  He and his sons had enough soldiers to surround cities and simply starve the citizens into submission.  Unfortunately, those who submitted to him were immediately murdered in mass executions.  It mattered little that depopulated cities were useless to him.  He raped and pillaged with the intent of guaranteeing that his children would rule the earth.

The capture of Mtislav of KIev

It is unlikely that Genghis Khan ever worried about ethics or social niceties or the opinion of the “international community.”  He was thoroughly reviled in his time and for hundreds of years afterwards. This didn’t stop the History Channel from praising him for his “diversity” and “tolerance of religious differences.” (my italics)

Unlike many empire builders, Genghis Khan embraced the diversity of his newly conquered territories. He passed laws declaring religious freedom for all and even granted tax exemptions to places of worship. This tolerance had a political side—the Khan knew that happy subjects were less likely to rebel—but the Mongols also had an exceptionally liberal attitude towards religion. While Genghis and many others subscribed to a shamanistic belief system that revered the spirits of the sky, winds and mountains, the Steppe peoples were a diverse bunch that included Nestorian Christians, Buddhists, Muslims and other animistic traditions. The Great Khan also had a personal interest in spirituality. He was known to pray in his tent for multiple days before important campaigns, and he often met with different religious leaders to discuss the details of their faiths. In his old age, he even summoned the Taoist leader Qiu Chuji to his camp, and the pair supposedly had long conversations on immortality and philosophy.

What a load of crap!  A man who happily tramples on royalty with horses, decapitates the men he conquers, treats women like his personal cum repositories, and enslaves children has no “shamanistic” belief system. mongol

The man was a cruel and vicious Mongol warlord!  He didn’t give a shit about religion. Cruelty was a not only his weapon. It was a sport he loved.  Even the Ottoman Muslims were afraid of him!

As we contemplate how we should respond to the barbarians that encroach upon us today, such as ISIS and North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, we should bear in mind how submission and subservience does not buy peace. It only hastens our deaths and the end of our culture forever.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Sheriff Joe Runs Afoul of the Deep State

Another example of leftist judicial activism against an elected conservative.

Sheriff Joe was enforcing Federal Law in contradiction to a District Judge G. Murray Snow’s order to stop turning over illegal alien criminals to ICE, which was arbitrary, unconstitutional order, and under appeal. The DOJ has ordered that counties turn over criminal aliens.

It was Judge Snow himself who demanded that Judge Bolton go after Arpaio.

Sheriff Joe wants and deserves a jury trial.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Remembering Solzhenitzyn


Annemarie reminded me that Solzhenitsyn and Salinger were both living in the Dartmouth College area when I was there in the 1980s. Saw Salinger, but never Solzhenitsyn. Guess he didn’t like English language bookstores. Or maybe he feared assasination by the KGB. Both probably true.


Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Ten Thing That Changed My Life

Ten life changing things I’m really glad I did:

10.) Boxing. I found my sport!

9.) Moved out of California. Yes, I love my home state and miss my family, but the place was making me crazy.

8.) Traveled to Israel. Beautiful country. Helped me to understand the righteousness of the Israeli cause.

7.) Became an English major in college. I still became a “computer guy” but I am literate, too.

6.) Bought a house in the ’90s. Prices were low, and rates got better.

5.) Taught. Yes, I was a real college professor!

4.) Converted to Conservatism. (Rush Limbaugh is a god!)

3.) Read Ayn Rand and studied objectivism.

2.) I had lots of children, though it was terrifying at first. Thank God, I never bought into the “population bomb” theory. They are still beautiful babies to me.

1.) Married Annette D’Agostino. She is so happy and tolerant. Exactly what I needed in my life.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Slavery’s Global Comeback


Think slavery has gone away, a relic of earlier centuries?

“Nay, nay!” as the late John Pinette used to say.

Communists and Muslims are practicing it.

“There are now twice as many people enslaved in the world as there were in the 350 years of the transatlantic slave trade…. Assuming even the rough accuracy of 27 million, there are likely more slaves in the world today than there have been at any other time in human history. For some quick perspective on that point: Over the entire 350 years of the transatlantic slave trade, 13.5 million people were taken out of Africa. That’s equal to just half the the world’s slave population today.”

Slavery’s Global Comeback

Globalists are hoping to spread this practice around the world. “Refugees” are needed to prop up failing welfare states with declining birth rates. European, North American and Australian nations are being repopulated with Africans and West Asians.

This is how we used to transport slaves in the 18th century.  Crude and inhuman, right?


Today, they import themselves. See the difference?


Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

How about an Alternate Reality show with No Government?

In light of recent dismantling of Civil War monuments in the South, it is not surprising that the Left is amping up the racial division with not one, but two Alternate Reality series, one which fantasizes about America if the Confederacy had won the war — and continued the institution of slavery, and another if the freed black slaves staged an uprising and created a separate nation in the South.

Both programs sound absolutely hideous.  Both promise to further exacerbate race relations which have already been at their worst in 50 years.  Why would someone — two major production companies — want to exploit racial fears by depicting white people as hideously racist and oppressive, and blacks as justifiably angry and violent?

The producers say it is about stimulating a dialog on issues that have gone unaddressed and unresolved in modern American society, namely, hidden racism and discrimination. But that all sits on the presumption that the entire Civil War and especially the Civil Rights movement were abject failures.  Nothing was really accomplished.  White politicians and the white majority public simply gave lip service to “civil rights” and nothing changed fundamentally.  Whites are still privileged and blacks are still oppressed.  Instead of outright racism and “Jim Crow” laws, we whites merely sublimated our oppressive behavior to relieve our guilt while continuing and benefitting from the behavior.  Thus, “dialog” is intended to awaken both races to balance the scales of social justice.

But it is clear to me that this “dialog” is a self-serving justification. A better analysis of the causes of racism and the continuing downfall of the blacks in America points to the rise of the welfare state and deep resentment of perceived racial inequalities, even if those inequalities no longer exist in law.  Whites *have* destroyed blacks, particularly in the dismantling of the black family and their increasing dependence on the state.  Blacks *do* have a legitimate gripe, but not for the reasons they have been told.  The never ending reparations from government in the form of welfare and welfare regulations has stripped most blacks, and especially black men, of all dignity of caring for a family and being productive members of society.

Whites *do* have reason to fear and loath. They are being told that there is *nothing* they can do to mitigate their racism other than submit them selves and future generations to an intensely racist experience — 400 years of oppression by people of color. Especially in the universities and corporate environment, blacks are being given preference in hiring simply because they are black, and not necessarily because they have merited the appointment. But for working class whites, who have a tendency to perceive reality better than their “educated” class counterparts, they experience the racial divide more acutely.  Close encounters with angry welfare dependent blacks is stripped of any the veneer of civility that exists in executive suites. According to the cultural Marxist/Black Lives Matter narrative, it would be just better all around if whites committed democide and stopped having children altogether.  Better yet, just die already.  This sort of rhetoric may seem fringe and “extreme” but as a tenant of left-wing thought, it becoming more mainstream.

Bottom line, we don’t need to fantasize about extreme racial stereotypes. We need to envision a society without government, not one where the government is even more corrupt than it is now.  I want to imagine a world where government and the state do not exist, where my rights are respected, and where people treat others based, not on the color of their skin, but on the content of their character.

Amazon to counter-program ‘Confederate’ with reparations-themed ‘Black America’ 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment