A recent GoBankingRates survey found that over 50% of Americans want student-loan forgiveness for everyone with any student-loan debt. Considering Democratic lawmakers are hoping President Joe Biden will keep his promise to cancel $50,000 in student debt per person, this data could certainly be used for leverage. But while the number of Americans who now want to see all higher ed-related debt simply erased from the books is growing, it doesn’t mean that we should follow along.
Pandemic and lockdown-related unemployment coupled with a slow economic growth following the low reopening of most states have, indeed, made it difficult for countless Americans to pay off their debt. It is thus natural to see U.S. residents wanting to help those in difficult situations. However, blanket loan forgiveness isn’t a response to hardship. It isn’t even a response to the broken American higher education system. Instead, loan forgiveness will only remove our attention from the errors of subsidized higher education.
Despite politicians’ best efforts, there’s simply no bottomless pit of money anywhere. Taxpayers, and even the Federal Reserve, will eventually run dry.
In public discourse, it’s considered bad form to insult your opponent’s integrity. But it’s almost impossible to believe that climate alarmists believe their own apocalyptic predictions.
Greta Thunberg, Al Gore and other experts sternly warned that our planet will be an uninhabitable, unsalvageable oven unless within 15 years (now 10 or 12) we bend all human activity to the goal of eliminating carbon emissions. If true, this creates an obvious moral imperative.
So on his first day in office, President Biden terminated the extension of the Keystone pipeline, created to export shale oil from Alberta to the US. It was, uh, controversial.
Union leaders were upset that 60,000 good jobs were lost. The pipeline’s demise threatened America’s energy independence. There were safety and environmental concerns too. Even Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm admitted that pipelines are the best, lowest carbon means of transporting fuels.
But no matter. Keystone made feasible the transport and use of fossil fuels and had to be stopped, no matter the impact on the welfare of Americans.
Maybe not smart, but at least ideologically consistent. To the environmental Left calling the shots, it signified America’s willingness to sacrifice for a carbon-free future.
But then in May, Biden did an about face and gave the go ahead to a similar Russian project transporting natural gas to Germany and other European countries via an immense underseas pipeline. It’s a huge win for Russia, cementing the economic dependence of fuel-starved Europe and circumventing the necessity of paying transit fees to Ukraine.
But waiving the Trump-era sanctions on Nordstream was an expensive concession. Russia’s gain is America’s loss of an export market. Our value to our European allies is diminished. Moreover, all the arguments against supporting fossil fuel use that shut down Keystone apply equally to Nordstream.
The effects of carbon emissions on global temperature is obviously the same regardless of their origin. Russia and China have paid only thinly disguised lip service to participating in reduction efforts. For us to aid expansion of Russian fossil fuel production is nuts.
So what did good old Joe get for this precious gift to Putin? Nothing.
But even in a world where the unthinkable keeps morphing into reality, Biden would never have agreed to open the pipeline if he really believed our continued existence depended on radically transforming away from fossil fuels in the next few years.(“Biden“ is used here to denote whoever the deciders are behind the curtain in the current administration).
More suspect thinking surrounds the current fad for electric car subsidies. The subsidies are popular with wealthy beneficiaries, of course, the manufacturers and drivers.
The US spends about $10,000 per car on these “temporary“ handouts intended to promote the development of the electric car market. Nations around the world are charging ahead with plans to eliminate fossil-fuel powered cars within the foreseeable future.
But electric cars aren’t all that green. First, manufacturing the large batteries is an energy intensive process they can emit a quarter as much greenhouse gases as a gasoline car produces in a lifetime.
Second, the electricity to operate a clean vehicle must be generated somewhere. Solar and wind are not yet technically developed to the point of being adequate contributors and non-emitting nuclear has been shunned by self-styled environmentalists. For now, that leaves fossil fuels.
Electric cars in sum have little or no effect on net emissions. The International Energy Agency estimates that if all the players follow through and we get to 140 million electric cars by 2030 – a highly ambitious goal – the net reduction would be only 0.4% of global emissions.
The alarmists wouldn’t be wasting their time on cars if they really believed the end was near. “Biden“ just sees a chance to make a politically astute move that corresponds with environmental groupthink.
It’s pretty obvious that the enviros don’t believe their own BS (sorry, ladies). The Thunberg/Gore 15-years-and-out prophecy is one of 50 hair-raising expert predictions documented by the American Enterprise Institute, all meant to induce panic and soften us up to accept the attendant necessary sacrifices.
Relax. Not one of them has come true.
Dr. Thomas Patterson, former Chairman of the Goldwater Institute, is a retired emergency physician. He served as an Arizona State senator for 10 years in the 1990s, and as Majority Leader from 93-96. He is the author of Arizona’s original charter schools bill.
In a surprise reversal, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is suspending its recently announced requirement that employers make a record of an employee’s adverse reaction to an employer-mandated COVID-19 vaccination.
In May, the U.S. Department of Labor and OSHA advised employers it would consider an employee’s adverse reaction as a “reportable incident” if the vaccination was required to obtain or keep employment, or to avoid repercussions such as a negative performance rating.
An adverse reaction would have to involve time away from work, medical treatment beyond basic first aid, restricted work duties, or even a job transfer in order to be recorded by the employer.
But OSHA has already changed its policy, according to new information on its website. The priority now is for federal agencies to encourage COVID-19 vaccinations.
“OSHA does not wish to have any appearance of discouraging workers from receiving COVID-19 vaccination, and also does not wish to disincentivize employers’ vaccination efforts,” the website states. “As a result, OSHA will not enforce its recording requirements to require any employers to record worker side effects from COVID-19 vaccination through May 2022.”
The backtracking by OSHA officials is seen as a response to “unprecedented” political pressure from the White House, according to Liberty Counsel chairman Mat Staver.
“OSHA’s suspension of the recording requirement so as not to discourage experimental COVID shots reveals that the Biden administration could care less about the collateral damage being caused by the COVID shots,” Staver commented last week. “The people can see this biased agenda. They are not stupid.”
Many civil liberties groups point to the fact the current experimental COVID-19 vaccines are only approved under an Emergency Use Authorization and therefore its use is not to be mandated.
Whether an employee in Arizona can seek recourse through the courts or a workers’ compensation claim after falling ill from an employer-required vaccination remains unclear.
If given the option between working full time or doing nothing but receiving the same or greater pay, which would you choose? Most people would choose the latter. And can you blame them? Why wake up early and work all day if the government will pay you to stay home and do nothing instead?
This is the current workforce environment in America, and it is having a detrimental impact on our economic recovery. The result? While the Biden administration was hoping to tout a million new jobs for the month of April, they ended with a paltry 266,000.
And we have seen this lag in job recovery all across the country. Restaurants have posted signs apologizing to customers for delays in service, noting that their employees refuse to come back to work. And some businesses have started offering cash simply for coming in for an interview.
Never let a crisis go to waste, right? Under the guise of a global pandemic, politicians shut down the economy, and then created a citizenry dependent on unemployment checks exceeding the wish list $15 minimum wage pushed by the likes of Bernie Sanders. How is a business, coming out of potentially months with no profit, supposed to compete with that?
It is completely unsustainable. States can’t afford it. The feds can’t afford it. And most importantly, small businesses can’t shoulder it any longer.
Fortunately, some states have moved in the right direction. South Carolina announced they will be ending the $300 federal unemployment supplemental payments. This comes after Montana announced the same, along with $1,200 stipends to Montanans who return to work.
As the border crisis rages, Arizona Governor Doug Ducey and 19 fellow governors are calling on President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris to take action to end the humanitarian debacle.
Just this week, Chief Patrol Agent Chris T. Clem tweeted: #YumaSector agents encountered a nine-year-old girl and a 12- and 17-year-old boy on the west side of Yuma Sunday morning after they illegally crossed the border into the U.S. by themselves. In the last week, agents have apprehended 24 unaccompanied children under the age of 13.
#YumaSector agents encountered a nine-year-old girl and a 12- and 17-year-old boy on the west side of Yuma Sunday morning after they illegally crossed the border into the U.S. by themselves. In the last week, agents have apprehended 24 unaccompanied children under the age of 13. pic.twitter.com/fqw35CV5GL
— Chief Patrol Agent Chris T. Clem (@USBPChiefYUM) May 10, 2021
The governors are asking the Biden administration to end what they say are “destructive policies that have created the crisis at the southern border.”
They remind the administration that their letter “follows months of deteriorating conditions at the border in Arizona and other states.”
According to the governors, in March, U.S. Customs and Border Protection reported 172,000 encounters, the highest number in nearly 20 years, as well as 18,890 unaccompanied children, the largest monthly number in history.
Also on Tuesday, the Arizona Attorney General tweeted: April stats from DHS show another record-number of encounters w/ migrants– more than 178,000 last month, including 17,000+ minors (not including “got-aways”). The longer the President maintains his reckless immigration policies, the worse this crisis at our border will get.
“As a border state, Arizona is on the front lines of the border crisis. We feel the impacts of human trafficking, drug smuggling, and this humanitarian crisis first,” said Ducey. “Now, the Biden-Harris border crisis is affecting other states too. And it’s clear the crisis is the direct result of this administration’s broken policies and botched messaging.”
“Arizona has deployed all available resources, including the National Guard, but we need federal cooperation to secure the border,” Governor Ducey said. “Today, I am joining 19 fellow governors to call for immediate action from President Biden and Vice President Harris to stop this crisis before it gets even worse.”
Arizona has been calling for action on the border crisis from the federal government for months. Last month, Governor Ducey declared a state of emergency at the southern border and deployed the Arizona National Guard to support law enforcement agencies in border regions. The Governor visited a wide-open section of the border in Yuma and called on President Biden to issue a national state of emergency on the border. Governor Ducey and Texas Governor Greg Abbott also wrote a joint op-ed in the Washington Post.
Signers of the letter include Governors Bill Lee, of Tennessee, Kay Ivey, of Alabama, Asa Hutchinson, of Arkansas, Brian Kemp, of Georgia, Brad Little, of Idaho, Eric Holcomb, of Indiana, Kim Reynolds, of Iowa, Tate Reeves, of Mississippi, Governor Mike Parson, of Missouri, Governor Greg Gianforte, of Montana, Governor Pete Ricketts, of Nebraska, Governor Chris Sununu, of New Hampshire, Governor Doug Burgum, of North Dakota, Governor Kevin Stitt, of Oklahoma, Governor Henry McMaster, of South Carolina, Governor Kristi Noem, of South Dakota, Governor Greg Abbott, of Texas, Governor Spencer Cox, of Utah, and Governor Mark Gordon, of Wyoming.
