Federal Regulations Cut Standard of Living by 75 Percent Over 56 Years

The 20th annual snapshot of the federal regulatory state published by the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) last month announced the arrival of an unhappy milestone: Regulatory costs now equal more than half of all federal spending. Put another way, the real cost of government in the United States is half-again as much as the federal budget. It is approaching a third of the country’s economic output. Said CEI in its Ten Thousand Commandments 2013 report: “Federal environmental, safety and health, and economic regulations cost hundreds of billions — perhaps trillions — of dollars every year over and above the costs of the official federal outlays that dominate the [current] policy debate.”

Just how many billions and trillions the regulatory state costs, and has cost, the American economy has been put into perspective by two economists in their paper, “Federal Regulation and Aggregate Economic Growth,” published in the June issue of the Journal of Economic Growth. Rather than count the cost in dollars, the authors, John W. Dawson and John J. Seater, take a unique approach and attempt to measure how much lower Americans’ standard of living is today compared to what it would be if regulations had stayed at the level they were in 1949, the starting point of their study. Their conclusion? The average American household’s income would be $27,500 a month instead of the $4,400 a month that it is currently.

In their study they count the pages of federal regulations from 1949 through 2005 and discover that they have grown by 600 percent, slowing the economy by an estimated two percent every year. In simple terms, today’s economy, which produces about $17 trillion in goods and services every year, would instead be producing almost $55 trillion. And the authors apologize that their study doesn't reflect state and local regulations during that period as the effort that would have been required to collect and analyze them as well would have greatly exceeded their time and resources.

read more:

http://thenewamerican.com/economy/item/15833-federal-regulations-cu...

Views: 600

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

The TEA PARTY must take over the USA.

Won't  happen. Too many idiots. BUT, secession is clearly a way out for us.

How? We do not want to secede from the USA   just Washington,DC

Jim Delaney, Clearly YOU skipped that week on the Civil War in school. The Union will DEFINITELY EXERT full military force regarding the unconstitutional act of secession. And folks like me (and Lincoln as recorded) that value the Union are resigned to shooting those who would not refrain from trying.

Reckless talk like secession while the government is still just barely duly constituted, provides a pretext for a tyrant to declare martial law, and act wih virtual impunity. Please think about what you say.

Agreed

Michael,

Secession actually is not unconstitutional under the original Constitution.  Yes Lincoln tried to change that and he tried to change this away from being a Republic............ ever think the wrong side won.  And NO the Civil War was NOT about slavery - - that was only an afterthought at the end of the war.  The Civil War was about the North trying to dictate to the South that they could not get adequate pay for their crops to be processed in the North.  The South had the farms and the North had the factories and both had slaves - some good owners that treated their people as employees and some 2 - 3% in both N. and S. who treated them with cruelty.

Arizona and Texas joined the Union only AFTER the Civil War and they both retain the right to secession in their State Constitutions and as a condition (with the Union) to their becoming states.

But most importantly, RIGHT NOW, is the QUESTION (since NOTHING ELSE WORKS) would you rather have some states secede and reform the original Republic (not the monstrosity of government we now have) - - - - Or - - would you rather have a full scale revolution to "right the wrongs of tyranny"??

"On every unauthoritative exercise of power by the legislature must the people rise in rebellion or their silence be construed into a surrender of that power to them? If so, how many rebellions should we have had already?"

--Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, Query 12, 1782

Pixie

While there is no question that the slavery issue was peripheral to the War Between the States, the historical outcome-defined fact remains that, reneging on the petitioned for and achieved acceptance into the political UNION was never intended to be casual like the Articles of Confederacy faliure. In fact the unworkablity of a confederacy justified the risk of a stronger federal government of the current Constitution.

I realize that this knowledge is inconveinient to the quickfix, secession would suggest. Nonetheless, I remain resolved in the remedy to seditionists, provided that the Constitutionally described channels of redress are even just barely in effect.

Just because the North won the Civil War by force of Arms doesn't mean that a SOVERIGN STATE doesn't have the Constitutional right to secede from the Union.  Please point to the Article , Section, and Clause in the Constitution that stops a State form seceding from the Union... I'll save you time there is none.

In fact, our forefather's feared that the 'federal government' may one day become a tyrant and the Declaration of Independence' clearly sums up the duty of a free people to throw off a tyrant... and when necessary to "institute new government, laying its Foundation on such Principals, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." 

Our founders established Constitutional safe guards to restrain the Federal Government.  However, over time these have been eroded by ill fated men and the corruption associated with the institutions of all governments. Over time we have lost our way and the Constitution has been relegated to an bygone era and is now nothing more than a historical inconvenience to those in government.  Those safe guards no longer exist as intended and the Federal Government has grossly exceeded its Constitutional Authority... rendering the contract between the federal government and the several States (the Constitution) null and void. Where there is no contract for unity there is no UNION or REPUBLIC... hence, the States no longer need to be bound to a voided contract/Constitution.

The Declaration of Independence is a fundamental founding document... the cornerstone of our Republic.  It clearly states that governments are created among men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed AND WHENEVER any form of Government (including our present form) becomes destructive to these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter OR TO ABOLISH IT, and to institute a new government.

The right to secession is a GOD given right... too liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  It is the right of men to establish governments that provide for the common safety and happiness of those to be governed. 

Our present government no longer abides by these precepts and has clearly overstepped its limits under the Constitution, too engage in tyranny ... looting the wealth of our nation and its people for its own purposes. As such, it is the DUTY and Responsibility of a free people to throw off the bonds of such a government and to either reestablish those original articles and precepts that once held them secure in liberty or to form a new government as they see fit.

The right of secession is found in the Declaration of Independence... and there is no article or clause that prohibits it in the Constitution.

Ronald - you are absolutely correct!  and

Michael G. Thompson -

You need to read what Ronald just said and ponder it and incorporate into that thought the last quote that I gave you above from Thomas Jefferson - 1782.  The only alternate choice from secession is a full blown Revolution!!   I suppose that is preferable to you.   Or is it?

Pixie

Agreed! The Democrat Party is totally corrupt and the Republican Party are full of idiots that are easily manipulated by the Dems. The Tea Party is this country's last true hope!

You sure got it right.

Joel... if only the GOP were idiots, they would have an excuse for their treason.  As it is though, they are willing accomplaces of the Marxist; thinking to rob our children of their wealth and heritage they are playing a DANGEROUS GAME as they attempt to subvert our Constitution and out wit the Marxist. 

They will awake some day not far off... to find that they don't have the upper hand and that they too are destined to feel the lash of the Marxist on their backs. The GOP is working against the Constitution in hopes of establishing a quasi-fascist new world order... a plutocracy... a new aristocracy that will rule the world.

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by Tom Stiglich

Political Cartoons by Lisa BensonPolitical Cartoons by Gary Varvel

ALERT ALERT

CONFUSION:   Pelosi Says Constitution Spells Out ‘Two Co-Equal Branches’ Of Government

No Nancy. No.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi must be taking night classes at the Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez School of Government.

Pelosi, the 79-year-old third-highest ranking official in the U.S. government, was speaking to the Center for American Progress today when she mistakenly said there are “two co-equal branches” of government, before correcting herself to say there are three.

Watch:

“First of all, let me just say, we take an oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States,” Pelosi said.

“Democrats take that oath seriously, and we are committed to honoring our oath of office. I’m not sure that our Republican colleagues share that commitment, and I’m not sure that the president of the United States does, too,” she claimed.

“So, in light of the fact that the beauty of the Constitution is a system of checks and balances— two co-equal branches— three co-equal branches of government,” she corrected with a laugh.

“A check and balance on each other,” she continued. “Con— Constitution spells out the pri— pa, uh, the duties of Congress and one of them is oversight of the president of the United States, another one of them is to impeach the president of the United States,” Pelosi said.

In November, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez rallied supporters on Facebook to pitch in and help Democrats take back “all three chambers of Congress.”

“…the Progressive movement works and it wins in all districts…If we work our butts off to make sure that we take back all three chambers of Congress– three chambers of government…,” she said during the virtual appearance.

She clarified that she meant the “presidency, the Senate and the House.”

According to the Constitution, the three branches of government are the legislative, executive and judicial.

Below: Nancy Pelosi is continuing to promote the false narrative that President Trump is involved in a cover-up and therefore may be guilty of an impeachable offense. Millie Weaver joins Alex to break down the propaganda being used to overturn the democratic election of 2016 

SPECIAL VIDEOS

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service