I’ve always suspected that the Left considers forcing me to contribute to their causes against my will, “charity” on their part. For example, if the Liberati are able to pass a law that requires me to pay taxes for homeless relief, they are able to tell their other Liberal friends that they contributed to the relief of the homeless.
What they did was cause ME to contribute to the relief of the homeless.
So this should come as no surprise:
According to a study, when people feel they have been morally virtuous by saving the planet through their purchases of organic baby food, for example, it leads to the “licensing [of] selfish and morally questionable behaviour”, otherwise known as “moral balancing” or “compensatory ethics”.
Now, to be fair, I don’t feel this relates only to the greenies. I’m pretty sure it is applicable to all on the Left.
However, this is good stuff:
…those in their study who bought green products appeared less willing to share with others a set amount of money than those who bought conventional products. When the green consumers were given the chance to boost their money by cheating on a computer game and then given the opportunity to lie about it – in other words, steal – they did, while the conventional consumers did not. Later, in an honour system in which participants were asked to take money from an envelope to pay themselves their spoils, the greens were six times more likely to steal than the conventionals.
In the end, it would appear that the Left and I have more in common than I thought. We both believe that it’s my responsibility to care for the less fortunate.
Who woulda thunk it?
I know this is gonna shock a TON of people.
Environmental reports released Tuesday show the first segment of the line in the Central Valley will cost between $10 billion and $13.9 billion, far more than the 2009 estimate of $7.1 billion.
I know I’m surprised. I had expected California to come in under budget; ’cause all such projects do, really, come in under budget.
The thing about the Liberati when it comes to central planning projects like this is that they never consider the cost. Would it be cool if I could take a train that ran on the coffee grounds I brew each morning? Ride a train that took me to a station a meager few blocks from my office?
Would it still be cool if the state had to pay $8,542 per round-trip ticket?
Still think it’s a good idea?
For nearly 5.5 years now Barack Obama has been blaming Dubya for the condition of the economy. In some cases, to be fair, he’s right. Dubya and the Republicans had control of things for a number of years and they all spent like massive fools. They deserve their share of the blame.
The strategy has run it’s course. Except for the far left Liberati, the idea that Bush is to blame is a Trivial Pursuit answer; next to meaningless. The current administration has had time to try their grand experiments, the results are in and stock must be taken.
Obama has to see that what he’s doing isn’t working. In fact, what he’s doing is making it even worse. In short, he’s taken a bad, very bad, situation, and simply done wrong.
Obamacare – an economy killing piece of legislation. Feel good? Free rubbers for everyone? Sure; maybe. But a jobs driver? Not so very much:
From the post:
Correlation is not causation, but in fact we have a lot of independent evidence (including my own experience) that many small and middle sized companies have changed their hiring plans based on costs and uncertainties of Obamacare.
Say what ya want. Data seems to be adding up that kids of socialist Marxists growing up learning to despise colonizers who then go to liberal law schools and organize the poor while never holding a job that demands results within the context of larger organizational constraints don’t make good Presidents.
I’m just sayin’.