The Week: Paul Waldman: 'Americans Don't Pay Enough Taxes'

Source: Credible Politics- Tax Day, is no holiday- 

Source: The New Democrat

Only Socialists whether they're self-described Socialists like Senator Bernie Sanders ( the only self-described Socialist in Congress, ( but not the only Socialist in Congress ) or trapped in the closet with no key or person insight to let them out Socialists ( like perhaps Paul Waldman ) who prefer to be called Progressives or even worst and makes want to stick my head in a toilet when I hear this, but some Americans trapped in the closet Socialists, prefer to be called Liberals, even though they tend to be more illiberal than Liberal like having the belief in unlimited government and that individualism and personal freedom is actually dangerous and selfish, believe Americans are undertaxed.

Source: Bluegrass Institute- Big Government, wants more of your money 

But only Socialists believe Americans and even middle class Americans are actually undertaxed. And view tax day as a national holiday and fill out their tax returns with huge smiles on their faces. Celebrate tax day with a wine and cheese party and brag about having to pay more in taxes than the guy or lady next to them. Americans aren't overtaxed, but they're overburdened which is why you had millions of Americans in the Midwest and rustbelt Northeast like Western Pennsylvania, voting for Donald Trump for President in 2016.

Not because they believed their taxes were too low, but because they their bills were too high and their incomes weren't keeping up with the cost of living. And they had a political candidate in Donald Trump, who actually campaigned for them ( unlike Hillary Clinton ) and ask them for their vote ( unlike Hillary Clinton ) and gave them reasons to vote for him. ( Unlike Hillary Clinton ) I didn't vote for Donald Trump for several reasons most of them having to do with with his lack of character and qualifications for the most important job in the world, but you have to give him credit for campaigning for what some people might say forgotten Americans.

People who are blue-collar and work very hard everyday to make ends meet and are now seeing their hard work not generating enough income for them to pay their bills. They're not looking for a bigger U.S. Government to help them out and take more money from them, especially a government that is running 600 billion-dollar deficit headed to over a trillion and a 20 trillion-dollar national debt. They're looking to be able to make more money and to live comfortably and not have worry every week or month about how they're going to pay their bills. With higher bills, more bills, and less income to pay their bills.

Americans don't want to pay more in taxes, they want to earn more money. They want jobs that not just pay their bills, but allow for them to put money away and gives them the freedom to decide how to educate their own kids, plan their own kids college savings plan, their own kids childcare, make their own health care and health insurance decisions, plan their own retirements, and make other key decisions in life that most adult Americans have to make for themselves.

You don't increase Americans income by taxing them more and running higher deficits, because you're overspending and hurting economic growth. You increase Americans income with better education including for adults who are struggling even if they're working and empower for them to increase their own skills and education so they can get themselves a good job that allows for them to have the freedom and to make their own economic and personal decisions for themselves.

Instead of their fat overbearing, over paternalistic, selfish with other people's money, Uncle Sammy who feels he can't live on a four-trillion dollar national budget and needs more money from his nephews and nieces, even though he's running a 600 billion-dollar deficit ( headed to over a trillion ) and a 20 trillion-dollar national debt.

Retro Pile: '1979 Wrangler Jeans Commercial'

Source:Retro Junk- 1979 Wrangler Jeans commercial, from Rome, Lazio, Italy. 

Source:Real Life Journal

"1979 Wrangler jeans commercial set in Rome, Italy." 

From Retro Pile 

"Vintage advertising -- found in my mother's basement, flea markets and various corners of the Internet -- dusted off and displayed for your viewing pleasure."

Source:Denims & Jeans- 1983 Wrangler Jeans commercial 

From PZR Services

In the late 1970s there was a boom for dark wash designer denim jeans thats been with us ever since.

It's by far my favorite tend with women's fashion, because we go from an era even in the mid and late 1970s where women didn't look like they were out West in the late 1800s or early 1990s wearing very long dresses and having to hold parts of their dresses when they walked, because they were worried about walking on their dresses and even tripping, but an era where women wore very baggy pants and were not expected to show off their legs at least with pants. And were bellbottoms and what were called in 1974-75 and even a little later and earlier flares. They were sort of like jeans, but not tight at all.

And then we end up in an era starting in 1978 or so with all these magazine covers, as well as movies and TV sitcoms and other TV programming where women are not only wearing jeans, but denim jeans, designer denim jeans, skin-tight designer jeans, where the jeans would go down only to the woman's ankle so and would be real tight in the legs and hip area of the woman's body. Where American women are now wearing jeans the way American men were wearing them on TV and in the movies since the 1950s.

Designer jeans that are simply designed to show off a woman's legs and butt, to show off their curves and how beautiful and sexy they were physically. But in a stylish professional way where women could dress down their jeans with t-shirts and boots, or could dress their jeans up with nice jacket, blouse, as well as boots and could wear denim jeans to work or go out to dinner, go shopping and other places, or go to ballgames with their boyfriends or the movies in their designer jeans. And not look like they're being over sexual or pornographic and have to worry about what more culturally conservative people thought about their tight pants and boots.

American women become liberated economically in the mid and late 1960s with the freedom culturally to not just go to college and get a degree, but then using that degree to get themselves a good job and enter the outside workforce and become economically independent from men. To the late 1970s and ever since where now they're culturally liberated when it comes to fashion. Where it's not only acceptable for them to be beautiful physically, have a beautiful body physically, but then have the freedom and courage to show the world that they have a beautiful body and are proud of it. Designer jeans from the late 1970s and early 1980s, to skinny jeans of today both denim and leather, as well as boots, are great ways for women to showcase their bodies and show people how put together physically that they are.

We go from an era in the early and mid 1970s, where American women weren't supposed to show their legs and butts at all, really other than miniskirts and other skirts which is some cases can be more revealing for a woman's lower body than tight denim, to an era where it was acceptable and in some cases expected for American women to not just wear tight jeans ( both leather and denim, ) but were those pants on a regular basis and in some cases everyday depending on what they did for a living and if they were involved let's say in the fashion or entertainment business or just out running their errands and doing their everyday business like going shopping or their kids sporting events.

And it's not just tight but skin-tight jeans especially denim but in some cases leather jeans like in entertainment and the fashion world, because not just popular but mainstream starting in 1978 or so with all sorts of American sitcoms now showing Americans women wearing skin-tight designer jeans on a regular basis and sometimes even every show with multiple women wearing designer jeans on the shows, but this movement in fashion for women just grew and grew. In the 1980s and especially 1990s, America women were seen everywhere in designer jeans and Levi's in every possible environment on TV. Women were even seen at work in tight jeans like on cop shows, private eye shows, other action/drama shows. Like The Dukes of Hazzard, The Fall Guy and other shows. And this is a trend in women's fashion that just keeps growing and will probably never go away.

A trend that started in 1978 that just kept going by the late 1990s-early 2000s, the dark wash skin-tight designer denim jeans that women started wearing and loving in the late 1970s, came back into style. Didn't replace the Levi's and Guess Jeans from the 1990s, but became an addition. Where you started seeing women in 1997-98 and into the early 2000s, wearing designer jeans that looked like they could be from 1979-80. But were perhaps even tighter and were more low-rise. Studded belts became mainstream on America women in the early 2000s and weren't before that when only biker women and rocker women would wear studded belts for the most part. And you would see women wearing their studded belts with their low-rise designer jeans on a regular basis and everywhere.

We're now in a skinny jeans era ( if you can call 8 years and era ) that started in 2005 where women not only wear skin-tight low-rise designer denim jeans, but can wear them in a way that shows off their butt and legs perfectly ( if they have nice legs and a nice butt ) but can do that in a way that doesn't give away too much. The low-rider ass crack jeans ( as I call them ) that were popular in 2001-02 were replaced by skinny jeans that are still low-rise and skin-tight, but where women can sit down and stand up without showing off skin around their backside. And this is an era for denim jeans for women that will be around forever I believe, as long as sexy women are comfortable in them, like them, and enjoy showing off their legs and butts. 

Shelley Winters: A&E Biography: Full Disclosure

Source: Jacinto Ruffew- Actor Charles Laughton & Hollywood Goddess Shelley Winters.

Source:The New Democrat

"Shelley Winters: Full Disclosure A&E Biography" 

From Jacinto Ruffew

This might sound cold, but when I think of Shelley Winters I think of Marilyn Monroe and Jayne Mansfield, but with substance as well as style. The Blonde Bombshell with a brain, The Blonde Bimbo who wasn't a bimbo. She had the looks, she had the body, the personality, but she was so smart, quick, honest and one of the best senses of humors Hollywood has ever seen at least. In many ways she reminds me of Joan Rivers. Someone who always had a wisecrack or monologue on the top of her head, with half of that humor aimed at herself.

One of the smartest, sharpest, self-deprecating senses of humors that we've ever seen. Which is why her interviews were so great and why when she would go on The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson, it would seem like she was the stand up comedian on the show and not Johnny. Because she was so quick and funny and could crack up great comedians like Johnny Carson. And why she became a great writer later in her life. Shelley's brain was so big that she was always thinking to the point that she had an opinion on everything. She took notes about everything that she did which is how she was able to become the writer that she became and wrote several autobiographies that were deep in how personal they were talking about all the conquests that she had with men and her relationships.

I believe some of her best movies are Executive Suite from 1954, where William Holden I believe is the best star in the movie. But where Shelley plays and important role in the movie as a secretary in that company and wife of one of the executives of that company in that movie.

The Big Knife from 1955, where she basically plays herself in that movie. The Blonde Bombshell actress, who is tired of playing blonde bimbos as an actress and is ready for bigger roles. Who has a big mouth, personality, and brain as well and knows the dirt on key people in Hollywood and is ready to spill that dirt. Who is later killed in that movie because she knows too much.

The Chapman Report from 1962, which also featured Jane Fonda and Glynis Johns, where she plays a middle age wife who is having an affair with a younger man. And feels the need to talk about her affair with a therapist because she feels guilty about it. Again playing a role that is close to home for her.

Harper from 1966, which also featured Paul Newman and Lauren Bacall, where she plays an aging alcoholic blonde bombshell who becomes fat. And once again playing an actress with a big brain, big mouth., who knows and talks too much.

Shelley Winters is one of the cutest, prettiest, sexiest, smartest, honest, funniest, people who has ever worked in Hollywood. Perhaps who has ever worked anywhere. She was so adorable and funny and could combine those attributes so well together. Able to make fun of other people and situations or herself and do it in a way where she didn't come off as bitchy but someone having a good time. Pointing out negative aspects about someone or something in a critical but not insulting way. She really would've made a great character on the sitcom Seinfeld and gone one on one with any of the cast members on that show. And I just wish there were more smart, funny, adorable people in America, because people like that are so much fun and so refreshing.

Liberty Pen: Jordan Peterson- 'Inside The Marxist Worldview'

Source:Liberty Pen- Karl Marx: the inspiration for today's Socialists?

Source:The New Democrat 

"Professor Peterson dissects he motivations and dynamics at play when the Marxist ideology is allowed to unfold. Liberty Pen."  

From Liberty Pen

I agree with Jordan Peterson that Karl Max and his supporters seem to have this all or nothing attitude when it comes to economics. That if you allow wealth and success in the economy, those things only happen because people who aren't wealthy and successful are left in poverty. That wealth and success can only happen at the cost of others with the cost being that people are left in poverty struggling just to survive. That they don't believe that you can have a system where everyone or at least most people are able to do well in life because wealth and success are incentivized. With a strong education system and a tax and regulatory structure that incentivizes success over poverty.

I'm not sure that is my main problem with Marxists and Marxism, but it's towards the top of the list. That economic freedom and private enterprise only produces two types of people in the economy: the haves which are the people who are doing well in the economy and the have nots the people who aren't doing well in the economy. And that they only assume that the people who are doing well are successful because they stole from everyone else, were born to wealth, or because they were rewarded based on their race and ethnicity. And that the people who aren't doing well is because the wealthy stole from them or they were held down because of their race or ethnicity.

So Marxists and Socialists in general including Democratic Socialists today, have a bad analysis for why some people tend to do well while others don't do well in the economy and they tend to follow up with that bad analysis with bad solutions. Sort of like the doctor who doesn't know what's wrong with you physically, but believes they do and prescribes the wrong prescription to what you don't have. Which just makes whatever condition that you're suffering from even worst while your doctor still doesn't know what's wrong with you.

The socialist solution (whether you're talking about democratic or Marxists) tends to be the wrong solution to the wrong problem. They believe the problem with the American economy and private economies in general outside of Britain and Scandinavia and perhaps France, is that wealth and success are not just allowed but encouraged. And what they would do instead of to essentially outlaw wealth and replace it with what they would call total equality on everyone. Forcing everyone to be able to survive with the same amount of money and resources in life. Even if some people are more successful and productive than others.

So Karl Marx and his followers even the Democratic Socialists of the world who wouldn't go as far as nationalizing the entire economy and just stop short with higher taxes on private property and income, as well as putting the central government in charge of providing most of the base human insurances that people get in life to live well like health care and health insurance, Bernie Sanders and others, not just have a bad analysis to what they see as the problems with the economy whether you're talking about America or some other first world developed economy like Canada or in Europe, but they also have bad solutions to what they see as problems with the economy. Whether you're talking about Bernie Sanders in America or U.K. Labour Party Leader Jeremy Corbyn in Britain.