Red state, blue state, solvent state, broke state

George Clooney called Donald Trump a xenophobic fascist, and said his immigration policies were idiotic and intolerant. But when George, who wants to bring in as many unvetted immigrants as possible, gets a wake-up call as terrorism rings throughout the UK, where does he take refuge? Yeah, you guessed it.

And I’ll take about a surprising trend in state solvency. Which states, run by which political parties, are better off financially? Well, if you’re a regular listener to this podcast, you won’t be so surprised.

Mentioned links:

George Clooney interview: ‘Donald Trump is a xenophobic fascist’

How Ironic: George Clooney Moving Family Out of England For ‘Security Reasons’

George Clooney Plans to Move Amal and Twins Back to LA for Security Reason

Best-Run States Are Low-Tax Republican, Worst-Run Are High-Tax Democratic, Study Finds

Getting some shopping done? If you're going to shop at Amazon, please consider clicking on my affiliate link. Thanks!

On Apple devices, you can subscribe to the podcast via iTunes.

If you're on Android, listen with Google Podcasts.

Stitcher Radio is another possibility for both Apple and Android devices. If you do download Stitcher to your phone, please use the promo code “ConsiderThis” to let them know where you heard about it.

Browser-based options are the Blubrry Network and

And if you have some other podcatcher or RSS reader, click here to get the direct feed and paste it wherever you need it.

I would love it if you would spread the word about the podcast! Click the Facebook, Twitter, and other icons (or all of them!) at the bottom of this post to recommend "Consider This!" to your social media audience.

Show transcript

I’ve got something from the website comments for episode 185, where I talked about how life expectancies in the US started dropping just as the major portions of ObamaCare kicked in. Listener DocH took a look at the economics of it all, and how little sense it makes. So, what’s up, Doc?

Think of it like Auto Insurance. Why not a flat-rate for drivers? You know… the 22-yr old male with three driving-related felonies, the 40-something m/f with not so much as a parking ticket, moving violation or accident, and the 80+ blue hair who can’t see over the steering wheel and has been playing ‘demolition derby’ for the past 15 years in the WalMart parking lot. How about a flat rate for them? NO. Insurers insure on merit, not mandate.

Why would insurers give the same rate to the AARP (BabyBoomHippiePotSmoking) crowd [versus] the health conscious 30-ish parent of one without one health-related issue other than simple childhood stuff. Throw the wreck-fest 20 yr old X-Games street skateboarder/anarchist into the mix. How do you insure that. YOU DON’T! At least not at a flat universal rate.

Take a look at the TV advertising slamming your responsible Senators and Congresspersons (likely GOP) demanding that they continue to endorse the Affordable (Obamanible) Care Act. You won’t see who made the commercial until the end of the disinfo-mercial. You see an AARP logo, an AMA logo and usually another medical-related organization. THESE are all the folks that benefit from your hard-earned tax dollars if the ACA remains in effect.

Rule #1 of journalistic investigation. $$ Follow The Money $$

Thanks, Doc. Yeah, this was supposed to “fix” health care and save the average family $2,500. As to the $2,500, clearly that didn’t pan out. And as to the health care “fix”, consider this. President Trump recently changed his strategy on repeal and replace (yet again…he really needs to focus). This time he said that he’ll let ObamaCare fail, and then Democrats will come begging for Republicans to fix it. After saying that, Congressional Democrats were coming out of the woodwork saying how awful this was and that he was going to cause people to die over this. Well wait just a minute. A bill that you heartily endorsed and voted for is going to kill people, not Donald Trump. If letting this bad policy (that conservatives knew was bad from the start) play itself out is heartless, what kind of heart did it take to pass it in the first place?

Their reactions to Trump are so telling.

George Clooney on Donald Trump: “[H]e’s a fascist; a xenophobic fascist.” He previously described Trump’s immigration policy proposals as “idiotic” and “intolerant.”

That was then, this is now.

After living in England, he’s now reconsidering that, after Muslim extremists have had their way with the country. Where’s he planning to go to now? The United States. Why? Well, he’s got twins on the way, and having children tends to bring some clarity. So he’s moving back to Los Angeles.

So he’s gone from a guy who thinks that keeping out illegals is “idiotic”, and who thinks vetting refugees is “intolerant”, to moving to the land of the supposed “xenophobic fascist” Trump to keep his wife and children safe.

Does anyone see the irony in this? Clearly he doesn’t.

As you may, or may not, have noticed, I’ve taken to posting articles about what the Trump administration has accomplished accompanied simply with the comment, “You’re welcome.” I have a feeling you’ll be seeing more of that, but for now, Mr. Clooney; you’re welcome.

Can a state tax its way out of a fiscal hole? Some new data suggest that it’s not the best way to go about it.

The Mercatus Center at George Mason University released its fourth annual list of states, ranked by their fiscal solvency in five different areas. The magazine Investor’s Business Daily then overlaid political affiliation over top of that list. They considered a red state to be one which voted Republican in the 3 past presidential elections and/or has a Republican-controlled legislature, and the reverse for blue states.

The results are what longtime listeners to this podcast would expect. The top 10 states are all red, and of the bottom 10, 6 are blue. Even starker, of the top half of the list, all but 4 are Republican, and of the bottom half, all but 5 are Democratic.

The IBD analysis suggests that the more money the state government takes from taxpayers, the worse it handles it. I would also suggest that the higher the tax burden, the less people get involved in behavior that is taxed. This is true of people, such as those bailing out of Illinois, but also especially true of businesses that leave and take their jobs with them; a double-whammy on taxes.

And according to a separate analysis by the Tax Foundation, which measures state and local tax burdens as a percentage of state income, the most fiscally sound states also tend to have the lowest tax burdens.

Will liberals learn from this? Well, consider this. The heavily-Democratic Illinois legislature recently overrode a veto by the governor on a bill to increase taxes even more to cover their financial problems. Illinois is 49th on this list. So apparently the answer to the question is, No, they won’t learn. Instead, it looks like they’re trying to rank 51st on the list. If they keep this up, they’ve got a lock on it.

They say that the states are the laboratory of democracy. See what works there, and apply the good policies in other states, and if necessary, even at the federal level. Problem is, the allegedly “pro-science” Left is too blinded by politics to put the results of that experiment into practice. So they get an F in Science. And Economics. And Applied Math. And Statistics.

Filed under: Economics & TaxesGovernmentHealth CareImmigration