Here is a great sermon by a courageous priest. I think you should play this on your show. Listen to this and I hope that you agree.
I listen to you everyday and you always attack the conservative issue's courageously.
Mike Decker Royal Oak, Michigan Please listen to the end. It is extremely well done... On February 5, 2012 Father Sammie Maletta delivered a Homily at St. John the Evangelist Catholic Parish in St. John, Indiana. And what a Homily it was. Enjoy.
Subject: Homily The following link is a homily from St John the Evangelist parish in ST. John Indiana. The priest is a lawyer - the parish is middle class, northern Indiana, blue collar, likely democratic. It's incredibly clear, direct and created a fire of activity - it doesn't take long.
Semper Fi Dr. Liddy, I just heard your piece on political correctness in the Corps. Being a Marine Veteran I can assure you that the compasses will be used to precisely align stream with TRUE east. OOHRA, Jeff Davis 2/7 69-70
lv o. wrote at 11:01 AM on Sep-09-2011:
gman; this the first time ive broke thru your tecno shield. ive spent months trying to join-- im 9 yrs your jr. and a vet.. me and the dog try to listen to your show at 7 am---radio reception is bad here in 0lalla. ddt--ive worked with it. im shure you read rachels carstens book--silent spring; that started the demise of rational chemistry. gen. apel (sp) wrote a book on chemical warfare which helped this demise. my favorite loss is chloradane (sp)--for ants.--the list goes on. well i hope you recive this transmission, vin.. ps- the radio stations here in wa. state (those who fveature your program) are very bad, and some times they replace your show with somthing greener.
greg s. wrote at 10:23 PM on Jul-16-2011:
Boehner, Cantor and McCarthy are NOT destroying obama/soviet death care. They dont even talk about it anymore. They also dont address BHO's thuggish EPA destroying property rights in the name of the eco-worshipers. Every day someone should challenge these "leaders" asking them "what have you done today to destroy Hussein Obama's Soviet death care law???" Do you agree G-man? thanks.
LEE H. wrote at 10:48 PM on May-03-2011:
Greetings from Tucson. We have a huge riot situatino here over the ethnic studies in the local schools being made into an "elective" by the school board and of course the kids are pissing their pants over it. What we found out,however, and this is not reported in the press, is this class takes the place of U. S. History! If it's an elective the little dears will have to take US History instead of this "hate whitey" class -- that's what the riot's about but it's unreported!
Best wishes, Lee Horner Attorney at law and long time fan
michael d. wrote at 11:49 AM on Apr-30-2011:
G. Gordan,
We have another water gate shaping up with this fraudulent live birth certificate released by the white house last week. This was photo shopped before it was released probably at the white house. Here's the link to the real one. As I said before Obama's mother was nine months pregnant when she traveled to Kenya to attend a Muslim conference and probably stayed with relatives. When she was there she went into labor and had little Barry. The Grandmother is the one who filed the live birth certificate that Hawaii permits.
"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."
Benjamin Franklin
Kerry wrote at 7:37 AM on Mar-07-2011:
I had emailed you awhile back about your misplaced support of the muslims in Kosovo and our countrys betrayal of the Serbs who aided us in WW2. When you were with JFK you came out strongly in support of the Islamic Kosovos, and I believed you. Now we have lost two Airmen murdered by a Kosovo Islamic. Your trust and my trust were very missplaced. We and you need to shine a light on the muslim breeding ground of Kosovo. I am man enough to admit I was wrong in support those in Kosovo and not the Serbs who it appears had more foresight into what would happen in the future. I believe you owe it to those service men who were murdered and wounded and their families to start shining the light on how a people we supported and aided are now trying to kill us. Please at least research what is now happening in that part of the world. We have a weak worthless President who is now embolding those who wish to do us harm, I thought Carter was a joke but this marxist moron in office now makes Carter look good. Thank you.
Mike wrote at 7:36 AM on Mar-07-2011:
Bad News! I had a porch light replaced a few months ago. The CFL in the fixture went out, so I took a CFL from the cupboard to replace it. When I removed the bulb, I saw it had a different base. I called Lowes to ask if they had this weird new bulb. They told me this is the new type bulb. The new fixtures they sell, no longer have the standard screw in type socket for the light bulbs. They have this new type of attachment. It is a flat surface with 2 metal protrusions sticking out. Please check on this before you mention it on the air. I may have misunderstood.
AHHHH, WHAT CAN WE DO!
Dave wrote at 5:49 AM on Jan-19-2011:
Gordon
I'm always amazed at the apparent inability of people to accept that sometimes it's just a lone nut, period. Conspiracy seems to somehow be a comfort to these people, somehow it reassures to think that sinister forces abound.
Great shows this week as always!
Dave
Laurie wrote at 5:47 AM on Jan-19-2011:
Good morning, G-Man,
When I was high-school-aged, we had the Ted Bundy case here locally. We had a sheriff that seemed to get some national recognition by showing off so much that the location of the trial had to be changed to Miami. Everyone here thought he was too boastful and he ended up being a one-term sheriff because nobody took him seriously.
I am sure this Arizona sheriff will not have the same fate, as it seems his county is pretty far to the left.
These are just my thoughts.
Take care.
Laurie
Anon wrote at 7:46 AM on Jan-14-2011:
1. Americans spend $36,000,000 at Wal-Mart Every hour of every day.
2. This works out to $20,928 profit every minute!
3. Wal-Mart will sell more from January 1 to St. Patrick's Day (March 17th) than Target sells all year.
4. Wal-Mart is bigger than Home Depot + Kroger + Target +Sears + Costco + K-Mart combined.
5. Wal-Mart employs 1.6 million people, is the world's largest private employer, and most speak English.
6. Wal-Mart is the largest company in the history of the world.
7. Wal-Mart now sells more food than Kroger and Safeway combined, and keep in mind they did this in only fifteen years.
8. During this same period, 31 big supermarket chains sought bankruptcy.
9. Wal-Mart now sells more food than any other store in the world.
10. Wal-Mart has approx 3,900 stores in the USA of which 1,906 are Super Centers; this is 1,000 more than it had five years ago.
11. This year 7.2 billion different purchasing experiences will occur at Wal-Mart stores. (Earth's population is approximately 6.5 Billion.)
12. 90% of all Americans live within fifteen miles of a Wal-Mart.
You may think that I am complaining, but I am really laying the ground work for suggesting that MAYBE we should hire the guys who run Wal-Mart to fix the economy.
This should be read and understood by all Americans Democrats, Republicans, EVERYONE!!
To President Obama and all 535 voting members of the Legislature,
It is now official you are ALL corrupt morons:
a.. The U.S. Postal Service was established in 1775. You have had 234 years to get it right and it is broke.
b.. Social Security was established in 1935. You have had 74 years to get it right and it is broke.
c.. Fannie Mae was established in 1938. You have had 71 years to get it right and it is broke.
d.. War on Poverty started in 1964. You have had 45 years to get it right; $1 trillion of our money is confiscated each year and transferred to "the poor" and they only want more.
e.. Medicare and Medicaid were established in 1965. You have had 44 years to get it right and they are broke.
f.. Freddie Mac was established in 1970. You have had 39 years to get it right and it is broke.
g.. The Department of Energy was created in 1977 to lessen our dependence on foreign oil. It has ballooned to 16,000 employees with a budget of $24 billion a year and we import more oil than ever before. You had 32 years to get it right and it is an abysmal failure.
You have FAILED in every "government service" you have shoved down our throats while overspending our tax dollars.
AND YOU WANT AMERICANS TO BELIEVE YOU CAN BE TRUSTED WITH A GOVERNMENT-RUN HEALTH CARE SYSTEM ??
Karl wrote at 7:15 AM on Jan-06-2011:
Paul has to be a liberal Democrat. I say this because he has the logic and depth of thought (or lack thereof) of a liberal Democrat. In his mind he can?t comprehend the evil done by Mr. Assange . To Paul, that Assange made one simple statement about the general corruption of all governments is enough to justify his publishing of things best left in secret ? things that will cost human blood, perhaps even on all sides of the fight. Shallow. Short-sighted . Stupid.
He calls WWII and the Cold War ?real,? and our current engagement ? by inference ? not ?real.? To Paul, Al Qaeda is a ?joke.? Well, Paul, that ?joke? killed as many people as the attack on Pearl Harbor ? you know, way back in that ?real? war. Do the math. Still think they are a joke?
The only problem is that Paul?s mindset is not isolated. Many in the intelligence and top end of the military communities think in a similar manner. Make no mistake, we are in a war ? a declared war ? but it is different because the war is not against a state. This war is against an ideology ? a mindset ? as acted upon through a terrorist organization that does not recognize political boundaries. As a result, all former ?models? of a ?typical? war are obsolete, as is the thinking used in prosecuting a war. We are in new territory, and holdovers from the old war ? be it hot or cold ? mindset will not fare well in this new type of war. Paul is a perfect example of why. He sees nothing wrong with the aid given the enemy by Assange , because he can?t comprehend the nature of the threat we face.
Oh, and for Paul?s enlightenment, the First Amendment covers the attempts of someone to prevent you from expressing YOUR OWN thoughts and words, it DOES NOT cover your efforts to expose someone else?s private words against their will.
Hopefully the rest of your much more intelligent listeners will help to educate Paul into the 21 st century.
Karl
Peter wrote at 5:52 AM on Dec-08-2010:
"The root difference between the Conservatives and the Liberals of today is that
Conservatives take account of the whole man, while the Liberals tend to look
only at the material side of man's nature. The Conservative believes that man
is, in part, an economic, an animal creature; but that he is also a spiritual
creature with spiritual needs and spiritual desires. What is more, these needs
and desires reflect the superior side of man's nature, and thus take precedence
over his economic wants. Conservatism therefore looks upon the enhancement of
man's spiritual nature as the primary concern of political philosophy. Liberals,
on the other hand, - in the name of 'concern for human beings' - regard the
satisfaction of economic wants as the dominant mission of society."
Dave wrote at 7:59 AM on Dec-06-2010:
Gordon
I'm one of those private sector grunts disgusted by rising Federal salaries, haven't had a raise in six years, my insurance deductibles keep climbing, not to mention fuel and utility costs.
Oh well, still employed!
Dave
Paul wrote at 3:33 AM on Dec-03-2010:
Gordon,
We don't get your show in NJ, but I respect your opinion, or I used to.
Read the Forbes interview with Assange and you will see someone who we should align with rather than fight. WW2 and the Cold War were real threats. Al Qaeda is a joke, yet we are quickly drifting toward a police state.
Do you really disagree with Assange's opinion about world leadership: "lying, corrupt and murderous leadership from Bahrain to Brazil."?
We are not in a declared war and he is merely publishing the information which is protected by the First Amendment.
Thanks,
Paul
Albert wrote at 6:14 AM on Dec-02-2010:
Don't let those kids kid you about ABBA. I too love ABBA's music. I discovered ABBA in the 1970's when I heard "Fernando" on the radio (still my favorite ABBA song, although "I Do! I Do! I Do! I Do! I Do!" comes in a close second.) I immediately went out and bought the album. (Do these kids even know what a vinyl album is?) I proceeded to buy several ABBA albums. Those two women can SING!!! I still have ABBA on my IPod. So, you are not the only one. By the way, Bono, lead singer for the rock band "U2", once remarked that ABBA was "one of the best pop groups that ever was." He even did a cover of "Dancing Queen" during a concert. ABBA's music is wonderful and don't let anyone tell you otherwise. As Duke Ellington said, "If it sounds good, it IS good!"
Albert
Tracy wrote at 6:59 AM on Dec-01-2010:
Hey Mr. Liddy,
Just wanted to wish you a happy birthday. I used to listen to your radio program quite regularly in the mid 1990s when you were teamed with the "brutal, tyrannical and Stalinist" John Popp and that guy who worked in the back and was "in business for himself," Cameron Gray.
I have checked out a few of your recent videos online and it's good to see you're still in top form.
God bless you, sir.
Semper Fi
Tracy
Dave wrote at 6:14 AM on Nov-30-2010:
Gordon
Just to be safe I had the missus give me a good pat down before I hopped on my old BMW 'cycle for the ride to work this morning... I feel safer already!
Dave
Steve wrote at 5:26 AM on Nov-18-2010:
Good Day Gman, it appears I was a day late and a dollar short on my first E. I do believe the CLEAR ACT deserves attention. We just may give up OUR surface DRINKING WATER. Remember to salute Obama every morning and don't forget to FLUSH.
Regards,
Steve
Tom wrote at 5:24 AM on Nov-18-2010:
Dear G-Man,
I think the problem with banning earmarks will prove to be defining what?s an earmark. Once such a ban is in place, congressmen will continue to put in earmarks arguing that it?s not an earmark but something else.
How can we define these properly so it doesn?t get circumvented or misused, as politicians have a penchant for circumventing or misusing whatever they find.
Anon wrote at 5:22 AM on Nov-18-2010:
A woman in a hot air balloon realized she was lost. She lowered altitude and spotted a man in a boat below. She shouted to him, "Excuse me, can you help me? I promised a friend I would meet him an hour ago, but I don't know where I am." The man consulted his portable GPS and replied, "You're in a hot air balloon approximately 30 feet above a ground elevation of 2346 feet above sea level.. You are 31 degrees, 14.97 minutes north latitude and 100 degrees, 49.09 minutes west longitude." She rolled her eyes and said, "You must be a Republican." I am," replied the man. "How did you know?" "Well," answered the balloonist, "everything you told me is technically correct, but I have no idea what to make of your information, and I'm still lost.. Frankly, you've not been much help to me."
The man smiled and responded, "You must be a Democrat." "I am," replied the balloonist. "How did you know?" "Well," said the man, "you don't know where you are or where you're going. You've risen to where you are due to a large quantity of hot air. You made a promise that you have no idea how to keep, and you expect ME to solve your problem. You're in EXACTLY the same position you were in before we met, but somehow, now it's MY fault.
Albert wrote at 9:16 AM on Nov-15-2010:
G-Man!
I was listening to the audio clip of Mr. John Tyner and his brush with TSA goons. Listen closely and in the backgraound you will hear on the Airport PA System, "Security is everyone's responsibility..." G-Man, we are living in the land of THX-1138. ("Blessed is the State, Blessed are the Masses...") This airport message is right out of that movie. This "procedure" is right out of that movie. G-Man, we have lost our constitutional rights. They have been stampeded by "overiding government interests." I will not fly anymore. Just a few years ago I was flying 1-2 times a year. No more. The TSA will not get their dirty hands on me.
Albert
Dan wrote at 8:45 AM on Nov-15-2010:
G-Man,
My suggestion for budget cuts is to suspend foreign aid until a surplus shows in our budget, we need to take care of our own first.
Thank you,
Dan
Milla wrote at 8:34 AM on Nov-15-2010:
I wanted to send a thank you to Mr. G Gordon Liddy for giving me the opportunity to pose for 2010 Stacked and Packed Calender. I had an immense amount of fun shooting and am honored that I was chosen by him as his calender cover girl. It will be a memory I will have forever. Thank you once again!!!!!!
Gabriela aka Milla
Dan wrote at 7:18 AM on Nov-04-2010:
Dear G-Man:
Both the caller Brandon, from Lewiston, Idaho, and the next caller, Eric, on the Oct. 27th program showed a lamentable lack of economic acumen in discussing Wal-Mart. Your less-than-forceful response to both callers ("fair enough") disappointed me as well.
If the Coleman Company, in bargaining with Wal-Mart on prices, cannot meet Wal-Mart's "demands" backed by its "corporate power," Coleman is certainly not forced to do business with Wal-Mart. Indeed, Wal-Mart has no power to force Coleman to do anything. Only the government has the power of legalized force.
Precisely the same misunderstanding occurs when people claim that Wal-Mart employees are "forced" to work for Wal-Mart for low wages, benefits, etc.. Wal-Mart does not force the job applicant to take the job--it is mutually agreed upon. Indeed--and this was common even before the recent economic downturn--when a new Wal-Mart opens for business in a given community, it always receives thousands of applications for a couple hundred positions to be filled. I know this because I used to be a pharmacist at Wal-Mart, where I heard this story time and again from store managers from diverse geographic areas throughout the country.
Eric's objection to Wal-Mart "running other stores in the area out of business," can be explained by a study done awhile back, one result of which is now known as the "Wal-Mart effect." The analysis found that when a new Wal-Mart opens in a given area, the stores about to go out of business anyway often do close. However, because of the increased foot and car traffic generated by the new Wal-Mart in the area, the surviving businesses frequently see increases in sales.
If Eric's belief is true that a new Wal-Mart raises prices after it becomes established, then it invites competition from another similar merchant--Target, for example--that can open a new store nearby to compete easily with the now allegedly overpriced Wal-Mart. Moreover, if one thinks Wal-Mart's prices are too high, one can always shop elsewhere, both for groceries and for general merchandise, Once again, only the government has the power create the conditions necessary for monopolies to exist.--Wal-Mart does not possess such power.
Larger Wal-Marts (Supercenters) require larger lots than the older Wal-Marts, both for the store itself and the parking area. This is the reason for Wal-Mart "leaving dead buildings" about which Eric complains. (If Wal-Mart were to tear down its old buildings rather than try to sell them, somebody would probably criticize that action as well).
Otherwise, I find your show unique and entertaining, and I listen to the podcast every day.
Cordially,
Dan
Laurie wrote at 5:32 AM on Nov-04-2010:
Good morning, G-Man,
I am happy about two results of this election.
The first one is that we will be rid of Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House. That's the best news I have heard all year!!
The second is that the people of Florida, my home state, have spoken. Almost two years ago when Charlie Crist declared his candidacy for the US Senate, the Republican establishment in Florida decided they didn't want to have a primary, even though there was talk of the possibility of Marco Rubio running. They wanted Charlie Crist. I wondered to myself which country I was living in: The United States or the old Soviet Union.
We fought hard against this, because we really believed that Marco would be a good senator for Florida. When Crist saw that the polls were not in his favor, he went Independent and started buttering up to the Democratic establishment.
I am really glad our voices were heard loud and clear last night: not Republican, but Conservative.
Thank you.
Laurie
Anon wrote at 10:35 AM on Nov-01-2010:
I've been listening to the podcasts of your show last week with regard to the Don't ask don't tell policy in the military. It seems to me almost everyone is concentrating on the sexual aspect of this policy and what will happen if it is repealed. Privacy, discrimination, assaults seems to occupy the conversation. What's not being addressed is this: battle field scenario: a group of soldiers come under an attack and most are wounded. What happens if one or more of these soldiers are HIV positive?
Anon wrote at 10:34 AM on Nov-01-2010:
Mr. Liddy, I am so disappointed in you today -Mr. Seton Motley, who you continue to promote as a so-called "expert" on the internet and net neutrality is propagating a bunch of half-truths, technical disinformation & political propaganda.
I've been in the telecommunications business since 1972 and primarily involved with computer networks and associated systems since 1993. Most of what he is spewing are "straw-dog" arguments - the equiv. of arguing that we must either have anarchy or North Korean Communism.
"Net Neutrality" is like the word "vegetable" - it covers a wide range of issues. Mr. Motley has presented only the most extreme example of what Net Neutrality can involve as the ONLY definition of the term - doing that is intellectually dishonest.
I'll agree with him that a bare minimum of regulation is the best, but NO regulation is not the answer.
Mr. Motely is correct about extending CALEA to the internet: because of the physical construction of the internet and that it is NOT a circuit-based network like the telephone system is but based on routing packets of data. We're having a repeat of the "Clipper Chip" argument from 1994.
You really need to get someone on that understands networks and how they operate and a technically valid discussion of why a limited level of regulation of the internet is not only necessarily but also desirable.
John wrote at 5:44 AM on Oct-28-2010:
Liddy:
You are quite the epitome of what a despicable U.S. american is.
How you and your criminal, perpetually lying, sub-human ilk can look in the mirror without vomiting is a mystery. But then again, people with no conscience find it quite easy to live inside a skin made up of so many sociopathic cells.
Only in America can a puke with zero integrity, like you, be "successful" (not in the true sense of course).
John
Jason wrote at 5:39 AM on Oct-28-2010:
Mr. Liddy,
I'm listening this morning about Juan Williams.
I believe you would the reason for Juan's firing in his writing, especially his work, "Enough."
It's a book where he picks up the banner of Bill Cosby and provides significant proof that the black community has been led by race baiters who don't have the good of the community in mind, but their own power - this would include those in charge of the NAACP, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, etc.
He puts forth a book that resonates with the sentiments of Chuck Colson & Jack Eckhart's work, "Why America Doesn't Work." . . . That book is a book of the "right."
I'm convinced that Juan has been on the hot seat for a long time. He broke from the fold in his writing, he broke from the fold when he started to appear on Fox, the final straw was agreeing with O'Riley.
Jason
Dave wrote at 5:28 AM on Oct-21-2010:
Pod caster here GMan, dam your sounding like you use too! Good for you Gman, you are my inspiration! Thanks for waking up every day!!
David wrote at 6:27 AM on Oct-12-2010:
Thank You
It was the 1980's and you were promoting your book "Will". I was in the University of North Dakota at the time and I was holding a sign reading: "Down With Fascism". You challenged me asking me what fascism was, and I could not answer.
Mr. Liddy, I may not agree with your politics, but you taught me an important lesson: be prepared to explain your positions. I could not, and you called me on it. And I feel you did me a great service, and I now thank you for it.
Yours Sincerely,
David
Bill wrote at 6:17 AM on Oct-12-2010:
Firefighting Issues
G. Gordon,
I can't get you live so I have to listen to your podcasts and I'm always a day late etc.
Here comes that old refrain, "I agree with you almost all of the time but . . ."
The "Fires Burning" issue in western Tennessee is an example of allowing compassion interfere with a logical opinion.
The owner of the double-wide gambled, and lost. You get what you pay for and you can't get something for nothing.
In the U.S. fire companies were originally formed by insurance companies to protect their risk pool.
The members of the pool paid for this to receive protection and compensation for any covered losses.
A compassionate person will and should give whatever aid they can to those in dire need.
While an individual may give food to a starving person, a store cannot give away food to the hungry.
The shelves would soon be bare, the store goes out of business and there would be nothing for anyone.
Fire companies must also remain solvent so they can continue to serve and protect their contributing members.
I know of other states where this type of thing happens. They are obligated to protect life but not property. It is much like how every Law Officer is obligated to uphold the law at all times.
Unlike the Obama Care fairy tale, you cannot wait until after a loss to obtain the insurance to cover it.
My thanks to you for the service you have done in the past and continue to perform.
Bill
Albert wrote at 5:57 AM on Oct-07-2010:
G-Man! Great show!
Dr. Segal mentioned that doctors are ALREADY dropping out of Medicare and Medicaid and that it would get far worse once ObozoCare kicks in. I believe that Pelosi-Reid-Obozo and Co. have a solution for that already. They will pass a "law" REQUIRING doctors to participate in Medicare and Medicaid.
Dropping out of the program will be made illegal. What this is, is reactionary management of problems. That is, the government apparatchiks and commissars react to "unforeseen" and "unexpected" circumstances, completely ignoring of course that the circumstances are the results of their own policies. They react, the market changes, then they react again with more regulations and requirements, and the cycle repeats.
This is how Lenin tried to manage industrialization and farming in the then-new Soviet Union, and the results were catastrophic. Millions of people starved to death as farmland lay fallow and bureaucrats issued order after order that production be increased. All socialists believe in the power of fiat, that is, to declare something is to make it happen. And Obozo is no different from Lenin or Mao or Uncle Ho in this practice. Failure after failure will make no difference to Obozo, just as millions of deaths made no difference to Lenin, et.al. ObozoCare is only the first step. Legal compulsion to take Medicare patients will be a next step. Completely socialized medicine will be following soon after.
Albert
Wallace wrote at 5:45 AM on Oct-07-2010:
Theodore Roosevelt's ideas on Immigrants and being an AMERICAN in 1907.
'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language.. And we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.'
Theodore Roosevelt 1907
David wrote at 5:37 AM on Oct-07-2010:
Barstool Economics
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten
comes to $100 and If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would
go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the
arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. "Since you are all
such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily
beer by $20." so drinks for the ten now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the
first four men were unaffected...They would still drink for free...But what
about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the
$20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'...They realized
that $20 divided by six is $3.33...But if they subtracted that from
everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up
being paid to drink his beer..So, the bar owner
Suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the
same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before...And the first four continued
to drink for free...But once outside the restaurant, the men began to
compare their savings.
"I only got a dollar out of the $20,"declared the sixth man. He pointed to
the tenth man," but he got $10!" "Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth
man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more
than I!" "That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10
back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!" "Wait a minute,"
yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The
system exploits the poor!"
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat
down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they
discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of
them for even half of the bill!
And that, ladies and gentlemen, journalists and college professors, is how
our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most
benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being
wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start
drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
David K. PhD.D.
Professor of Economics
University of Georgia
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.
Joseph wrote at 5:22 AM on Oct-07-2010:
Well I'm not sure what kind of wind turbines are in that recording, but after hearing it I wanted to see if they really make that much nosie. Since growing up in central Texas and visiting west Texas often enough to see them. It just so happened that on the day I heard such crazy accusations, that I was going to be driving by one of these notorious wind farms. So being curious as I am, I ventured out of my car and stood ten feet from one of these giant wind turbines, looking all around me, I saw that there were hundreds of these majestic structure all around me. You know what, not a sound from them and I saw birds flying in and out of them. I saw one vulture fly right in between the moving blades. Maybe Texas just knows how to build there wind turbines. A plus for wind farms is that they give us more jobs. And the man that had theses on his property, had oil pumps, cattle and cotton. Crazy demonize wind Turbines you need to spend a day with the strangely beautiful structures. The sound bite may of been recorded from a jet flying over the wind farm who knows.
Tony wrote at 7:40 AM on Oct-04-2010:
1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity, by legislating the wealth out of prosperity.
2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
4. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work, because somebody else is going to get what they work for, then that is the beginning of the end of any nation.
5. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.
Howard wrote at 6:14 AM on Oct-01-2010:
Dear Mr. Liddy,
Recent events have reminded me to re-familiarize myself with the classics.
"one who rules without law, looks to his own advantage rather than
that of his subjects, and uses extreme and cruel tactics against his
own people as well as others" - Plato and Aristotle's definition of
a tyrant
Certainly sound like someone we know.
Anon wrote at 7:28 AM on Sep-30-2010:
I've been listening to the podcasts of your show last week with regard to the Don't ask don't tell policy in the military. It seems to me almost everyone is concentrating on the sexual aspect of this policy and what will happen if it is repealed. Privacy, discrimination, assaults seems to occupy the conversation. What's not being addressed is this: battle field scenario: a group of soldiers come under an attack and most are wounded. What happens if one or more of these soldiers are HIV positive?
Listener wrote at 7:02 AM on Sep-30-2010:
Mr. Liddy, I am so disappointed in you today -Mr. Seton Motley, who you continue to promote as a so-called "expert" on the internet and net neutrality is propagating a bunch of half-truths, technical disinformation & political propaganda.
I've been in the telecommunications business since 1972 and primarily involved with computer networks and associated systems since 1993. Most of what he is spewing are "straw-dog" arguments - the equiv. of arguing that we must either have anarchy or North Korean Communism.
"Net Neutrality" is like the word "vegetable" - it covers a wide range of issues. Mr. Motley has presented only the most extreme example of what Net Neutrality can involve as the ONLY definition of the term - doing that is intellectually dishonest.
I'll agree with him that a bare minimum of regulation is the best, but NO regulation is not the answer.
Mr. Motely is correct about extending CALEA to the internet: because of the physical construction of the internet and that it is NOT a circuit-based network like the telephone system is but based on routing packets of data. We're having a repeat of the "Clipper Chip" argument from 1994.
You really need to get someone on that understands networks and how they operate and a technically valid discussion of why a limited level of regulation of the internet is not only necessarily but also desirable.
Listener wrote at 7:00 AM on Sep-30-2010:
I was very sorry when your wife Francis paased away. I remember what my mom went through when my father passed. My sincere consolences to you and your entire family. Mrs. Liddy is a shining example of the very best in humankind.
Duane wrote at 6:56 AM on Sep-30-2010:
I wanted to thank you for providing so many valuable insights. You have been a hero of mine for countless years..I find it very comforting to know that there are men of action like you, that are willing to selflessly act for the greater good.
