Corporatists pushing a radical social agenda to stop expression of religious freedom may or may not succeed. But they will definitely lose the public. Attitudes will turn against chamber corporatists who seek to get rich while pushing their immoral values on to others (who are much poorer).
“Just as North Carolina is being pressured to eliminate its recent religious freedom bill, the legislature in neighboring South Carolina is considering a similar bill of its own. Just like North Carolina, many are lining up in opposition, and in the Palmetto State, the Chamber of Commerce is leading the charge to stop the bill in its tracks.” here
“The Target department store chain has made itself infamous for announcing that it will allow transgender people to choose whatever bathroom they want to use at any given time, even though the chain already has many problems with sexual assaults in its stores.” click here
“Target allows men to use the same restrooms as ten-year-old girls and has made it clear that it would prefer law-abiding citizens to enter its stores unarmed.” click here
“The hashtag #BoycottTarget has topped Facebook’s top 10 trends for three days in a row from Friday through Sunday, as hundreds of thousands of Americans have signed the American Family Association’s (AFA) petition opposing the retail giant’s decision to allow men to use women’s changing rooms and bathrooms.” click here
“On the heels of an announcement from department store giant Target that transgender shoppers and employees may use whichever bathroom they choose in Target stores, a campaign to boycott the chain was launched, garnering more than 200,000 signatures in a single day.” click here
Posted in Politics
“The chancellors of leading US universities, including MIT, the University of Chicago, and all ten campuses of the University of California, have clarified that they are opposed to any academic boycott, in particular to one against Israel.” here for more.
From the Manhattan Institute (here):
President Obama’s policies for tackling climate change would impose heavy costs borne disproportionately by lower-income U.S. households. His Clean Power Plan (CPP) and proposal for a $10.25-per-barrel oil tax are the equivalent of a $25–$30-per-ton carbon tax, which would cost America’s poorest families tens of billions of dollars per year.
- Obama’s climate policies would cover four-fifths of U.S. carbon-dioxide emissions and would be similar in scope to an economy-wide carbon tax.
- The cost of such policies would fall disproportionately on the lowest-income U.S. households, which spend more than 35 percent of their annual income on energy; by comparison, households in the top 10 percent of the income distribution spend less than 3 percent of their income on energy.
- Obama’s climate policies would cost households in the lowest quintile $19 billion per year, equal to a 166 percent increase in their federal tax bills; households in the second-lowest quintile would pay an extra $25 billion, equal to a 33 percent tax increase.