...between liberals and conservatives in this country, and really in general, is this: liberals tend to think that there is only so much pie to go around and distribution of said pie is better left in the hands of wealthy, power wielding liberals in government. Conservatives, on the other hand, believe in making a bigger pie and that the function of government is to ensure individuals the opportunity to make their own piece of pie and help protect them from those who wish to take it. At least, that's what they say to get elected. Unspoken is the desire of all politicians to get RE-elected. I myself tend to lean libertarian, being relatively liberal socially and fiscally conservative as far as the public treasury is concerned. At least, I think government should stay out of peoples private lives, regulate business only when necessary to resolve disputes and promote competition, and spend taxpayer money as if they could run out of it at any moment. Politicians don't seem to understand or care that the money they're spending does not belong to them. A large portion of our national debt, which now stands at around $17 trillion, is owned by foreign countries....just over a third of it. That means any future production by American workers belongs not to Americans but to those countries. For years. And years. The remainder of the debt, which is in only slightly better hands, is owned by US entities, both public and private. Which is really just a fancy way of saying we're robbing Peter to pay Paul. All thanks to a government hellbent on control and a welfare class too intent on voting themselves benefits produced by others.That is one of the major reasons America was NEVER INTENDED TO BE A DEMOCRACY. It is a constitutional republic with a representative government. As soon as people figure out they can vote themselves benefits without working for them, they do it. And we have a political class that understands this and promotes it so as to increase their voter base and essentially purchase their reelection with other peoples money. The money they're using is a part of a persons life....the portion of their life it took them to earn that money....it's about time the working class in this country, the ones that actually produce more than they consume, start demanding their pound of flesh back from the crooked politicians who use it to buy votes from uneducated constituents....who are uneducated in part due to a government whose public education system teaches children not HOW to think, but WHAT.
Sunday, December 15, 2013
Saturday, December 7, 2013
Dear President Obama: Payment Due Upon Receipt, Application Now Complete
Some people will never receive the justice in this life they deserve for inflicting the damage they do...this "President" is one of them. Huffington Post published this letter in their comedy section....but just wait. I promise people will not be laughing when this program is fully implemented. Or perhaps some will....those who have exempted themselves from its edicts while pushing for its passage. Why would they do that if Obamacare was any good at all?
Sunday, November 24, 2013
4 Year Health Care Reform Plan
It has been bandied about that Republicans have offered no alternatives to the Affordable Care Act even while they've been vehemently opposed it. This is patently false. I recall hearing, prior to it's 2009 passage, that as many as 30 alternatives were offered by Republicans and rejected. It seemed that every other day leading up to the passage of the AHCA I heard about a Republican alternative being shot down. Now, it's difficult to find anything out about these plans...the focus is mainly on a single bill introduced in 2009 that was quickly shot down by Democrats. You can read about that plan and others that were introduced as far back as 1995 here.
Myself, being but a lowly electrician, apparently shouldn't have anything to say on the issue....but I do. In fact, the following outline would go a long way toward fixing our overly burdensome and intrusive tax code, immigration, and our healthcare system. Mind you, it's just an outline.....you'd need far more.....umm......educated minds than mine to work out the details. Plus, it has the inherent problem of bumping into lots of special interests. Big ones. And bumping into them hard. Oops.
Step 1: FairTax. Why, you ask, should we begin healthcare reform with tax reform? The answer is actually pretty simple and has to do with increasing the tax base to include those who are using the system and not paying for it and increasing the amount of take home pay each person receives. Extra take home pay means more flexibility of choice in medical insurers and providers. This one change, while the simplest to implement, may run into some of the strongest opposition due to several facts: first, it would be the single biggest shift of power from the government to the American people possibly in its' history. Imagine the government's spending being constrained by what you decide to spend and be taxed on...it would force fiscal responsibility. Second, thousands of K Street lobbyists would be out of work...with no loopholes to find and no special interests to fight for, they'd have to retrain, wouldn't they? Third...no more IRS. Somewhere in the neighborhood of 90-95,000 IRS employees would find themselves in the same line as those K Street lobbyists I mentioned. No more audits, I'm sure, would just ruin some of their ideas of fun. Again....oops.
Add to that the expected repatriation of approximately $11 trillion dollars being held in offshore tax shelters to contribute to business investment, an approximately 22% decrease in the cost of consumer goods, and taking home 100% of your pay....that equals a lot of extra money in your pockets to spend on things like medical insurance, which could also be cheaper, were the proper reforms implemented.
Which brings me to....Step 2: Health care reform. A little more complicated, as it would require revamping our healthcare system from the ground up. To do this, one must consider why healthcare costs are as high as they are to begin with. One of the biggest contributing factors is coverage of the uninsured and under insured. Add to that the cost of education of doctors and nurses, malpractice insurance, facility maintenance, administration, material and equipment costs, pharmaceuticals....just to name a few. Getting these costs under control in a rational way that still leaves some room for profit and expansion of services while maintaining affordable private insurance is paramount in solving the healthcare dilemma....and the AHCA completely misses it.
The fatal flaw in the Affordable Healthcare Act is that is does absolutely nothing to address the underlying issues...it merely shifts the burden of payment onto already overburdened taxpayers and places the government in control of who receives what coverage and the amount that will be paid for it. I don't know about you, but that places entirely too much control of my life into the hands of people that don't really give a shit if I live or die....only whether or not my treatment will be cost effective.
To begin to address these issues would require increasing the tax base, thereby increasing revenues to jumpstart programs nearing insolvency such as Medicare and Medicaid. Next on the list would be deregulation of insurance companies to allow policy purchases across state lines, increasing competition and decreasing consumer cost. After that....tort reform. A major contributing factor in the high cost of medical malpractice insurance is the sheer number of false insurance claims, many of which are settled simply to avoid the costs associated with going to court. Premiums on these policies can run as high as $1 million a year or more for a surgeon or private practitioner. Pharmaceuticals are next....contrary to popular belief, pharmaceutical companies are not entirely to blame for the high cost of their medications, though they're not entirely innocent either. It's not unheard of for big pharma, with collusion from health care professionals(especially in areas of mental health), to invent an illness just to provide a drug for it. And if a highly sought after drug is in the hands of a single provider, you can bet on paying a premium no matter how much it actually costs to produce. Regardless, a great deal of money goes into research and development of new drugs, which then undergo a lengthy and expensive approval process with the FDA. These drugs are marketed not only here in the States, but globally. Many countries simply refuse to shoulder a fair portion of the burden of developing, approving, and marketing these drugs, paying well under market value. Pharmaceutical companies are then left with a choice....either market their drugs in countries who refuse to pay market value and retain their market share in those countries, or refuse to sell in these countries and risk tarnishing a relationship with a customer. Either way, it increases the cost to patients in the US.
This is by no means an all inclusive outline and it's sure to run into some pretty heavy opposition from vested interests. But if you value freedom from government intrusion, the ability to make your own choices concerning affordable healthcare, and a reduction of the tax burden on the American public, it's certainly a viable option.
Myself, being but a lowly electrician, apparently shouldn't have anything to say on the issue....but I do. In fact, the following outline would go a long way toward fixing our overly burdensome and intrusive tax code, immigration, and our healthcare system. Mind you, it's just an outline.....you'd need far more.....umm......educated minds than mine to work out the details. Plus, it has the inherent problem of bumping into lots of special interests. Big ones. And bumping into them hard. Oops.
Step 1: FairTax. Why, you ask, should we begin healthcare reform with tax reform? The answer is actually pretty simple and has to do with increasing the tax base to include those who are using the system and not paying for it and increasing the amount of take home pay each person receives. Extra take home pay means more flexibility of choice in medical insurers and providers. This one change, while the simplest to implement, may run into some of the strongest opposition due to several facts: first, it would be the single biggest shift of power from the government to the American people possibly in its' history. Imagine the government's spending being constrained by what you decide to spend and be taxed on...it would force fiscal responsibility. Second, thousands of K Street lobbyists would be out of work...with no loopholes to find and no special interests to fight for, they'd have to retrain, wouldn't they? Third...no more IRS. Somewhere in the neighborhood of 90-95,000 IRS employees would find themselves in the same line as those K Street lobbyists I mentioned. No more audits, I'm sure, would just ruin some of their ideas of fun. Again....oops.
Add to that the expected repatriation of approximately $11 trillion dollars being held in offshore tax shelters to contribute to business investment, an approximately 22% decrease in the cost of consumer goods, and taking home 100% of your pay....that equals a lot of extra money in your pockets to spend on things like medical insurance, which could also be cheaper, were the proper reforms implemented.
Which brings me to....Step 2: Health care reform. A little more complicated, as it would require revamping our healthcare system from the ground up. To do this, one must consider why healthcare costs are as high as they are to begin with. One of the biggest contributing factors is coverage of the uninsured and under insured. Add to that the cost of education of doctors and nurses, malpractice insurance, facility maintenance, administration, material and equipment costs, pharmaceuticals....just to name a few. Getting these costs under control in a rational way that still leaves some room for profit and expansion of services while maintaining affordable private insurance is paramount in solving the healthcare dilemma....and the AHCA completely misses it.
The fatal flaw in the Affordable Healthcare Act is that is does absolutely nothing to address the underlying issues...it merely shifts the burden of payment onto already overburdened taxpayers and places the government in control of who receives what coverage and the amount that will be paid for it. I don't know about you, but that places entirely too much control of my life into the hands of people that don't really give a shit if I live or die....only whether or not my treatment will be cost effective.
To begin to address these issues would require increasing the tax base, thereby increasing revenues to jumpstart programs nearing insolvency such as Medicare and Medicaid. Next on the list would be deregulation of insurance companies to allow policy purchases across state lines, increasing competition and decreasing consumer cost. After that....tort reform. A major contributing factor in the high cost of medical malpractice insurance is the sheer number of false insurance claims, many of which are settled simply to avoid the costs associated with going to court. Premiums on these policies can run as high as $1 million a year or more for a surgeon or private practitioner. Pharmaceuticals are next....contrary to popular belief, pharmaceutical companies are not entirely to blame for the high cost of their medications, though they're not entirely innocent either. It's not unheard of for big pharma, with collusion from health care professionals(especially in areas of mental health), to invent an illness just to provide a drug for it. And if a highly sought after drug is in the hands of a single provider, you can bet on paying a premium no matter how much it actually costs to produce. Regardless, a great deal of money goes into research and development of new drugs, which then undergo a lengthy and expensive approval process with the FDA. These drugs are marketed not only here in the States, but globally. Many countries simply refuse to shoulder a fair portion of the burden of developing, approving, and marketing these drugs, paying well under market value. Pharmaceutical companies are then left with a choice....either market their drugs in countries who refuse to pay market value and retain their market share in those countries, or refuse to sell in these countries and risk tarnishing a relationship with a customer. Either way, it increases the cost to patients in the US.
This is by no means an all inclusive outline and it's sure to run into some pretty heavy opposition from vested interests. But if you value freedom from government intrusion, the ability to make your own choices concerning affordable healthcare, and a reduction of the tax burden on the American public, it's certainly a viable option.
Tuesday, October 15, 2013
I Can't Beat This Drum Enough....
....FairTax, FairTax, FairTax. The country I was born into is going down the tubes. Fast food workers are demanding nearly as much pay as I was getting as a licensed journeyman electrician. Union workers demand so much pay and benefits they price themselves right out of a job, then blame their employers. Government unions are an entirely different story....they vote for the candidates who can guarantee them the most benefits who are then beholden to the unions who voted them into office in the first place. The government, for all its proclamations of compassion for the poor, has a misplaced heart. People expect the government to care for them from cradle to grave, not realizing or not caring that the benefits they receive come from someone else who worked for the money that was then taken from them, at gunpoint, in the guise of the IRS. I hear people complain of the rich getting all of the breaks, and to some extent that's true....but no one ever got a job from a poor person. Jobs don't just appear out of thin air....they are created by people who have the means to do so. The rich also pay more in taxes than anyone else, with 40% of government revenues coming from the top 5% of income earners. That's income earners....NOT the wealthy. Our current system does not tax wealth the same as it does income. It is possible, under our current system, to be a multimillionaire yet qualify for foodstamps. Those income earners that are being taxed are the small and medium sized businesses that employ somewhere around 80% of the nation. You're biting the hand that feeds, people.
Sunday, October 13, 2013
Why Is It....
that people feel that its perfectly ok to wrong the people in their lives then pray to whichever god they worship expecting that to heal the wounds without saying a word to those they did wrong? Is it because it would require an admission of guilt in the real world with real consequences? I read a joke once about a boy who wanted a bike, so he wrote a letter to God asking for one. He started by writing "God, I've been a very good boy and I would very much like a bike." He realized this wasn't the truth, so he tore it up and started again. This time he wrote "God, I've been a pretty good boy, and I would very much like a bike." Well he realized this wasn't the truth at all either, so he tore up that letter, went out and stole a bike, and prayed for forgiveness. Too many people today seem to have this attitude that they can take whatever they want from whoever, and if they get away with it, everything is hunky dory. It is not. There are many things, intangible things, that until recently I was not even aware could be taken...and in ways I could not previously fathom. Those who took these things know who they are and what they took, and are apparently under the impression no apology is necessary to those they stole from. This could not be farther from the truth.
The liberal intellectual elite in this country are much the same way, feeling that it is fine to take from those who earned what they have and give to those who did not, so long as it doesn't affect them. Rarely will you come across an individual who will themselves take a hit to do what is right in the long run or make a necessary change. This is the difficulty faced by anyone attempting to make significant, meaningful change in America's political structure and system of taxation. As the nature of these changes come to light, one bumps into special interests on every side who are doing not much more than the boy with the bike, in the guise of charity or compassion or fairness, when their real intention is to line their own pockets and bring down others they view as a threat. The single biggest and most helpful change this country could make, possibly more important than healthcare reform, is tax reform. Our progressive tax system is overly burdensome to job creators and private entities in a position to help others make a bigger pie. The FairTax is a way to not only tax wealth, which is something our current tax system passes over, it also taxes blackmarket activity and would pave the way to the repatriation of approximately $11 trillion dollars in private revenue kept in offshore tax shelters. Our national debt is somewhere around $17 trillion, just to put that in perspective.
I sort of went off on a wild tangent on this piece, for which I beg your pardon. If you couldn't tell, the first part has some personal significance which led to the second part, which is more general in nature but still related in that the second part is somewhat analogous to the first.
The liberal intellectual elite in this country are much the same way, feeling that it is fine to take from those who earned what they have and give to those who did not, so long as it doesn't affect them. Rarely will you come across an individual who will themselves take a hit to do what is right in the long run or make a necessary change. This is the difficulty faced by anyone attempting to make significant, meaningful change in America's political structure and system of taxation. As the nature of these changes come to light, one bumps into special interests on every side who are doing not much more than the boy with the bike, in the guise of charity or compassion or fairness, when their real intention is to line their own pockets and bring down others they view as a threat. The single biggest and most helpful change this country could make, possibly more important than healthcare reform, is tax reform. Our progressive tax system is overly burdensome to job creators and private entities in a position to help others make a bigger pie. The FairTax is a way to not only tax wealth, which is something our current tax system passes over, it also taxes blackmarket activity and would pave the way to the repatriation of approximately $11 trillion dollars in private revenue kept in offshore tax shelters. Our national debt is somewhere around $17 trillion, just to put that in perspective.
I sort of went off on a wild tangent on this piece, for which I beg your pardon. If you couldn't tell, the first part has some personal significance which led to the second part, which is more general in nature but still related in that the second part is somewhat analogous to the first.
Friday, October 11, 2013
Students Forced To Re-Enact Slavery
Political correctness alert: if that's what you're looking for, you're not going to find it here. I am not a racist, but you may not come away from this post with that impression. I am, however, a bit of a culturalist, and I feel that there are certain cultural elements in the United States that are in need of a dose of reality. Freedoms in this country are being frittered away by those who would prefer nanny government take care of them and insure their security, paving the way again to slavery...just in a different form. I'm writing this post and maintain this blog so that perhaps, years from now, I won't be saying "See, I told you so." Hopefully its not already too late.
Students at a middle school in Hartford, Connecticut were forced to re-enact slavery last year on a school field trip. You can read the story here. It was reported that students were asked to jump up and down, open their mouths so their teeth could be checked, and made to dance for their masters. In addition to pretending to be sold at auction and picking cotton, the students participated as slaves in a re-enactment of the Underground Railroad and simulated being on slave ships. Though organizers claim racial epithets were not supposed to be used during the exercise, the parents of the complainant claims that they were.
Horrible, right? Well....maybe not so much as one would think. People in America today, though they banty the term "racist" about as if it were nothing, know nothing of true racism. Race baiters like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson make their livings off of keeping the race war alive in America, which means using the slightest hint of bigotry as a verbal cudgel to match the real cudgels carried in the 2008 presidential election and the 2010 midterms. It would seem that some have developed an extremely thin skin where the slightest provocation is met with a violent retort, leading those in a position to do something about it impotent.
There is a level of freedom for all in the United States that is unknown in the history of the world and it is being taken for granted on a daily basis by those who take their livings from those who earned it because they somehow feel entitled to it. Most are guilty to one extent or another, never thinking how easily those freedoms could slip away.
Though nothing was mentioned of it in the story, organizers most likely did not adequately inform parents of the nature of the exercise. I think parents should have been included in the exercise, made to kneel with their children as a reminder of the things America has left behind and how easily things can slide back. To know what it feels like for a human being to be bought and sold as property, because we have forgotten. All of the benefits that people vote themselves from government coffers come from somewhere....someone... productive. To do that is no different than stealing the portion of that persons life it took them to earn it.
Students at a middle school in Hartford, Connecticut were forced to re-enact slavery last year on a school field trip. You can read the story here. It was reported that students were asked to jump up and down, open their mouths so their teeth could be checked, and made to dance for their masters. In addition to pretending to be sold at auction and picking cotton, the students participated as slaves in a re-enactment of the Underground Railroad and simulated being on slave ships. Though organizers claim racial epithets were not supposed to be used during the exercise, the parents of the complainant claims that they were.
Horrible, right? Well....maybe not so much as one would think. People in America today, though they banty the term "racist" about as if it were nothing, know nothing of true racism. Race baiters like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson make their livings off of keeping the race war alive in America, which means using the slightest hint of bigotry as a verbal cudgel to match the real cudgels carried in the 2008 presidential election and the 2010 midterms. It would seem that some have developed an extremely thin skin where the slightest provocation is met with a violent retort, leading those in a position to do something about it impotent.
There is a level of freedom for all in the United States that is unknown in the history of the world and it is being taken for granted on a daily basis by those who take their livings from those who earned it because they somehow feel entitled to it. Most are guilty to one extent or another, never thinking how easily those freedoms could slip away.
Though nothing was mentioned of it in the story, organizers most likely did not adequately inform parents of the nature of the exercise. I think parents should have been included in the exercise, made to kneel with their children as a reminder of the things America has left behind and how easily things can slide back. To know what it feels like for a human being to be bought and sold as property, because we have forgotten. All of the benefits that people vote themselves from government coffers come from somewhere....someone... productive. To do that is no different than stealing the portion of that persons life it took them to earn it.
Thursday, October 10, 2013
What Makes A Crime More Of A Crime?
A couple days ago, I ran across the story of three black soldiers accused of killing a white soldier. Following is a quote that appeared in the USA Today story on the incident:
Matthew Barnes, a soldier who was holding Geike in his arms when he died, told KIRO-TV that someone in the car had yelled "cracker" and "white" at the soldiers numerous times.
"I yelled back, 'So this is how we treat combat veterans now?' But we weren't looking for trouble, and trouble found us anyway," Barnes said. "And when police find them, I hope to God we get justice."
You can read the rest of the USA Today story here.
The story I first read is here.
The following quote is from the NY Daily News.
"Where's the outrage?" Turnipseed said. "If this had been the other way around — black victims — then this would have been a hate crime."
Lindquist said the facts didn’t support a hate crime charge. Two of Hill’s accused accomplices told investigators race wasn’t a factor and Geike’s friends said there weren’t any more slurs after the initial heckling, Lindquist said.
Police also said that race wasn't an issue, but didn't elaborate.
I'd like to hear some elaboration.
When I originally viewed the story, it stated that the attack was being viewed as a possible hate crime. When I went back to it several hours later, it had been updated to state that, while investigators would not explain why, it appeared that race was not a motivating factor. Apparently, on the word of the murderer's accomplices, coupled with the fact that the other party involved stated that the slurs ended before the stabbing occurred, it is determined that this is somehow not to be tried as a hate crime. Would he have had to have been calling him a cracker WHILE he was stabbing him for it to qualify? Does this mean, while during the commission of a so called hate crime, if a white person were not calling someone a nigger or spic or fag WHILE they were doing it, their crime should not have been classified as a hate crime and their sentences reduced or their convictions overturned? Does anyone else think this has devolved into utter ridiculousness? Is this how hate crime laws in our country are to be applied now? A hate crime is only a hate crime if its a white person committing it against some other minority? Am I asking too many questions that so called smart people can't answer rationally?
Hate crime laws began in the United States in 1968 with the adoption of the Civil Rights Act, which allows federal prosecution of anyone who "willingly injures, intimidates or interferes with another person, or attempts to do so, by force because of the other person's race, color, religion or national origin". These basic qualifiers have been amended to include gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, and homelessness. These are all feel good laws meant to protect "minorities" from undue aggression from the "majority". The problem comes in its application...these laws are not applied equitably, as evidenced in this recent case. Hate crime charges should obviously be pursued in this case, but are not. Is it any wonder then, that this inequity of application further widens the racial divide in this nation? Is that the goal? If these laws are going to be on the books they should be applied evenly, across the board. If they are not, those involved in this investigation should themselves be investigated to determine why these laws are being willfully misapplied.
I personally do not condone hate laws, as motive does not make a crime MORE of a crime. That being said, they are now the law of the land. If they are to be so, then they should be applied more judiciously, in EVERY applicable case. Justice is supposed to be blind. With these kinds of laws being misapplied, the blindfold has been ripped off and the scales thrown out...leaving justice in the hands of thieves.
Update: 10/23/2013
This video highlights the hypocrisy with which hate crime laws are prosecuted in this country.
Jeremiah Hill is being charged with first-degree murder; Cedarium Johnson and Ajoni Runnion-Bareford are being charged with rendering criminal assistance after helping dispose of the murder weapon. Johnson was released without bail; no mention was made of the driver or other passenger.
Matthew Barnes, a soldier who was holding Geike in his arms when he died, told KIRO-TV that someone in the car had yelled "cracker" and "white" at the soldiers numerous times.
"I yelled back, 'So this is how we treat combat veterans now?' But we weren't looking for trouble, and trouble found us anyway," Barnes said. "And when police find them, I hope to God we get justice."
You can read the rest of the USA Today story here.
The story I first read is here.
The following quote is from the NY Daily News.
"Where's the outrage?" Turnipseed said. "If this had been the other way around — black victims — then this would have been a hate crime."
Lindquist said the facts didn’t support a hate crime charge. Two of Hill’s accused accomplices told investigators race wasn’t a factor and Geike’s friends said there weren’t any more slurs after the initial heckling, Lindquist said.
Police also said that race wasn't an issue, but didn't elaborate.
I'd like to hear some elaboration.
When I originally viewed the story, it stated that the attack was being viewed as a possible hate crime. When I went back to it several hours later, it had been updated to state that, while investigators would not explain why, it appeared that race was not a motivating factor. Apparently, on the word of the murderer's accomplices, coupled with the fact that the other party involved stated that the slurs ended before the stabbing occurred, it is determined that this is somehow not to be tried as a hate crime. Would he have had to have been calling him a cracker WHILE he was stabbing him for it to qualify? Does this mean, while during the commission of a so called hate crime, if a white person were not calling someone a nigger or spic or fag WHILE they were doing it, their crime should not have been classified as a hate crime and their sentences reduced or their convictions overturned? Does anyone else think this has devolved into utter ridiculousness? Is this how hate crime laws in our country are to be applied now? A hate crime is only a hate crime if its a white person committing it against some other minority? Am I asking too many questions that so called smart people can't answer rationally?
Hate crime laws began in the United States in 1968 with the adoption of the Civil Rights Act, which allows federal prosecution of anyone who "willingly injures, intimidates or interferes with another person, or attempts to do so, by force because of the other person's race, color, religion or national origin". These basic qualifiers have been amended to include gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, and homelessness. These are all feel good laws meant to protect "minorities" from undue aggression from the "majority". The problem comes in its application...these laws are not applied equitably, as evidenced in this recent case. Hate crime charges should obviously be pursued in this case, but are not. Is it any wonder then, that this inequity of application further widens the racial divide in this nation? Is that the goal? If these laws are going to be on the books they should be applied evenly, across the board. If they are not, those involved in this investigation should themselves be investigated to determine why these laws are being willfully misapplied.
I personally do not condone hate laws, as motive does not make a crime MORE of a crime. That being said, they are now the law of the land. If they are to be so, then they should be applied more judiciously, in EVERY applicable case. Justice is supposed to be blind. With these kinds of laws being misapplied, the blindfold has been ripped off and the scales thrown out...leaving justice in the hands of thieves.
Update: 10/23/2013
This video highlights the hypocrisy with which hate crime laws are prosecuted in this country.
Jeremiah Hill is being charged with first-degree murder; Cedarium Johnson and Ajoni Runnion-Bareford are being charged with rendering criminal assistance after helping dispose of the murder weapon. Johnson was released without bail; no mention was made of the driver or other passenger.
Tuesday, October 1, 2013
The Story Of Your Enslavement
This fellow, Stefan Molyneux, has something to say about the institutions that people tend to enslave themselves with. It makes a lot of sense. People have always found a way somehow to take other peoples capital, be it monetary or intellectual, from the obvious smash and grab to some not so obvious psychological cons and everything in between. One of the most insidious ways is through the government which we insist we must have to provide for us. The problem comes in when we find a way to vote ourselves benefits from the public coffers. What people tend to forget or perhaps purposefully ignore is that the government cannot give anyone anything it has not first taken from someone else at the point of a gun in the guise of the IRS. That enslaves both those who work for and earn the money which is taken and those who take that money, who then find themselves unable or unwilling to do anything other than continue to vote for those who will continue to take money from those who earn it and give to those who don't. The FairTax is the beginning of a solution to this problem.
Friday, September 20, 2013
Net Neutrality
Net neutrality, on the surface, seems like a no-brainer. In essence, the idea of net neutrality is that no company's or web site's data should receive priority over any others based solely on content. The idea is to prevent tier 1 ISP's from throttling data or charging a premium to competing services based solely on content. The issue is...how is this to be achieved? I am generally not in favor of government regulation, as over regulation is typically the death knell of any business. But can the free market, in this case, be relied on to police itself? Generally, in a competitive marketplace, businesses will take whatever advantages they can to grab a larger market share and regulation is not needed to ensure these businesses play fair. The story is slightly different with ISP's however, as there are a limited number and choices are often dictated by geography. This places tier 1 providers in a position to be able to set prices by whatever criteria is supported in a particular market, leading to less consumer choice. However, for the government to step in and regulate these providers is seen by many, myself included, as a power grab. The following video gives more detail on issues surrounding net neutrality.
Monday, September 16, 2013
Gun Control....Come On People, Let's Think About This A Minute
I tend to be an idealistic, hopeless romantic at heart. The fact that guns exist at all kinda sucks. Pretty much all they're good for is killing things. Unless you like target practice, which I happen to. The problem with gun control laws, ANY gun control laws, is this....they only serve to remove guns from the hands of people who have no desire to use them for anything illegal. Crooks are crooks. They couldn't give a flying fornication about gun control laws. Gang bangers are not going to refer to the laws in their municipality before their drive by. A nutcase is not going to make sure that the magazine in his weapon does not exceed the capacity allowed by law before opening fire at an elementary school.
Law abiding citizens have a right to defend themselves against those who wish to take their lives or property and something like an obligation to protect the innocent or those unable to protect themselves. Its a sad state of affairs that it has come down to this, but the fact of the matter is that there are people out there who will shoot a person without a second thought if it will gain them the $20 they have in their wallet. And now, those who wish NOT to have their life taken for a pittance find themselves having to defend themselves also from a government that is supposed to ensure that those types of things don't happen. There are many in our government and some in the public that seem to have forgotten that America's is a government by the people and for the people, not people by the government and for the government.
The second amendment states "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." The operative portion of this amendment is "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." At the time the Constitution was written, America had no standing Army. Defense of American interests at that time lay with volunteers, which were comprised of every able bodied man and boy. It was not imagined then that a full time standing Army would be required, however it was recognized that not only might people need to be called upon to defend the country from foreign invaders, they would also require means to defend themselves from domestic threats and were all too familiar with the effects of an oppressive government. They understood that every tyranny began in part with the removal of weapons from the hands of law abiding citizens. They also understood that they could do next to nothing to prevent weapons from falling into the hands of criminals. The only way to prevent both an oppressive government and allow people the freedom to defend themselves is to allow responsible citizens the right to bear arms.
I do understand the argument in favor of gun control....it has to start somewhere. But the answer is not to take guns from responsible citizens, leaving them defenseless against both criminals and their government and increasing black market demand for weapons. In fact, it's quite the opposite...it has been proven that cities with liberal gun laws have lower violent crime rates than those with heavily restrictive regulations. The answer seems to me, then, to make sure more responsible people have access to guns and that criminals are well aware they have them. And while I have no particular issue with those who choose not to own or carry guns on moral or religious grounds, and actually commend them for their choice, it is not their place to take any action that would infringe on others' rights to defend themselves, practice perfectly legal recreational activities, or even simply to own guns because they can.
Law abiding citizens have a right to defend themselves against those who wish to take their lives or property and something like an obligation to protect the innocent or those unable to protect themselves. Its a sad state of affairs that it has come down to this, but the fact of the matter is that there are people out there who will shoot a person without a second thought if it will gain them the $20 they have in their wallet. And now, those who wish NOT to have their life taken for a pittance find themselves having to defend themselves also from a government that is supposed to ensure that those types of things don't happen. There are many in our government and some in the public that seem to have forgotten that America's is a government by the people and for the people, not people by the government and for the government.
The second amendment states "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." The operative portion of this amendment is "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." At the time the Constitution was written, America had no standing Army. Defense of American interests at that time lay with volunteers, which were comprised of every able bodied man and boy. It was not imagined then that a full time standing Army would be required, however it was recognized that not only might people need to be called upon to defend the country from foreign invaders, they would also require means to defend themselves from domestic threats and were all too familiar with the effects of an oppressive government. They understood that every tyranny began in part with the removal of weapons from the hands of law abiding citizens. They also understood that they could do next to nothing to prevent weapons from falling into the hands of criminals. The only way to prevent both an oppressive government and allow people the freedom to defend themselves is to allow responsible citizens the right to bear arms.
I do understand the argument in favor of gun control....it has to start somewhere. But the answer is not to take guns from responsible citizens, leaving them defenseless against both criminals and their government and increasing black market demand for weapons. In fact, it's quite the opposite...it has been proven that cities with liberal gun laws have lower violent crime rates than those with heavily restrictive regulations. The answer seems to me, then, to make sure more responsible people have access to guns and that criminals are well aware they have them. And while I have no particular issue with those who choose not to own or carry guns on moral or religious grounds, and actually commend them for their choice, it is not their place to take any action that would infringe on others' rights to defend themselves, practice perfectly legal recreational activities, or even simply to own guns because they can.
Wednesday, September 4, 2013
How American Environmentalists Help Cause Wars In The Mideast
Whoa...hold on...wait a minute, you say...environmentalists here in the States are mostly peace loving tree huggers who would no sooner swat a fly than start a war. How is it they could possibly be responsible for starting a conflict anywhere? Unintended consequences, that's how. You see, environmentalists here in the States, while sipping lattes, texting on their iPhones, and driving their hybrid cars with their knees don't want nary a drop of oil spilled anywhere near their backyard. Or their neighbors backyard. Or anywhere on US soil that isn't already being drilled. They obviously haven't seen the mines the heavy metals for the batteries in their hybrid cars come from, or considered the acid rain caused by sulphur dioxide emissions generated in the production of said hybrid vehicles. They also fail to take into account that the batteries in their hybrids will most likely need replacement at some point during the life of the vehicle, doubling the environmental impact of production of the batteries for that vehicle. Anyhow, I've gone a little off course.
How is it, you wonder, that environmentalists start wars? The fact of the matter is, no matter how many hybrids there are on the street, the US still needs oil. A LOT of it. The United States, in 2012, consumed somewhere on the order of 6.7 BILLION barrels of oil. Of that total, approximately 3.9 billion barrels were imported, with 1.6 billion barrels coming from OPEC countries. And that's just what the United States imports. Worldwide, OPEC member countries export approximately 12.2 billion barrels of oil annually.
Of the twelve current OPEC members, six are Middle Eastern countries....and Libya, which is actually in North Africa but whose politics and culture are intertwined with Israel, Egypt, and the rest of the Mid East. Iran is one of the six Mid East OPEC members, but since we don't import oil from them, their figures are not included in US imports, just in worldwide exports. Their politics, however, figure heavily in the region, and they rank fourth in OPEC exports.
And this has exactly what to do with the price of tea in China? Well, for starters, that means political stability in the region is of paramount importance to the global oil supply. Anything that threatens stability in the region, internal or external, threatens not only our oil supplies but supplies for the rest of the world. That means that any action the US takes in the region is not only in the interest of the United States but in the world's interest. It behooves everyone to ensure tranquility in the region because like it or not, until an alternative is found, the Spice must flow (that's a "Dune" reference, in case you don't know). Unfortunately, the United States seems to be the only country with the balls to stand up and do anything about it, since folks over there have a tendency to behead anyone who disagrees with them.
For those protesters out there, the Iraq war was, in part, a war for oil....just not really for the US. Of the approximately 3.2 million barrels per day produced there, a mere 321,000 per day come our way. So the end result of the war over there, for all the hooting and hollering, helped to secure the rest of the world about 2.9 million barrels of oil a day, removed a crackpot dictator who gassed his own people, and secured the US basically squat in the way of oil.
In understanding why it is so important at this time for the US to help maintain stability in the Mideast region and the role of the environmental movement in keeping the United States involved, it is important to first understand the process by which crude oil is produced and refined, and the various definitions of reserves. According to the United States Energy Information Administration, US proved crude oil reserves stood at 29 billion barrels as of December 31, 2011, not counting the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. There is a difference, though, between proved reserves and technically recoverable resources. Oilindependents.org has more information on these differences, but in a nutshell, proved reserves count only those reserves with a 90% probability of economically viable recovery or existing extraction operations, while technically recoverable covers all the rest to varying degrees. Depending on the source, technically recoverable oil reserves in the United States stands somewhere between 218 billion to 1.4 trillion barrels. Even at the low end of the spectrum, at a 50% recovery rate, that's enough of the gooey black crap to supply our crude oil needs for 12-15 years at the current rate of consumption...plenty of time to supply our fuel needs until moving to a transition fuel like natural gas, then perhaps to an altogether different alternative such as hydrogen fuel cells. Natural gas conversions for automobiles are relatively inexpensive at about $800-$1200 for parts, it burns about 80% cleaner than gas or diesel and much of the infrastructure is already in place...there are propane cylinder exchanges set up at nearly every gas station in this area...a natural gas cylinder exchange would be just as simple, and much of the natural gas produced in the United States is burned off as a waste byproduct of existing drilling operations.
Thing is though, to get at those reserves, we gotta drill. Or frack. Or horizontal bore. Or whatfrackingever. We have to get to it. I'm not exactly sure what logic in environmentalists' minds makes it perfectly ok to drill in the sands of the Saudi Arabian desert but not Utah. These same people claim to be motivated by global climate concerns, yet appear to be under the mistaken impression that Utah or ANWAR does not exist on the same globe as Saudi Arabia or Kuwait. That the Gulf of Mexico is somehow in a dimension separate from the Persian Gulf. Oil extraction technology has grown by leaps and bounds in the last 20 years or so, and has become much safer and environmentally responsible despite the couple of recently sensationalized accidents. And the fact of the matter is...alternative energy sources are closer than most people realize. Development of these sources, given historical advances, should be seen in the next 20-30 years, and the use of cleaner transition fuels such as natural gas and biodiesel combinations(cooking oil) would contribute to reducing our need to drill even further. These conversions are something that can be done with relative ease right now...not in 10 or 15 years.
Yet we still need additional crude oil to meet demand in the meantime. The United States imports approximately 60% of the crude oil it consumes, with over 1/3 of that from the Mideast. More than that, much of the world is dependent on Mideast oil and therefore dependent on their regional stability. As I mentioned before, the United States seems to be, for all the accusations of American imperialism, the only country with the testicular fortitude to go in and bash heads so the rest of the world can drive their Fiats and Saabs. The environmental movement in the States, well intentioned on its face, is the main factor of resistance to US oil independence, necessitating our interference in Mideast politics. I'm fairly certain they don't see it that way; I can well understand their concerns as well. Everyone has been struck by images of oil covered pelicans and sea otters and I want to see this no more than anyone. Yet something must be done. All that remains is to do it.
How is it, you wonder, that environmentalists start wars? The fact of the matter is, no matter how many hybrids there are on the street, the US still needs oil. A LOT of it. The United States, in 2012, consumed somewhere on the order of 6.7 BILLION barrels of oil. Of that total, approximately 3.9 billion barrels were imported, with 1.6 billion barrels coming from OPEC countries. And that's just what the United States imports. Worldwide, OPEC member countries export approximately 12.2 billion barrels of oil annually.
Of the twelve current OPEC members, six are Middle Eastern countries....and Libya, which is actually in North Africa but whose politics and culture are intertwined with Israel, Egypt, and the rest of the Mid East. Iran is one of the six Mid East OPEC members, but since we don't import oil from them, their figures are not included in US imports, just in worldwide exports. Their politics, however, figure heavily in the region, and they rank fourth in OPEC exports.
And this has exactly what to do with the price of tea in China? Well, for starters, that means political stability in the region is of paramount importance to the global oil supply. Anything that threatens stability in the region, internal or external, threatens not only our oil supplies but supplies for the rest of the world. That means that any action the US takes in the region is not only in the interest of the United States but in the world's interest. It behooves everyone to ensure tranquility in the region because like it or not, until an alternative is found, the Spice must flow (that's a "Dune" reference, in case you don't know). Unfortunately, the United States seems to be the only country with the balls to stand up and do anything about it, since folks over there have a tendency to behead anyone who disagrees with them.
For those protesters out there, the Iraq war was, in part, a war for oil....just not really for the US. Of the approximately 3.2 million barrels per day produced there, a mere 321,000 per day come our way. So the end result of the war over there, for all the hooting and hollering, helped to secure the rest of the world about 2.9 million barrels of oil a day, removed a crackpot dictator who gassed his own people, and secured the US basically squat in the way of oil.
In understanding why it is so important at this time for the US to help maintain stability in the Mideast region and the role of the environmental movement in keeping the United States involved, it is important to first understand the process by which crude oil is produced and refined, and the various definitions of reserves. According to the United States Energy Information Administration, US proved crude oil reserves stood at 29 billion barrels as of December 31, 2011, not counting the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. There is a difference, though, between proved reserves and technically recoverable resources. Oilindependents.org has more information on these differences, but in a nutshell, proved reserves count only those reserves with a 90% probability of economically viable recovery or existing extraction operations, while technically recoverable covers all the rest to varying degrees. Depending on the source, technically recoverable oil reserves in the United States stands somewhere between 218 billion to 1.4 trillion barrels. Even at the low end of the spectrum, at a 50% recovery rate, that's enough of the gooey black crap to supply our crude oil needs for 12-15 years at the current rate of consumption...plenty of time to supply our fuel needs until moving to a transition fuel like natural gas, then perhaps to an altogether different alternative such as hydrogen fuel cells. Natural gas conversions for automobiles are relatively inexpensive at about $800-$1200 for parts, it burns about 80% cleaner than gas or diesel and much of the infrastructure is already in place...there are propane cylinder exchanges set up at nearly every gas station in this area...a natural gas cylinder exchange would be just as simple, and much of the natural gas produced in the United States is burned off as a waste byproduct of existing drilling operations.
Thing is though, to get at those reserves, we gotta drill. Or frack. Or horizontal bore. Or whatfrackingever. We have to get to it. I'm not exactly sure what logic in environmentalists' minds makes it perfectly ok to drill in the sands of the Saudi Arabian desert but not Utah. These same people claim to be motivated by global climate concerns, yet appear to be under the mistaken impression that Utah or ANWAR does not exist on the same globe as Saudi Arabia or Kuwait. That the Gulf of Mexico is somehow in a dimension separate from the Persian Gulf. Oil extraction technology has grown by leaps and bounds in the last 20 years or so, and has become much safer and environmentally responsible despite the couple of recently sensationalized accidents. And the fact of the matter is...alternative energy sources are closer than most people realize. Development of these sources, given historical advances, should be seen in the next 20-30 years, and the use of cleaner transition fuels such as natural gas and biodiesel combinations(cooking oil) would contribute to reducing our need to drill even further. These conversions are something that can be done with relative ease right now...not in 10 or 15 years.
Yet we still need additional crude oil to meet demand in the meantime. The United States imports approximately 60% of the crude oil it consumes, with over 1/3 of that from the Mideast. More than that, much of the world is dependent on Mideast oil and therefore dependent on their regional stability. As I mentioned before, the United States seems to be, for all the accusations of American imperialism, the only country with the testicular fortitude to go in and bash heads so the rest of the world can drive their Fiats and Saabs. The environmental movement in the States, well intentioned on its face, is the main factor of resistance to US oil independence, necessitating our interference in Mideast politics. I'm fairly certain they don't see it that way; I can well understand their concerns as well. Everyone has been struck by images of oil covered pelicans and sea otters and I want to see this no more than anyone. Yet something must be done. All that remains is to do it.
Tuesday, August 20, 2013
Message To Whitehouse.gov....
The following is a portion of an email I received and responded to from Whitehouse.gov....
Learn more about the President's plan for the economy, then let the country know that you believe that America works best not when it grows from the top-down, but when it grows from the middle-out.
....and here is the reply I sent....
We can take an enormous leap in the direction proposed by passing the FairTax bill (HR25/S122), repealing the 16th Amendment and abolishing the IRS. Continue taking the leap by repealing Obamacare and beginning a thorough reform of the healthcare system...not just methods of payment. Also helpful would be to turn control of Social Security retirement accounts over to individuals, privatizing those accounts, and establishing an assistance program for those unable or unwilling to manage those accounts. Alternatively, make every member of Congress and the House of Representatives substitute their private retirement accounts for the same system that is now forced on their constituents. Bet we'd see some "Change We Can Believe In" then.
I've not received a response from them yet. Big surprise.
For all the grand ideas and flowery talk, Obama's ideas (which aren't really Obama's ideas) won't work because they fail to address the underlying issues. They're simply a big band aid placed over gaping wounds that need major surgery to heal. What people seem to fail to comprehend is that government largesse is not infinite and comes from somewhere. It comes from people who work and earn a living not only for themselves, but for those that their taxes go to support. Forty seven percent of Americans have no tax liability whatsoever. And a good number of that 47% receive a tax "refund"....of someone else's money.See my previous post here.
When you boil everything down to brass tacks, the number of people in this country who work for their living are beginning to be outnumbered by the number of people who take their living from those who work. Don't get me wrong...I'm not so heartless that I don't realize the problems some people face in finding employment, whether it be physical or mental disability or simply being down on their luck. Part of the problem is, though, that our "compassionate" social programs have made it a little too easy just to stay at home, spit out a kid, and collect a check for it. The effect that has, in the long run, is to increase poverty by making it too easy to collect a government check. And the people who receive these checks vote...do you think they're going to vote to end their government checks?
Speak Up to Support the Middle Class
President Obama’s vision for our economy builds on the cornerstones of what it means to be middle class in America: Job security. A good education for all ages. A home to call your own. Health care when you get sick. A secure retirement even if you’re not rich. And Americans still trapped in poverty deserve a chance to work their way into the middle class, too.Learn more about the President's plan for the economy, then let the country know that you believe that America works best not when it grows from the top-down, but when it grows from the middle-out.
....and here is the reply I sent....
We can take an enormous leap in the direction proposed by passing the FairTax bill (HR25/S122), repealing the 16th Amendment and abolishing the IRS. Continue taking the leap by repealing Obamacare and beginning a thorough reform of the healthcare system...not just methods of payment. Also helpful would be to turn control of Social Security retirement accounts over to individuals, privatizing those accounts, and establishing an assistance program for those unable or unwilling to manage those accounts. Alternatively, make every member of Congress and the House of Representatives substitute their private retirement accounts for the same system that is now forced on their constituents. Bet we'd see some "Change We Can Believe In" then.
I've not received a response from them yet. Big surprise.
For all the grand ideas and flowery talk, Obama's ideas (which aren't really Obama's ideas) won't work because they fail to address the underlying issues. They're simply a big band aid placed over gaping wounds that need major surgery to heal. What people seem to fail to comprehend is that government largesse is not infinite and comes from somewhere. It comes from people who work and earn a living not only for themselves, but for those that their taxes go to support. Forty seven percent of Americans have no tax liability whatsoever. And a good number of that 47% receive a tax "refund"....of someone else's money.See my previous post here.
When you boil everything down to brass tacks, the number of people in this country who work for their living are beginning to be outnumbered by the number of people who take their living from those who work. Don't get me wrong...I'm not so heartless that I don't realize the problems some people face in finding employment, whether it be physical or mental disability or simply being down on their luck. Part of the problem is, though, that our "compassionate" social programs have made it a little too easy just to stay at home, spit out a kid, and collect a check for it. The effect that has, in the long run, is to increase poverty by making it too easy to collect a government check. And the people who receive these checks vote...do you think they're going to vote to end their government checks?
Tuesday, July 23, 2013
FairTax, FairTax, FairTax.....
I have been a proponent of the FairTax since I first heard of it in 2002 or 2003. It proposes to eliminate all federal income and payroll taxes on individuals and corporations and replace them with a national retail sales tax on all goods and services. It would also replace the IRS with an Excise Tax Bureau and a Sales Tax Bureau within the Department of the Treasury. Introduced in 1999 by John Linder, it is currently floating around the House of Representatives as HR. 25 and the Senate as S. 122. A sunset provision has been provided to repeal the 16th Amendment eight years after implementation of the FairTax, else the FairTax will expire.
I don't suppose there are many alive today that remember, but America did not always have an income tax. A brief history lesson: up until 1862, America relied mainly on internal taxes on distilled spirits, carriages, refined sugar, tobacco and snuff, property sold at auction, corporate bonds, and slaves, and on external taxes such as tariffs on imported goods. The Civil War brought about a need for increased revenue, thus was the first income tax implemented. In 1868 taxes were refocused on tobacco and alcohol and in 1872 the income tax was eliminated. It returned in 1894 and 1895, and then declared unconstitutional as the income tax violates Article 1. Believe it or not there was actually a ten year period, between 1802 and 1812, where there were NO FEDERAL TAXES AT ALL. I guess that was because we weren't fighting with anybody and nearly everyone worked for a living. The income tax, via the 16th Amendment to the Constitution, was first proposed in 1909 by Nebraska senator Norris Brown. It was passed by the Senate on July 12, 1909 then was kicked around by the House of Representatives and the States for the next couple of years. It achieved ratification by three fourths of the States on February 25, 1913 and was enacted shortly thereafter. Learn more about the income tax here and about the history of the 16th Amendment here.
Our current tax system is broken. No one, not even IRS employees, fully understands it. It is overly complex, burdensome, and easy to manipulate. No one even seems to be sure how long it is, with estimates ranging from 2500 to 2.5 million pages and and anywhere between 1 million and 500 million words. The closest I could get to a concrete number is 71,684 pages. That's just ridonkulous. Hidden compliance costs are estimated by one source as between $215-987 billion annually. It is used frequently by politicians to provide benefits to key lobbying groups and corporate backers and as a way to regulate and modify individual behavior. It has to stop.
The way to stop it is the FairTax. As explained before, the FairTax proposes to eliminate all federal withholding and payroll taxes and replace them with an across the board, no deductions or loopholes tax on new sales and services at the inclusive rate of 23%. Please note the new part there...used items will not be taxed. This means while keeping 100% of your paycheck, for every $100 spent, $23 of that will be tax. The tax will be included in the price of the item, so the price you see on the shelf will be the price you pay at the register. The same applies across the board, from groceries to gadgets and gizmos to real estate and that new car you've been eyeballing. But wait a second, you think....won't that added tax increase the cost of those items out of my range? I mean, we're talking about adding 23% onto the cost of goods whose prices are already high. The answer to that question is no, it won't, at least in most cases, and the reason is this: a dirty little secret most companies don't want you to know and most people don't take the time to learn about is that corporations don't pay taxes. Yup, you read that right. Zip, zilch, nada. So how do they get away with it, with the United States having some of the highest corporate tax rates in the world? They pass their tax costs off on consumers. By estimating their annual tax liability, they then adjust the cost of their goods to compensate. That means you, the consumer, are the one paying those taxes.
A short lesson on embedded taxes: in every item purchased today, there is what's commonly referred to as embedded taxes. Similar to the European Value Added Tax (VAT), embedded taxes are added at every point of production and distribution from raw material to finished product on the shelf. The company that procures or produces the raw material adds to the cost of material they provide to the manufacturer, the manufacturer adds their cost to the distributor, the distributor adds their cost to the wholesaler, and the wholesaler adds theirs to the retailer. After tacking on their taxes, the retailer then passes their cost on to you, the consumer. The total of these taxes amounts to an estimated 22% of the finished product, which, under the FairTax, would vanish. Poof...gone, leaving the consumer paying the same amount as before, only with 100% of their paychecks. Well, you ask, won't these greedy corporations try to hold on to that surplus and not pass those savings on to their customers? The answer, initially, may be yes. There's a good chance that companies will attempt to hold on to those windfall gains as long as they can. That's where a free market economy comes into play. As soon as a competitor tries to grab a larger market share by lowering prices, the next will have to also, just to remain competitive, leading me to believe that we would see an initial surge in prices, followed quickly by a sharp drop....of approximately 22%.
As an added bonus, it would also tax illegal activity. As I'm sure most are aware, thieves and drug dealers don't pay income taxes. But they all need groceries, cars, and Xboxes. Meanwhile, many take advantage of social services offered such as food stamps, SSI disability, and healthcare services. It is estimated that the black market economy in the US may comprise as much as 10% of the GNP. In 2012, that worked out to approximately 1.6 TRILLION dollars. That's an enormous amount of untaxed revenue.
It would also go a long way towards solving the illegal immigration problem, as many of the immigrants who are not paying taxes, yet still receiving social benefits, would now be paying for the benefits they receive, taking the burden off the shoulders of legal taxpayers.
Not to mention the repatriation of approximately $11 trillion held in offshore tax shelters. Now THAT'S a stimulus package.
To find out more go to the FairTax website. Neal Boortz has also written a couple of books on the subject..."The FairTax Book" and "FairTax: The Truth: Answering The Critics". Both are available at Amazon and Barnes and Noble.
I don't suppose there are many alive today that remember, but America did not always have an income tax. A brief history lesson: up until 1862, America relied mainly on internal taxes on distilled spirits, carriages, refined sugar, tobacco and snuff, property sold at auction, corporate bonds, and slaves, and on external taxes such as tariffs on imported goods. The Civil War brought about a need for increased revenue, thus was the first income tax implemented. In 1868 taxes were refocused on tobacco and alcohol and in 1872 the income tax was eliminated. It returned in 1894 and 1895, and then declared unconstitutional as the income tax violates Article 1. Believe it or not there was actually a ten year period, between 1802 and 1812, where there were NO FEDERAL TAXES AT ALL. I guess that was because we weren't fighting with anybody and nearly everyone worked for a living. The income tax, via the 16th Amendment to the Constitution, was first proposed in 1909 by Nebraska senator Norris Brown. It was passed by the Senate on July 12, 1909 then was kicked around by the House of Representatives and the States for the next couple of years. It achieved ratification by three fourths of the States on February 25, 1913 and was enacted shortly thereafter. Learn more about the income tax here and about the history of the 16th Amendment here.
Our current tax system is broken. No one, not even IRS employees, fully understands it. It is overly complex, burdensome, and easy to manipulate. No one even seems to be sure how long it is, with estimates ranging from 2500 to 2.5 million pages and and anywhere between 1 million and 500 million words. The closest I could get to a concrete number is 71,684 pages. That's just ridonkulous. Hidden compliance costs are estimated by one source as between $215-987 billion annually. It is used frequently by politicians to provide benefits to key lobbying groups and corporate backers and as a way to regulate and modify individual behavior. It has to stop.
The way to stop it is the FairTax. As explained before, the FairTax proposes to eliminate all federal withholding and payroll taxes and replace them with an across the board, no deductions or loopholes tax on new sales and services at the inclusive rate of 23%. Please note the new part there...used items will not be taxed. This means while keeping 100% of your paycheck, for every $100 spent, $23 of that will be tax. The tax will be included in the price of the item, so the price you see on the shelf will be the price you pay at the register. The same applies across the board, from groceries to gadgets and gizmos to real estate and that new car you've been eyeballing. But wait a second, you think....won't that added tax increase the cost of those items out of my range? I mean, we're talking about adding 23% onto the cost of goods whose prices are already high. The answer to that question is no, it won't, at least in most cases, and the reason is this: a dirty little secret most companies don't want you to know and most people don't take the time to learn about is that corporations don't pay taxes. Yup, you read that right. Zip, zilch, nada. So how do they get away with it, with the United States having some of the highest corporate tax rates in the world? They pass their tax costs off on consumers. By estimating their annual tax liability, they then adjust the cost of their goods to compensate. That means you, the consumer, are the one paying those taxes.
A short lesson on embedded taxes: in every item purchased today, there is what's commonly referred to as embedded taxes. Similar to the European Value Added Tax (VAT), embedded taxes are added at every point of production and distribution from raw material to finished product on the shelf. The company that procures or produces the raw material adds to the cost of material they provide to the manufacturer, the manufacturer adds their cost to the distributor, the distributor adds their cost to the wholesaler, and the wholesaler adds theirs to the retailer. After tacking on their taxes, the retailer then passes their cost on to you, the consumer. The total of these taxes amounts to an estimated 22% of the finished product, which, under the FairTax, would vanish. Poof...gone, leaving the consumer paying the same amount as before, only with 100% of their paychecks. Well, you ask, won't these greedy corporations try to hold on to that surplus and not pass those savings on to their customers? The answer, initially, may be yes. There's a good chance that companies will attempt to hold on to those windfall gains as long as they can. That's where a free market economy comes into play. As soon as a competitor tries to grab a larger market share by lowering prices, the next will have to also, just to remain competitive, leading me to believe that we would see an initial surge in prices, followed quickly by a sharp drop....of approximately 22%.
As an added bonus, it would also tax illegal activity. As I'm sure most are aware, thieves and drug dealers don't pay income taxes. But they all need groceries, cars, and Xboxes. Meanwhile, many take advantage of social services offered such as food stamps, SSI disability, and healthcare services. It is estimated that the black market economy in the US may comprise as much as 10% of the GNP. In 2012, that worked out to approximately 1.6 TRILLION dollars. That's an enormous amount of untaxed revenue.
It would also go a long way towards solving the illegal immigration problem, as many of the immigrants who are not paying taxes, yet still receiving social benefits, would now be paying for the benefits they receive, taking the burden off the shoulders of legal taxpayers.
Not to mention the repatriation of approximately $11 trillion held in offshore tax shelters. Now THAT'S a stimulus package.
To find out more go to the FairTax website. Neal Boortz has also written a couple of books on the subject..."The FairTax Book" and "FairTax: The Truth: Answering The Critics". Both are available at Amazon and Barnes and Noble.
Monday, July 15, 2013
Here's What Neal Boortz Has To Say.....
about the George Zimmerman verdict. He touches on some points I missed and does a good job of it.
http://www.wsbradio.com/weblogs/nealz-nuze/2013/jul/15/zimmerman-verdict/
http://www.wsbradio.com/weblogs/nealz-nuze/2013/jul/15/zimmerman-verdict/
George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin Update
I highly suggest, before reading this post and jumping to any conclusions, reading the Wikipedia article
on the Trayvon Martin shooting. It offers a fairly unbiased view of the
facts in the case without spin from the media or public.
Saturday night, around 10:00 P.M., George Zimmerman was found not guilty on the manslaughter and second degree murder charges against him, hopefully bringing closure to a situation that was tragic from the outset. We now, however, must wait for the reaction from the black community, many of whom I'm certain feel that justice was not served in this case. In this article from Jesse Lee Peterson, he describes what he calls black racism and how its become such a rampant problem in America. I won't go so far as to say that black racism killed Trayvon Martin, as he does, but I will say that his death was the culmination of a series of incredibly unfortunate events and George Zimmerman was put on trial almost exclusively due to outrage from the black community. See my previous post here. The issue has become so devisive that whites are afraid to take a stand against blacks even when the stand is warranted. My brother was fired from his job of several years as produce/deli manager at a grocery store when he reprimanded a junior black female employee for having fingernails that were too long. Apparently, they were approaching 2" and she couldn't do anything because of it. After the reprimand, she brought a complaint of racism and sexism to their HR department, whereupon he was fired. This has gotten a little out of control. Don't take any of this to mean that I don't believe white racism exists in this country, because it does. I live in the South...I'm not blind and I'm not an idiot. Not completely anyway. But it's not nearly as widespread as some would have you believe, and there is as much, if not more, racism among blacks for whites as there is among whites for blacks, especially among the youth. You may have noticed that nowhere in this post did I use the term "African-American" and you'll never hear me use it. The reason for that is because 99.999999999(whatever)percent of blacks in this country have never set foot in Africa. Nor have their parents. Or their parents parents, for that matter. I would just as soon call myself an English-Irish-German-Swedish-American. At least I've actually been to Germany. I have heard of only one instance where the use of the term African-American was justified. An exchange student from South Africa, he was running for Student Body president at his high school and used the term on his campaign posters. He was castigated and made to remove all the posters....because he was white.
Saturday night, around 10:00 P.M., George Zimmerman was found not guilty on the manslaughter and second degree murder charges against him, hopefully bringing closure to a situation that was tragic from the outset. We now, however, must wait for the reaction from the black community, many of whom I'm certain feel that justice was not served in this case. In this article from Jesse Lee Peterson, he describes what he calls black racism and how its become such a rampant problem in America. I won't go so far as to say that black racism killed Trayvon Martin, as he does, but I will say that his death was the culmination of a series of incredibly unfortunate events and George Zimmerman was put on trial almost exclusively due to outrage from the black community. See my previous post here. The issue has become so devisive that whites are afraid to take a stand against blacks even when the stand is warranted. My brother was fired from his job of several years as produce/deli manager at a grocery store when he reprimanded a junior black female employee for having fingernails that were too long. Apparently, they were approaching 2" and she couldn't do anything because of it. After the reprimand, she brought a complaint of racism and sexism to their HR department, whereupon he was fired. This has gotten a little out of control. Don't take any of this to mean that I don't believe white racism exists in this country, because it does. I live in the South...I'm not blind and I'm not an idiot. Not completely anyway. But it's not nearly as widespread as some would have you believe, and there is as much, if not more, racism among blacks for whites as there is among whites for blacks, especially among the youth. You may have noticed that nowhere in this post did I use the term "African-American" and you'll never hear me use it. The reason for that is because 99.999999999(whatever)percent of blacks in this country have never set foot in Africa. Nor have their parents. Or their parents parents, for that matter. I would just as soon call myself an English-Irish-German-Swedish-American. At least I've actually been to Germany. I have heard of only one instance where the use of the term African-American was justified. An exchange student from South Africa, he was running for Student Body president at his high school and used the term on his campaign posters. He was castigated and made to remove all the posters....because he was white.
Sunday, June 30, 2013
Here's A Rainbow Fish Who....
figured out how to make his own scales. His name is Willard Wigan, and he does micro-miniature sculpture. Pretty amazing.
Watch the YouTube video.
Watch the YouTube video.
Saturday, June 29, 2013
George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin
I've avoided until now mentioning anything about about the George Zimmerman trial now going on, but I just can't hold my tongue any longer. What happened was, any way you look at it, a tragedy. It would be nice to see that a tragedy doesn't turn to a travesty every once in a while. The travesty is this: George Zimmerman has already been tried and convicted, in the court of public opinion, before he ever set foot in the courtroom. What I would like to know, simply, is this....what new evidence, before the media chummed the water, was presented to make prosecutors reverse course on their "Stand Your Ground" decision? Who in the public actually took the time to research the facts of the case before they started wagging their chins and calling for blood? Does anyone now remember how facts of the case were misrepresented by the media just long enough to stir up a frenzy before they were "corrected"? Trayvon Martin is gone, and a jury will now decide the fate of George Zimmerman. That is all people tend to focus on, yet how many lives have been wrecked by the thousands of Tweets from ill-educated....Tweeters. There's an old Chinese form of torture called "Death by a Thousand Cuts". It is what its name implies. Such ignorant and misdirected statements are much like that and too often lead to innocent peoples lives being irreparably damaged, yet no one feels guilty because they're just words, spoken in anonymity and supposedly safe in numbers. Spike Lee even forced one family out of their home because he posted their address by mistake, rather than the Zimmerman's. Not that he had any right to post the Zimmerman's address...it was not the rest of his family who was involved. I think he apologized...that should about cover their cost of moving, right?
The Wikipedia article on the Trayvon Martin shooting is here. I suggest people read it, paying special attention to the sections 'Public Response' and 'Media Coverage'. I personally feel the the 'Media Coverage' section should have come before 'Public Response', as one led directly to the other...but they still did a very good job laying out just the facts of the case, which unfortunately nobody seemed to pay heed to before they opened their gobs.
An afterthought: Ask yourself a question and try to answer it as honestly and objectively as you can...would there have this much to-do had their races been reversed?
The Wikipedia article on the Trayvon Martin shooting is here. I suggest people read it, paying special attention to the sections 'Public Response' and 'Media Coverage'. I personally feel the the 'Media Coverage' section should have come before 'Public Response', as one led directly to the other...but they still did a very good job laying out just the facts of the case, which unfortunately nobody seemed to pay heed to before they opened their gobs.
An afterthought: Ask yourself a question and try to answer it as honestly and objectively as you can...would there have this much to-do had their races been reversed?
Tuesday, June 25, 2013
It's Fairly Common Practice For Banks...
anymore to charge a fee to non-account holders for check cashing services, on top of all the other fees they collect...overdraft, loan interest, minimum balance, debit transaction, etc. So it's pretty rare to find a bank that doesn't charge one, and I thought I'd found it at my local branch of M+S Bank. I'd taken in several checks, drawn from them, to be cashed and was pleasantly surprised not to be charged a fee. So surprised, in fact, I considered opening an account there. That was until yesterday, when I went in to cash a check from someone whom I'd gotten a check from before, and was informed it would be $10 to cash it. I inquired why I was being charged now for something I had had not been charged for before, and was told that it was bank policy to charge to cash paychecks. It wasn't a paycheck, actually...it was a personal loan drawn on a business account....but that's neither here nor there. I asked what the difference was between a paycheck and any other kind of check and the answer I received was "It's a paycheck.". I know....pretty good reasoning, right? When I asked for the banks written policy on check cashing or schedule of fees, they could not provide me with one...I was given some kind of runaround by the bank manager about looking for the email. I was then informed that if I left my name and address, they would mail me a copy....if I was allowed to have it. Yep, that's right...if a customer is ALLOWED to see a schedule of fees, they'll show it to ya. Wait, what?
I was pretty proud of myself through the whole thing with the manager...kept a pleasant demeanor, even laughed and made light of the situation a little in front of two rather cowed looking tellers. I kinda felt bad for them...I know what it's like being stuck in the middle of a very uncomfortable situation. I couldn't resist however, given my somewhat snarky nature when pressed, leaving without commending them for honorably adhering to the rules they were making up on the spot.
Update: I received their brochure on personal banking services today in the mail...and there is indeed a $10 fee for cashing checks...and everything else up to but not quite including allowing you the privilege of walking into the lobby. I'm not sure why they could not have simply handed me the brochure while I was there...needless to say I'll not be taking any of my business there and wouldn't suggest them to anyone else. Shame...my parents banked there for years and had no problems. Too bad they've gone so far downhill.
I was pretty proud of myself through the whole thing with the manager...kept a pleasant demeanor, even laughed and made light of the situation a little in front of two rather cowed looking tellers. I kinda felt bad for them...I know what it's like being stuck in the middle of a very uncomfortable situation. I couldn't resist however, given my somewhat snarky nature when pressed, leaving without commending them for honorably adhering to the rules they were making up on the spot.
Update: I received their brochure on personal banking services today in the mail...and there is indeed a $10 fee for cashing checks...and everything else up to but not quite including allowing you the privilege of walking into the lobby. I'm not sure why they could not have simply handed me the brochure while I was there...needless to say I'll not be taking any of my business there and wouldn't suggest them to anyone else. Shame...my parents banked there for years and had no problems. Too bad they've gone so far downhill.
Sunday, June 23, 2013
At One Time, I Saw The Internet As....
the single most important vehicle for ensuring peoples freedom to come along since, I don't know.....the Greeks invented democracy or the Romans a representative government. It allows a free exchange of ideas that even the most oppressive of governments have a hard time censuring. It is a tool for learning unlike anything the world has ever seen...vast amounts of knowledge available at the fingertips of anyone who cares to look for it.
Unfortunately, it also has a high potential for abuse....for spreading disinformation, as a vehicle for theft, as a slander rag. The internet has a long memory that is difficult, if not impossible, to erase. Many young people today place their entire lives on the internet for the world to see, never thinking what a future employer or spouse may think of what they find.
The problem is exacerbated by the fact that the internet's memory is malleable by those who may or may not have your best interests in mind or through simple error. Garbage in, garbage out-so its said.
I recently heard of a new money making trend on the internet...companies compile lists of public records such as arrests, marriages, divorces, and bankruptcies-place them in a searchable database, then charge you for their removal. They tout themselves as providers of a service in the public interest, allowing people to search for potential threats...yet their true aim is to extort money out of those who don't wish to have their mugshots spread across several sites. What these sites fail to mention is that this information is already available, for free, through state and local agencies with far more factual accuracy.
Case in point...in 2004 I was arrested for domestic abuse. My wife and I were going through a divorce at the time, and had gotten into an argument over possession of a book. I know...kinda silly, fighting over a book...but it was a rather nice old history book from the 1800's. Wasn't worth very much, but still...it looked nice in the collection. She wanted to take it with her, I wanted to keep it. I don't remember who grabbed it first, but lets just say for the sake of argument it was her. I didn't want her to take it, so I grabbed it also. We played tug of war with it for a bit, which I ended up winning. In the process, I pulled hard enough that she fell into me. I never laid a hand on her, mind you. My hands were on the book, and our only contact was when she was pulled into me. I don't think I even left my seat. Well....she started screaming bloody murder. Her new boyfriend, who was standing outside at the time helping move stuff out of our house, comes running in to see what was going on, and she starts claiming abuse. She then calls the cops and files a sworn complaint. I, being naïve to the ways of domestic abuse laws in Florida at the time, was perfectly open and honest with the officer who arrived, who tended to agree with me that the complaint was bullshit....and was then read my Miranda rights. Since I didn't see where any abuse had occurred, and having been forthright with the officer when he arrived, I didn't even begin to suspect that I'd be arrested. Little did I know at the time that in the state of Florida, any time a sworn complaint is filed for domestic abuse is filed, the party against whom the complaint is filed is spending the night in jail...no questions asked. All charges were later dropped due to lack of evidence, because, well, SURPRISE.....no abuse had actually occurred.
Fast forward to 2013, when I hear of this public record scam. I decide, since this arrest for nothing has come back to haunt me before, to search for myself and see what came up. To my great surprise, not only did I find myself (which I sort of expected), I found that they had most of the information wrong...at least the stuff you don't have to pay to see. All of my associates were correct...they had my mother and father, who are both dead, listed...as well as my ex-wife and a family friend. What they had wrong, however, was a little disturbing....aliases I've never used, places I've never lived....they even had my age wrong. All of that can only lead to a couple different conclusions - one, that they have my information grievously incorrect, or B, that all of my associates were somehow mistakenly connected to someone else. There are quite a few people in Florida with my name...it could happen. Unfortunately, I can't find out how they screwed up my life without paying $30 for a subscription to their site. I think they might just get an earful from me before too long.
Unfortunately, it also has a high potential for abuse....for spreading disinformation, as a vehicle for theft, as a slander rag. The internet has a long memory that is difficult, if not impossible, to erase. Many young people today place their entire lives on the internet for the world to see, never thinking what a future employer or spouse may think of what they find.
The problem is exacerbated by the fact that the internet's memory is malleable by those who may or may not have your best interests in mind or through simple error. Garbage in, garbage out-so its said.
I recently heard of a new money making trend on the internet...companies compile lists of public records such as arrests, marriages, divorces, and bankruptcies-place them in a searchable database, then charge you for their removal. They tout themselves as providers of a service in the public interest, allowing people to search for potential threats...yet their true aim is to extort money out of those who don't wish to have their mugshots spread across several sites. What these sites fail to mention is that this information is already available, for free, through state and local agencies with far more factual accuracy.
Case in point...in 2004 I was arrested for domestic abuse. My wife and I were going through a divorce at the time, and had gotten into an argument over possession of a book. I know...kinda silly, fighting over a book...but it was a rather nice old history book from the 1800's. Wasn't worth very much, but still...it looked nice in the collection. She wanted to take it with her, I wanted to keep it. I don't remember who grabbed it first, but lets just say for the sake of argument it was her. I didn't want her to take it, so I grabbed it also. We played tug of war with it for a bit, which I ended up winning. In the process, I pulled hard enough that she fell into me. I never laid a hand on her, mind you. My hands were on the book, and our only contact was when she was pulled into me. I don't think I even left my seat. Well....she started screaming bloody murder. Her new boyfriend, who was standing outside at the time helping move stuff out of our house, comes running in to see what was going on, and she starts claiming abuse. She then calls the cops and files a sworn complaint. I, being naïve to the ways of domestic abuse laws in Florida at the time, was perfectly open and honest with the officer who arrived, who tended to agree with me that the complaint was bullshit....and was then read my Miranda rights. Since I didn't see where any abuse had occurred, and having been forthright with the officer when he arrived, I didn't even begin to suspect that I'd be arrested. Little did I know at the time that in the state of Florida, any time a sworn complaint is filed for domestic abuse is filed, the party against whom the complaint is filed is spending the night in jail...no questions asked. All charges were later dropped due to lack of evidence, because, well, SURPRISE.....no abuse had actually occurred.
Fast forward to 2013, when I hear of this public record scam. I decide, since this arrest for nothing has come back to haunt me before, to search for myself and see what came up. To my great surprise, not only did I find myself (which I sort of expected), I found that they had most of the information wrong...at least the stuff you don't have to pay to see. All of my associates were correct...they had my mother and father, who are both dead, listed...as well as my ex-wife and a family friend. What they had wrong, however, was a little disturbing....aliases I've never used, places I've never lived....they even had my age wrong. All of that can only lead to a couple different conclusions - one, that they have my information grievously incorrect, or B, that all of my associates were somehow mistakenly connected to someone else. There are quite a few people in Florida with my name...it could happen. Unfortunately, I can't find out how they screwed up my life without paying $30 for a subscription to their site. I think they might just get an earful from me before too long.
Wednesday, June 19, 2013
America's Drug Problem
The other day, someone at a store in our town read that a methamphetamine lab had been found in an old farmhouse in the adjoining county and he asked me a rhetorical question, ''Why didn't we have a drug problem when you and I were growing up?'' I replied: I had a drug problem when I was young: I was drug to church on Sunday morning. I was drug to church for weddings and funerals. I was drug to family reunions and community socials no matter the weather. I was drug by my ears when I was disrespectful to adults. I was also drug to the woodshed when I disobeyed my parents, told a lie, brought home a bad report card, did not speak with respect, spoke ill of the teacher or the preacher, or if I didn't put forth my best effort in everything that was asked of me. I was drug to the kitchen sink to have my mouth washed out with soap if I uttered a profane four-letter word. I was drug out to pull weeds in mom's garden and flower beds and cockleburrs out of dad's fields. I was drug to the homes of family, friends, and neighbors to help out some poor soul who had no one to mow the yard, repair the clothesline, or chop some firewood; and, if my mother had ever known that I took a single dime as a tip for this kindness, she would have drug me back to the woodshed. Those drugs are still in my veins; and they affect my behavior in everything I do, say, and think. They are stronger than cocaine, crack, or heroin; and, if today's children had this kind of drug problem, America would be a better place.
From AmazingJokes.com
From AmazingJokes.com
Have You Ever Read....
"The Rainbow Fish" by Marcus Pfister? It tells the story of a fish covered with beautiful scales who, when asked by a smaller fish to give him one, rudely refuses. His other friends hear of this and thereafter refuse to play with him. He then asks his only remaining friend, the Starfish, what he should do, and the Starfish directs him to the Wise Octopus. The Octopus advises that he should consider sharing some of his scales. So he does, with one little fish, and feels much better about himself. Soon, the others hear that he's giving his scales away, and come around for theirs. Soon, eveyone has one shiny scale and everybody's happy and friends again.
I have a couple issues with this story. The first is Rainbow Fish's rude refusal....there's no need to be rude about it. More heinous than that is his friends abandonment of him....has he got to buy his friends with pieces of himself? Sharing is a wonderful quality and should be encouraged...however...should anyone be forced to share until there's nothing left of themselves? Until everyone is exactly the same, with no shining stars left to stand out? What sort of friends were they that they had to be bought with shiny things? If they wanted to share the rainbow fishes beauty, they could have looked about on their own...made themselves into what they wanted to be, what they wanted to look like without guilt tripping Rainbow Fish into giving himself away. What he did at first, his rude refusal, was wrong. His friends behavior, though, was atrocious. I'm jus' sayin'.
Thursday, June 13, 2013
Americas Worst Charities
You would think when you donate money to a charity it would actually go to help people who need it. Unfortunately, it seems many of these charities exist simply to pay administration and fund raising costs. Here is a list of the 50 worst...you may want to research the charities you give to beforehand.
America's Worst Charities
America's Worst Charities
I Am A Firm Supporter Of The Fair Tax.....
and so is this guy, Neal Boortz. He's retired now, but I've listened to his show for years. He's one of the main public supporters of the FairTax, which is sadly misrepresented by nearly everyone who supports our current tax system. So, I thought I'd throw a link out that helps clarify the situation, just a little, and hopefully point some in an alternate direction.
Neal Boortz on the FairTax
Neal Boortz on the FairTax
Wednesday, June 12, 2013
Trust and love....
have to go together. I've trusted people before, people I thought were my friends, only to find they were using me as a means to an end. I still try to fight my way through the past to find trust elsewhere...I know that not everyone is like that. But once your trust is broken so badly by the ones closest to you, its difficult to trust anyone again....to not think that they're somehow using you. That's not the person I was before I had something of an awakening....a clearer view of past events...a different perspective. I tended to trust almost everyone, implicitly, until they did something to break that trust. Now, it seems to be the other way around, and I don't like it too much.
People I considered close friends used me for what they could get from me then left when the going got tough...leaving me to stand or fall on my own. The crazy thing is...I still love them. I'll never stop...but because of them....I can't trust as I used to.
Tuesday, June 4, 2013
Nothing Happened Here.....
Why does it take one person standing in front of a row of tanks for people to wake up to an oppressive government? How can something like like that happen and be so easily forgotten? Now, the Chinese government is censoring such search terms as today, tomorrow, 6/4, May 35, etc...in an effort to curb any discussion of the Tiananmen Square Massacre. I suppose the Chinese government intends in this way to try to erase the national memory of the governments disgraceful actions. The responsibility of a free people is to ensure no one ever forgets......lest it happen again.
Do You Suppose....
that if the Montagues and Capulets hadn't been such assholes they might not have lost their kids? That perhaps had their children not felt chained by the people they love, both families may have benefitted greatly, rather than losing two beloved members? Is a family feud really worth that cost? Ask yourself....have you seen anything similar, in your own family or others, that would drive two people to such extremes? Will we ever learn?
Monday, April 15, 2013
Beware The Ides Of April....
Tax day folks! Can I get a "Hell Yeah!"? This year, as a single father paying $1036 per month in child support for two children, filing single with no dependants (because my ex wife won't allow me to claim the kids), I paid approximately $3000 in federal withholding tax. Of this $3000, Uncle Sam says I overpaid by $268, which he KINDLY held on to for me, interest free, all year. This $268 is going to go to my ex wife, as I fell behind on my child support during a period of unemployment in 2010. I have no real issue there....at least I don't OWE anything, and it'll help with my arrearage. What I do take issue with is this....last year, my ex girlfriend, as a single mother with one child, paid approximately $800 in federal withholding tax. She filed head of household (for which she did not exactly qualify) and got back $3900. Which was good....I suppose....because at least I know where the rest of my taxes went. And some of yours, too, most likely. Sure, I can see giving Ceasar his due, but when is Ceasar gonna figure out that no matter how hard you squeeze, you can't get blood from a middle class turnip, and pretty soon, the turnip is gonna grow a set of teeth and bite him on the ass? What right does he have to use the IRS to take it, basically at gunpoint?
It can end...go to FairTax.org to find out how.
It can end...go to FairTax.org to find out how.
Saturday, April 13, 2013
What Right....
does any man have to take what someone has earned and give it to someone who has not? None. Giving voluntarily is one thing...having it taken at the point of a gun is quite another. Our taxes are taken at the point of a gun....they didn't used to be, although there probably aren't many still alive that remember that. Why do we tolerate this? Is it simply that we get so used to the beating we barely feel it when the lashes get harder? FairTax....check it out.
Thursday, April 4, 2013
I Dream Of A Day...
when the chicken can cross the road without its motives being questioned, its questions being motived, or being followed by a drone. And if we can achieve that kind of freedom for chickens, just think what could be accomplished for people. :)
Wednesday, April 3, 2013
Have You Ever...
been in a situation where lying gets you in trouble and telling the truth seems to get you in deeper, but doing nothing at all leaves you stuck in a rut? Why does life often seem to turn out this way? Or am I the only one this has happened to? For the most part, I tell the truth, although I have been known to lie to get my ass out of a sling. It never seemed to work out...the truth always came out in the end. But nowadays, even the way I present myself to others is a bit of a lie...I used to be a pretty happy go lucky, live and let live kind of person. Yet lately, the powers that be have seen fit to ensure that I don't feel that way anymore...yet still I try to act as if nothing is wrong. Yet nothing could be further from the truth...I go to work lately almost for the sole purpose of being able to afford to go to work....I can't see my kids nearly as often as I'd like to....and I'm struggling with things that, while they may have started with the tiniest grain of truth have gotten blown out of proportion in my mind. And I've found myself in a situation where I'm unalble to really talk to anyone about it...so I thought I'd put this out there and maybe see if anyone else is going through a similar situation. And it lets me blow off a little steam.
Tuesday, March 26, 2013
Has Anyone Bothered...
to read the Declaration of Independence lately? Is it even required reading in high school anymore? In it you'll find the reasons for America's separation from the British crown. I see some surprising parallels to today, only the crown seems to have moved across the pond. Here's a link if you haven't read it... http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html
And here's the Constitution while you're at it...
http://constitutionus.com/
And here's the Constitution while you're at it...
http://constitutionus.com/
Saturday, March 23, 2013
Why not natural gas?
We've been on an ethanol kick for seveal years now, and overall it doesn't seem to be working out very well. Ethanol is more expensive to produce than gasoline, damages fuel systems and does not burn as efficiently as gasoline, so lowers fuel economy. I've been wondering lately why we don't try natural gas. It burns cleaner than gasoline and the conversions are relatively inexpensive. Infastructure is an issue now, but it shouldn't be too difficult to set up a couple test stations in several larger cities to determine feasability. We burn off tons of the stuff every year as a waste product in oil drilling anyhow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)