Let me get straight to the point; I hate taxes! There, I said it. I feel better already. I wish it were that simple. But did you know that as of 2009, the tax code is approximately 67, 204 pages, about twenty times the size of a Harry Potter book, and much less entertaining. So, with all this talk about extending the Bush tax cuts or not; unemployment up today to 9.8%; extending unemployment benefits forever, etc. the thing we ought to do is reform the tax code by eliminating the income tax and implementing the Fair Tax. By the way, I support the Fair Tax!
Since that is not going to happen overnight (if it ever does), what should we do today? It's not a zero-sum game solution. Nevertheless, both Washington and Wall Street operate in that manner, which probably explains why the entire system is rigged. But I digress...So, the Democrats want to limit the Bush tax cuts to those individuals making less than $200,000, or couples making less than $250,000; while the Republicans want to extend all Bush-era tax cuts and make them permanent for even the 2% of households earning more than $250,000.
I hate the IRS and hate the income tax I have to pay to those SOB's every year on top of what gets deducted from my family's paychecks every other week. But $250,000 doesn't go very far when you have 3 or more children, private school, groceries (don't tell me there isn't inflation) and extra curricular activities (sports, music lessons, etc.). It doesn't go very far at all even if you have none of these things but live in San Francisco or New York City. Lincoln, Nebraska with $250,000 in household income is A LOT different than $250,000 in Manhattan, New York. I dare someone challenge me on that. Heck, I submit that $250,000 in Marietta, GA is different than the two cities I just mentioned. The point is that looking at a static household income like that is part of the problem. With the Fair Tax it doesn't matter how much one makes or where you live.
It shouldn't be viewed as a zero-sum game by the politicians. Good ol' Chuckie Schumer (D-NY) should know better than to say the Republicans want to "Give tax breaks to millionaires". Last time I checked millions had seven digits, not six. And like I said about New York City...So, this is where I tread lightly...I can't believe I am going to suggest this but this country is so screwed that we need to make some sacrifices, so I say tax the rich! Make them pay their fair share. However, my definition of rich is much different than the politicians or elites that debate this stuff. I am talking about wealthy, uber rich individuals and households. Especially people like Paris Hilton and The Kardashians who provide no value to society. I dare someone challenge me on this too! I'm talking about people that make more than $1,000,000 in annual income. I call that rich, no matter where you live.
I can hear the argument from my Republican friends that small business owners fall into this bracket and they are the engine of the economy and if the Bush-era tax cuts expire for the wealthy that jobs will be affected. In the past, this would be my argument as well because those are the talking points of conservatives. I listen to Hannity, Limbaugh much less, Neal Boortz and others. I agree with a lot of what they say. But I'm not dumb and take what they say as gospel either. Let's not kid ourselves -- both sides have their talking points. I agree that small businesses are the engine of this economy and they create more jobs than large companies. I want to be my own boss more than anything, so I'm coming from what I think is a fair and educated support for taxing the uber rich.
So, back to the argument of small business owners being hit hardest. Most small businesses are S-Corporations or Partnerships. S-Corporations and Partnerships do not pay income taxes. Instead, income is passed through to its owners and taxed on their individual income tax returns. Owners of pass-through entities receive income from their businesses in primarily two ways. The first way is through salaries and wages, and the second is through K-1 distributions. Salaries and wages are reported on W-2 Forms and are subject to withholding, social security, Medicare, and federal and state unemployment taxes. K-1 distributions are reported to the shareholder on Schedule K-1, and are not taxable, nor subject to withholding or payroll taxes. The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center analyzed IRS data in March 2009, looking to see how many wealthy tax filers could say that half of their income or more came from business income. The center found that, among the wealthiest filers -- the top 1 percent -- only 32.5 percent earned more than half their income from business-type income. The percentages for non-wage income were even smaller among taxpayers earning less. In conclusion, do many wealthy tax payers report types of business income that might be from owning a small business? Sure. But it's impossible to tell how many meet the definition of what most of us think of when we think of small business owners. Other data indicate that among all tax payers who might be small business owners, most would not see taxes go up if the Bush tax cuts for the highest earners are allowed to expire.
What I am suggesting, besides scrapping the whole tax code, is to extend the Bush-era tax cuts for everyone making less than $1,000,000 in annual household income for two-years. Increase the tax rate for anyone who is on The Kardashian's reality tv show or any of those Housewives reality shows or anyone that does not contribute any value to society like Kate Gosselin. Increase the tax rate to 50% on Hollywood actors who make terrible movies yet get paid more than $5 million for it. Increase the tax rate to 75% on Hollywood actors that not only get paid a lot of money to make terrible movies but also hold telethons for other countries and insinuate that Americans (not Democrats of course) are arrogant and selfish and think that America is exceptional. This is tax policy that I can believe in. Besides, I think I just solved the fiscal mess by raising taxes.
If that fails, there is always another option. Fair Tax!!!!!
Friday, December 3, 2010
Monday, November 8, 2010
Monday Morning QB
Now that the mid-term elections are over and the people have spoken that they are tired of our government spending our children’s money and its intrusion into our lives, will things change with the newly elected? I want to say yes; a resounding YES in fact! But, I do not believe it will. Why? Because nothing has really changed – except for a new nameplate outside of the door of the offices of the newly elected. Let’s not kid ourselves that things are going to be different this time around. Not as long as special interest money still exists; not as long as the politicians start thinking about the next election; and not as long as they are preoccupied with the talking points of the establishment on both sides of the aisle. No one is really interested in making the necessary and difficult decisions to right the ship. Sure, some will say cut spending and cut taxes; others will say that we need to increase government spending and tax and regulate, and tax some more just to be safe. The truth is that both are correct to some extent, although I am much more inclined to go the route of the former. Why does it have to be an all or nothing solution for every problem? Life isn’t black or white. You may be able to get away with “because I said so” with your children, but that is not going to cut it in the real world.
We need people that are going to roll up their sleeves, work together to come up with solution(s) and make the difficult decisions – the right decisions. I hope Marco Rubio is someone like that. He appears to be. We need them to do the job they were hired for and we need to hold every single one of them accountable. How about just a modicum of common sense? Is that really too much to ask? I suspect that if Term Limits existed they would all act in a different manner. No more career politicians is a good start IMO!
So, let’s identify the problems we face:
- Jobs, Jobs, Jobs.
- The economy.
- National Debt.
- Entitlements (Medicare and Social Security)
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Deficits...and the Culture of Dependency
I am currently reading a book titled "I.O.U.S.A.", which as the name implies is about the amount of debt this country has saddled American citizens with over the last 40 years with no end in sight. In the book the authors refer to four deficits: The Federal Budget Deficit, The Savings Deficit, The Trade Deficit, and The Leadership Deficit. To read more on the four deficits click here.
The number people (government officials) throw out when talking about our budget deficit is currently $12.7 Trillion; which incidentally is a hell of a lot of money. But that figure does not account for the gap between future promised and funded Social Security and Medicare benefits, as well as a range of other commitments and contingencies the federal government has pledged to support.
As of 1 April 2010, the Treasury Department spent so far this year $202 Billion of your money on interest payments to the holders of the National Debt (mostly China and Japan). Compare that to NASA at $19 Billion, Education at $53 Billion, and Department of Transportation at $73 Billion. Those numbers are scary in itself but our REAL national debt is more like $62.3 Trillion, or almost 5 times as much as the $12.7 Trillion number you usually read or here about. As of September 30, 2009, each American’s share (every man, woman and child in this country) of the $62.3 trillion national fiscal burden was over $200,000. And every year in which no down payments or reforms are made to these obligations and promises, the total grows by at least $2 trillion to $3 trillion – or $6,500 to $10,000 per person – on autopilot. I am not going to bore you with the details, but if you are interested in more details read here. Suffice it to say, SCARY, FREAKIN' SCARY.
I am working on a future blog post that will get into the "meat and potatoes" if you will, of the fiscal mess we have allowed our elected officials to get us into. In the meantime, I want to discuss the deficit in leadership and the culture of dependency they have burdened us with.
I came across the following video from a post on Facebook from a friend, Jason Guest. I don't think Obama even needed to be edited into the video to have the same effect on me as it did. It just seemed so relevant to the issues of today. Jason, I agree, I miss that man. Check it out:
I will repeat, our current two-party government system is broken. I wish the same Republicans who today are shouting about programs that we can't afford, would've had the balls to shout at the ridiculous amount of spending when Bush was president. I wish Democrats AND Republicans would not look at every issue as either black or white; or all good or all bad. More importantly, I wish there were term limits so maybe, just maybe, our elected officials would make the right choices even if they are difficult. As Ronald Reagan once said, "A leader, once convinced that a particular course of action is the right one, must be undaunted when the going gets tough". For politicians, throwing money at an economic crisis is far easier than creating a long-term model for growth that is less dependent on debt. For leaders in democracies it is always difficult to get elected on a platform of austerity and more difficult today, as many of their constituents have grown accustomed to government largesse.
That the leadership deficit now seems so chronic suggests that the problem goes deeper than the quality of the individuals who come to power. There is something in the culture that makes leadership even tougher and more perilous than it should be. Why, asked Thomas Jefferson, did the American Revolution create a budding democracy while the French Revolution—coming at virtually the same time and with similar values—ended in tyranny? The answer, he thought, could be traced as much to the quality of the followers as to that of the leaders: American citizens were more accustomed than the French to responsible self-government.
Today it is much different. The only time the word self is used is in the word selfish. Self reliant -- say what? Self-government -- who? Public policy helps determine the kind of society we are. The Obama Democrats, Progressives or New Democrats; or whatever, see a society in which ordinary people cannot fend for themselves, where they need to have their incomes supplemented, their health care insurance regulated and guaranteed, their relationships with their employers governed by union leaders. That is the culture of dependence. Obama Democrats are trying to permanently enlarge government and increase citizens' dependence on it.
And, invoking the language of the Founding Fathers, I believe that this will destroy the culture of independence that has enabled Americans over the past two centuries to make this the most productive and prosperous -- and the most charitably generous -- nation in the world. Seeing our political divisions as a battle between the culture of dependence and the culture of independence helps to make sense of the divisions seen in the 2008 election.
Interestingly, Barack Obama carried voters with incomes under $50,000 and those with incomes over $200,000 and lost those with incomes in between. He won large margins from those who never graduated from high school and from those with graduate school degrees and barely exceeded 50 percent among those in between. The top-and-bottom Obama coalition was in effect a coalition of those dependent on government transfers and benefits and those in what David Brooks of the New York Times calls "the educated class" who administer or believe that their kind of people administer those transactions. They are the natural constituency for the culture of dependence.
In 1964, President Lyndon Johnson initiated the War on Poverty. Thus began the ever-expanding Welfare State. Today, 46 years later, we are no closer to winning that war. Instead, the “war” created a vast and ever-growing constituency that perpetuates the Welfare State — a permanent underclass, a network of government bureaucracies and bureaucrats to administer the welfare state, and, most toxic of all, a culture of dependency.
"My friends, some years ago, the Federal Government declared war on poverty, and poverty won. Today the Federal Government has 59 major welfare programs and spends more than $100 billion a year on them. What has all this money done? Well, too often it has only made poverty harder to escape. Federal welfare programs have created a massive social problem. With the best of intentions, government created a poverty trap that wreaks havoc on the very support system the poor need most to lift themselves out of poverty: the family. Dependency has become the one enduring heirloom, passed from one generation to the next, of too many fragmented families." ~Ronald Reagan from the State of the Union address in 1984.
And to sum it up...a letter (which some of you may have seen via chain emails)to the editor that was published by a Jackson, Mississippi newspaper, Clarion Ledger, on August 23, 2009. The writer is Dr. Roger Starner Jones, a physician who specializes in emergency medicine at the U. of Mississippi Medical Center. This is genuine, verified by snopes.com.
I'm out...
The number people (government officials) throw out when talking about our budget deficit is currently $12.7 Trillion; which incidentally is a hell of a lot of money. But that figure does not account for the gap between future promised and funded Social Security and Medicare benefits, as well as a range of other commitments and contingencies the federal government has pledged to support.
As of 1 April 2010, the Treasury Department spent so far this year $202 Billion of your money on interest payments to the holders of the National Debt (mostly China and Japan). Compare that to NASA at $19 Billion, Education at $53 Billion, and Department of Transportation at $73 Billion. Those numbers are scary in itself but our REAL national debt is more like $62.3 Trillion, or almost 5 times as much as the $12.7 Trillion number you usually read or here about. As of September 30, 2009, each American’s share (every man, woman and child in this country) of the $62.3 trillion national fiscal burden was over $200,000. And every year in which no down payments or reforms are made to these obligations and promises, the total grows by at least $2 trillion to $3 trillion – or $6,500 to $10,000 per person – on autopilot. I am not going to bore you with the details, but if you are interested in more details read here. Suffice it to say, SCARY, FREAKIN' SCARY.
I am working on a future blog post that will get into the "meat and potatoes" if you will, of the fiscal mess we have allowed our elected officials to get us into. In the meantime, I want to discuss the deficit in leadership and the culture of dependency they have burdened us with.
I came across the following video from a post on Facebook from a friend, Jason Guest. I don't think Obama even needed to be edited into the video to have the same effect on me as it did. It just seemed so relevant to the issues of today. Jason, I agree, I miss that man. Check it out:
I will repeat, our current two-party government system is broken. I wish the same Republicans who today are shouting about programs that we can't afford, would've had the balls to shout at the ridiculous amount of spending when Bush was president. I wish Democrats AND Republicans would not look at every issue as either black or white; or all good or all bad. More importantly, I wish there were term limits so maybe, just maybe, our elected officials would make the right choices even if they are difficult. As Ronald Reagan once said, "A leader, once convinced that a particular course of action is the right one, must be undaunted when the going gets tough". For politicians, throwing money at an economic crisis is far easier than creating a long-term model for growth that is less dependent on debt. For leaders in democracies it is always difficult to get elected on a platform of austerity and more difficult today, as many of their constituents have grown accustomed to government largesse.
That the leadership deficit now seems so chronic suggests that the problem goes deeper than the quality of the individuals who come to power. There is something in the culture that makes leadership even tougher and more perilous than it should be. Why, asked Thomas Jefferson, did the American Revolution create a budding democracy while the French Revolution—coming at virtually the same time and with similar values—ended in tyranny? The answer, he thought, could be traced as much to the quality of the followers as to that of the leaders: American citizens were more accustomed than the French to responsible self-government.
Today it is much different. The only time the word self is used is in the word selfish. Self reliant -- say what? Self-government -- who? Public policy helps determine the kind of society we are. The Obama Democrats, Progressives or New Democrats; or whatever, see a society in which ordinary people cannot fend for themselves, where they need to have their incomes supplemented, their health care insurance regulated and guaranteed, their relationships with their employers governed by union leaders. That is the culture of dependence. Obama Democrats are trying to permanently enlarge government and increase citizens' dependence on it.
And, invoking the language of the Founding Fathers, I believe that this will destroy the culture of independence that has enabled Americans over the past two centuries to make this the most productive and prosperous -- and the most charitably generous -- nation in the world. Seeing our political divisions as a battle between the culture of dependence and the culture of independence helps to make sense of the divisions seen in the 2008 election.
Interestingly, Barack Obama carried voters with incomes under $50,000 and those with incomes over $200,000 and lost those with incomes in between. He won large margins from those who never graduated from high school and from those with graduate school degrees and barely exceeded 50 percent among those in between. The top-and-bottom Obama coalition was in effect a coalition of those dependent on government transfers and benefits and those in what David Brooks of the New York Times calls "the educated class" who administer or believe that their kind of people administer those transactions. They are the natural constituency for the culture of dependence.
In 1964, President Lyndon Johnson initiated the War on Poverty. Thus began the ever-expanding Welfare State. Today, 46 years later, we are no closer to winning that war. Instead, the “war” created a vast and ever-growing constituency that perpetuates the Welfare State — a permanent underclass, a network of government bureaucracies and bureaucrats to administer the welfare state, and, most toxic of all, a culture of dependency.
"My friends, some years ago, the Federal Government declared war on poverty, and poverty won. Today the Federal Government has 59 major welfare programs and spends more than $100 billion a year on them. What has all this money done? Well, too often it has only made poverty harder to escape. Federal welfare programs have created a massive social problem. With the best of intentions, government created a poverty trap that wreaks havoc on the very support system the poor need most to lift themselves out of poverty: the family. Dependency has become the one enduring heirloom, passed from one generation to the next, of too many fragmented families." ~Ronald Reagan from the State of the Union address in 1984.
And to sum it up...a letter (which some of you may have seen via chain emails)to the editor that was published by a Jackson, Mississippi newspaper, Clarion Ledger, on August 23, 2009. The writer is Dr. Roger Starner Jones, a physician who specializes in emergency medicine at the U. of Mississippi Medical Center. This is genuine, verified by snopes.com.
Dear Sirs:
During my last night’s shift in the ER, I had the pleasure of evaluating a patient with an expensive shiny gold tooth, multiple elaborate expensive tattoos, a very expensive brand of tennis shoes and a new cellular telephone equipped with her favorite R&B tune for a ringtone.
Glancing over the chart, one could not help noticing her payer status: Medicaid.
She smokes more than one costly pack of cigarettes every day and, somehow, still has money to buy beer. And our president expects me to pay for this woman’s health care? Our nation’s health care crisis is not a shortage of quality hospitals, doctors or nurses. It is a crisis of culture — a culture in which it is perfectly acceptable to spend money on vices while refusing to take care of one’s self or, heaven forbid, purchase health insurance. A culture that thinks “I can do whatever I want to because someone else will always take care of me.”
Life is really not that hard. Most of us reap what we sow.
Starner Jones, MD
Jackson
During my last night’s shift in the ER, I had the pleasure of evaluating a patient with an expensive shiny gold tooth, multiple elaborate expensive tattoos, a very expensive brand of tennis shoes and a new cellular telephone equipped with her favorite R&B tune for a ringtone.
Glancing over the chart, one could not help noticing her payer status: Medicaid.
She smokes more than one costly pack of cigarettes every day and, somehow, still has money to buy beer. And our president expects me to pay for this woman’s health care? Our nation’s health care crisis is not a shortage of quality hospitals, doctors or nurses. It is a crisis of culture — a culture in which it is perfectly acceptable to spend money on vices while refusing to take care of one’s self or, heaven forbid, purchase health insurance. A culture that thinks “I can do whatever I want to because someone else will always take care of me.”
Life is really not that hard. Most of us reap what we sow.
Starner Jones, MD
Jackson
I'm out...
Saturday, April 24, 2010
The case against Republicans...AND Democrats.
A lot has happened since my last blog post...I wish I could say for the better, but not so. So, personally all is well -- we have our health, which is the most important thing; we have good jobs and are successful -- but not rich Mr. Obama. But I worry. I worry about the future of my family. I worry how much more the government is going to steal from my paycheck. I worry about the financial burdens that are being placed on us by OUR government today and the ones on my children and my children's children tomorrow. Ironically, I still have hope. I have hope because the American people are fed up with the status quo in Washington. I think (and hope) that people do not want to be classified as Republican or Democrat; or red or blue. We are free. We are Americans.
In a recent USA Today Gallup poll on April 20, 2010, the following are some of the findings that help confirm my hope:
Term limits would work for me in lieu of a third or fourth party or whatever. Power begets more power. And whomever is in charge would like to remain in charge, even if it is not part of the "establishment". So truly, we need to blow the system up and eliminate the two-party system. We need to enact term limits. We need campaign finance reform. Then maybe will we get a government for the people, by the people.
In a recent USA Today Gallup poll on April 20, 2010, the following are some of the findings that help confirm my hope:
- 3 out of 4 Americans polled say they are dissatisfied with the country's direction.
- A record low 28% say most members of Congress deserve re-election. The percentage who say their representative deserves re-election drops to 49%, only the second time it has dipped below 50%.
- For the first time, both major parties are viewed unfavorably by most Americans. The anti-tax "Tea Party" movement has a favorable rating nearly as high as they do — 37% compared with 41% for Democrats and 42% for the GOP.
- Fifty percent say Obama doesn't deserve re-election, and 26% say he deserves "a great deal" of the blame for the nation's economic problems, double the percentage in July.
- And my favorite...the nation's fastest growing political party is "none of the above". The number of independent voters has grown faster in the past two years than Democrats and Republicans in at least 14 of the 28 states and the District of Columbia that register voters by party.
Term limits would work for me in lieu of a third or fourth party or whatever. Power begets more power. And whomever is in charge would like to remain in charge, even if it is not part of the "establishment". So truly, we need to blow the system up and eliminate the two-party system. We need to enact term limits. We need campaign finance reform. Then maybe will we get a government for the people, by the people.
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Free Healthcare???
Where in the Constitution does it say that Americans have the right to FREE healthcare? Let me be clear: I do believe the current health insurance system needs reform. However, a government-run single payer system is not, I repeat, N.O.T. the answer. I hope you are not of the belief that the Obama administration and Democratic party (especially Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and their like) do not want a government-run single payer system. Although I wouldn't be surprised if you take them at their word...more than half of the citizens (and illegals) in this country are idiots...I mean, they voted for this guy. I'm just sayin'!! However, let's believe Obama when he said that if we were starting a system from scratch a single payer system would be his choice. And since we are not starting from scratch it would be extremely difficult to do because of the infrastructure already in place. This just in...we already have a single-payer system: Medicare. Medicare is run by the government...well, run, as in run like the US Postal service which is now considering eliminating Saturday delivery because they lost $7 BILLION last year and seemingly raise the price of stamps at least twice a year. This is the same government that "runs" Medicare which will be insolvent by 2017. The same government who has this track record: Amtrak, US Postal Service, Social Security (don't count on it for your retirement yet you keep paying into it), Medicare and Medicaid. Seriously??? And you think that at the very least the government should offer a public option?
I am interested to hear your thoughts on the healthcare debate and why you think we need reform.
I am interested to hear your thoughts on the healthcare debate and why you think we need reform.
Monday, July 13, 2009
"Too much information running through my brain".
"Too much information driving me insane". The Police had it right way back then. "Overkill. Overview. Over my dead body. Over me. Over you. Over everybody." Facebook. Twitter. LinkedIn. Blogs. DirecTV. CNN. MSNBC. Online. 24/7 news. Blackberry. iPhone . Overkill. Overview. Over my dead body. Michael Jackson this, Michael Jackson that...
I was thinking about this as I was updating my Facebook status on my Blackberry while simultaneously receiving a Tweet from a Sales Blog I follow after checking my portfolio on Fidelity Mobile on my BB. Every second of every day we are bombarded with information -- most of it useless. And the scary thing is that it is getting worse. If you really want to freak out go rent "Eagle Eye" with Shia Lebouf if you haven't seen it yet. I saw it on HBO on Sunday night before True Blood. My feeling is that if this stuff isn't going on already, it will soon. Scary stuff. Very scary.
The thing about information in today's world is that it seems to take a life of its own. People throw shit out to see what sticks and nobody bothers to even verify anything anymore. Garbage in; garbage out. Nevertheless, I admit that I am in information addict. (At least I have taken the first step and admitted I have a problem). I don't have enough time to read everything I want to read on the Internet. I subscribe to way too much shit. My work and my family time have gotten in the way of my WSJ Online, ESPN Page 2, HealthLeaders, Inc., Fast Company, Food Network and Food & Wine (some culture is necessary). Who has time to live an uncaffeinated life anymore??? And football practice is starting soon...Carajo!
Seriously though...No, seriously. The great thing about information and the Internet specifically, is it allows us the ability to go back in time for "gotcha" moments. Particularly gotcha moments with politicians...(You didn't think that this blog posting was not going to somehow be about politics, did ya??? It always comes back to politics). Not only can you go back and read what some politician (usually a Liberal) said during specific issues, but you can actually see what they said on YouTube. Gotcha! I love it! Which, brings me to the issue at hand that has me boiling -- more stimulus by the government. I cannot for the life of me believe that they are already talking about another stimulus. For the one or two of you who are so kind and must have no life that follow my blog, you know how I felt about the "stimulus" that was slammed down our throats like a cheap bottle of tequila earlier this year. People also know I voted for the "other guy", or the lesser of two evils -- but boy, they ain't even in the same time zone. Funny thing what VP Joe Biden said recently that the administration misread how bad the economy was and how effective the stimulus would be. Ya think??? What happened to the Chinese math that was used to justify the stimulus that for every dollar spent it would yield $1.50 in growth. Really?
Read this for some sobering news. How do you think I feel now? How's that workin' out for everyone now??? So another (more) stimulus is the answer? We don't even know how we are going to pay for the first one amongst the many other things we have been spending taxpayer money on, like the auto companies, banks, AIG, etc. And to top it off...government healthcare! $1 Trillion later for that alone, which you know how terrible the government is at estimating anything. How will we pay for that? Good 'ol Rangel has the answer.
Here is my pledge...screw Obama and his administration and Congress. No benefit of the doubt. No, "let's give him a chance", "he's our President now and needs our support". Screw it! And screw all of them. Change is a coming...
I was thinking about this as I was updating my Facebook status on my Blackberry while simultaneously receiving a Tweet from a Sales Blog I follow after checking my portfolio on Fidelity Mobile on my BB. Every second of every day we are bombarded with information -- most of it useless. And the scary thing is that it is getting worse. If you really want to freak out go rent "Eagle Eye" with Shia Lebouf if you haven't seen it yet. I saw it on HBO on Sunday night before True Blood. My feeling is that if this stuff isn't going on already, it will soon. Scary stuff. Very scary.
The thing about information in today's world is that it seems to take a life of its own. People throw shit out to see what sticks and nobody bothers to even verify anything anymore. Garbage in; garbage out. Nevertheless, I admit that I am in information addict. (At least I have taken the first step and admitted I have a problem). I don't have enough time to read everything I want to read on the Internet. I subscribe to way too much shit. My work and my family time have gotten in the way of my WSJ Online, ESPN Page 2, HealthLeaders, Inc., Fast Company, Food Network and Food & Wine (some culture is necessary). Who has time to live an uncaffeinated life anymore??? And football practice is starting soon...Carajo!
Seriously though...No, seriously. The great thing about information and the Internet specifically, is it allows us the ability to go back in time for "gotcha" moments. Particularly gotcha moments with politicians...(You didn't think that this blog posting was not going to somehow be about politics, did ya??? It always comes back to politics). Not only can you go back and read what some politician (usually a Liberal) said during specific issues, but you can actually see what they said on YouTube. Gotcha! I love it! Which, brings me to the issue at hand that has me boiling -- more stimulus by the government. I cannot for the life of me believe that they are already talking about another stimulus. For the one or two of you who are so kind and must have no life that follow my blog, you know how I felt about the "stimulus" that was slammed down our throats like a cheap bottle of tequila earlier this year. People also know I voted for the "other guy", or the lesser of two evils -- but boy, they ain't even in the same time zone. Funny thing what VP Joe Biden said recently that the administration misread how bad the economy was and how effective the stimulus would be. Ya think??? What happened to the Chinese math that was used to justify the stimulus that for every dollar spent it would yield $1.50 in growth. Really?
Read this for some sobering news. How do you think I feel now? How's that workin' out for everyone now??? So another (more) stimulus is the answer? We don't even know how we are going to pay for the first one amongst the many other things we have been spending taxpayer money on, like the auto companies, banks, AIG, etc. And to top it off...government healthcare! $1 Trillion later for that alone, which you know how terrible the government is at estimating anything. How will we pay for that? Good 'ol Rangel has the answer.
Here is my pledge...screw Obama and his administration and Congress. No benefit of the doubt. No, "let's give him a chance", "he's our President now and needs our support". Screw it! And screw all of them. Change is a coming...
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Welcome to Obama, Inc.
I've been kind of busy with work, Lacrosse practice 4x a week, 2, 3 and even 4 games on the weekend, etc. I'm not complaining though -- life is good. Unfortunately for so many Americans, it is not so good -- not good at all. ADP just came out with their March jobs report and 742,000 private-sector jobs were cut in March. Instead of getting better, or not as bad, it just keeps getting worse.
It's hard to remain positive when everything you read, or hear, or see on TV is all negative. America, capitalism, liberty, and freedom as I know it is on assault. Not just in our country, which by the way is bad enough, but by the whole world it seems. I've always heard nobody likes the "guy" at the top, and frankly I subscribe to that point of view with regards to sports anyway. I can't stand the Yankees, Red Sox, Patriots (as a Dolfan, I never have though), Cowboys, Lakers, Celtics, etc. America is the "guy" at the top, and foreign governments and some of their citizens have always been envious of us as the leader of the free world. And secretly, and some not so secretly, are smiling at the mess we have gotten ourselves into. Make no mistake, WE have gotten ourselves into this mess because we all fell asleep at the wheel and let our government do whatever it wanted.
This is where it gets interesting though. The liberals believe it is greedy corporate America and Wall Street taking advantage of us. And the "failed Bush policies of the last 8 years" and the rich getting richer; yada, yada, yada. Maybe some of this is true, but I am sick of the populist rhetoric. On the other side, the Republicans blame Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and Chuck Shumer. Well, if the shoe fits...The bottom line is that there is plenty of blame to go around. This complex mess we are in is simply because of two intertwined words: power and money. Not solely Wall Street executives and corporate CEO's, but more importantly, our federal government -- our U.S. Congress to be more specific. Do you know of any member of Congress that is not "rich"? If they weren't rich when they were "elected" to Congress they sure are when they leave -- although they don't leave...they do not ever leave. Therein lies the problem!
Capitalism has not failed us. Capitalism is not an inherent corrupt system as many in the liberal media would have you believe. If not for Capitalism, we would not have many of the things we have today. One question...when was the last time something of great value was invented in a Socialist or Communist country in which the government dictates what should be produced, how it should be produced and how much one is going to be paid for producing it? I'll let you get back to me on that one, because it is going to take a while...
Unfortunately, the current administration believes the government is the only thing that is going to get us out of this mess. The federal government is not our savior. The federal government is the problem. If you think the banks had too much power before, wait until the government owns the financial system. Nationalization of all important industries is the prize that this government has its eyes on. They will do it just as they have done with the stimulus package, the budget, AIG, and most recently GM. Under cover at night, covertly they take over a private company or vote on a bill (usually a HUGE spending bill) all under the guise of it was necessary to avert further damage to our economy. So we've gone from an administration labeled as "war mongers" to an administration of "fear mongers"? Well, the people wanted change, and they got it! For me though, it's not the change I can believe in!
It's hard to remain positive when everything you read, or hear, or see on TV is all negative. America, capitalism, liberty, and freedom as I know it is on assault. Not just in our country, which by the way is bad enough, but by the whole world it seems. I've always heard nobody likes the "guy" at the top, and frankly I subscribe to that point of view with regards to sports anyway. I can't stand the Yankees, Red Sox, Patriots (as a Dolfan, I never have though), Cowboys, Lakers, Celtics, etc. America is the "guy" at the top, and foreign governments and some of their citizens have always been envious of us as the leader of the free world. And secretly, and some not so secretly, are smiling at the mess we have gotten ourselves into. Make no mistake, WE have gotten ourselves into this mess because we all fell asleep at the wheel and let our government do whatever it wanted.
This is where it gets interesting though. The liberals believe it is greedy corporate America and Wall Street taking advantage of us. And the "failed Bush policies of the last 8 years" and the rich getting richer; yada, yada, yada. Maybe some of this is true, but I am sick of the populist rhetoric. On the other side, the Republicans blame Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and Chuck Shumer. Well, if the shoe fits...The bottom line is that there is plenty of blame to go around. This complex mess we are in is simply because of two intertwined words: power and money. Not solely Wall Street executives and corporate CEO's, but more importantly, our federal government -- our U.S. Congress to be more specific. Do you know of any member of Congress that is not "rich"? If they weren't rich when they were "elected" to Congress they sure are when they leave -- although they don't leave...they do not ever leave. Therein lies the problem!
Capitalism has not failed us. Capitalism is not an inherent corrupt system as many in the liberal media would have you believe. If not for Capitalism, we would not have many of the things we have today. One question...when was the last time something of great value was invented in a Socialist or Communist country in which the government dictates what should be produced, how it should be produced and how much one is going to be paid for producing it? I'll let you get back to me on that one, because it is going to take a while...
Unfortunately, the current administration believes the government is the only thing that is going to get us out of this mess. The federal government is not our savior. The federal government is the problem. If you think the banks had too much power before, wait until the government owns the financial system. Nationalization of all important industries is the prize that this government has its eyes on. They will do it just as they have done with the stimulus package, the budget, AIG, and most recently GM. Under cover at night, covertly they take over a private company or vote on a bill (usually a HUGE spending bill) all under the guise of it was necessary to avert further damage to our economy. So we've gone from an administration labeled as "war mongers" to an administration of "fear mongers"? Well, the people wanted change, and they got it! For me though, it's not the change I can believe in!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)