My niece who is just about worthless (at the current time), and absolutely clueless about the "real world" asked me a question yesterday. This is a girl who has very little self esteem and it is so very sad. I've tried to instill in her some self worth, advise her as to some books she should read, tapes she should should listen to (CD's I guess at this point), and in general I've advised her that only She can make the decision to either be happy or sad. She is always sad, and seems that there is always some physical ailment that she is suffering. So she asked me, "What 1 or 2 things do you do that make you happy, and fulfilled?" I guess she thought I was going to give a dissertation or something, but I replied back what I think is the secret to my life. Pretty short.
1) I have the absolute belief that my own happiness is up to me. My attitude is almost unwavering positive. Bad things may happen to me, but any feelings of sadness, bitterness, resentment, usually lasts at most a day, and usually only an hour, until I can refocus on myself and understand that I WILL MAKE IT THROUGH, AND I WILL WIN! That thought carries me through some real horrible shit. I WILL WIN! I just keep repeating it in my mind until it is as solid a belief, as saying, I am a man.
2) I have clearly defined, written out goals. I know where I want to be in 10 years from now, in 5 years from now, in 2 years from now, next year, and next month. Very specific things I would like to achieve. How can you every get what you want if you dont know what you want? A goal of "be happy" is not a goal, it's just a vague and ambiguous feeling you wish to achieve. I break my goals down into 3 categories. Financial Goals, Personal Goals, and Life Goals. The Life Goals usually are a mix of what I want to be as a business owner, a father, and a husband. The Personal Goals are usually health, spiritual learning, and intellectual learning. Financial Goals are definitely the easiest goals to come up with, and achieve. They must push you, but be just outside of what you believe is possible. I use to hit my financial goals for the year in about month 10, and I've learned to set them higher than I thought possible. Now I barely reach them, and a few times, have missed my mark by a little. That drives me harder. One thing about these goals, and it is something that is a new goal for this next year. I HAVE to balance my family life with my professional life. Although I have plenty of Dagny time, I want even more. This is important.
On #2. The best way I know of making sure I reach my goals is that I break them down to monthly goals, and monthly benchmarks to know if I will meet the yearly goal. Some folks may break it down by week, but I've found I get to geeky when I break them down that far. Monthly is fine with me, however, the #1 method of success that I know is to make a daily "STD" (stuff to do for some, shit to do for me) list the night before. I know exactly what needs to be done every day when I wake up. I tried to do this list in the morning, but it took up too much of my morning, and I just wouldn't even do it, so I would wander about aimlessly through my day. But then I started doing them at night before I went to bed. Stuff that didn't get done that day, stayed on the list for the next, and more stuff was added, ALL adding up to achieving the monthly goals. If I miss a monthly goal this month, the rest of the monthly goals to the end of the year get adjusted up so that I dont miss the yearly goal.
All of this takes very little time, although I will admit that my long term goal setting of 10 years, 5 years, and 2 years will sometimes take a few days to put together. Why? Because I do what I call dream building. Now dream building is different than Goal Setting, in that my Dream Building is more of an exercise of getting excited. One may put on a 10 year Goal- I will have a house on 25 acres, with a pond and a stream, that is cross fenced for horses, has a large red barn, and a basement bar, that leads out to a swimming pool that overlooks the pastures. So what I do in my Dream Building is that I go an visit a house that is similar to what I want. I can envision the swimming pool in the back yard if there isn't one, I can see the horses in the pasture, and where I would put a garden etc. Nothing is more motivating to me, than to actually see, smell and feel what it is that I am aiming for.
So anyway, back to my Niece:
I told her:
1) have specific written short and long term goals
2) Have a "to do" list written the night before, so that when you wake up you already know what will happen during the day, and you wont waste time wandering about aimlessly looking for things to do, or wasting time.
Monday, December 19, 2011
Wednesday, December 14, 2011
My nutshell version of a better heathcare system in the US
Nutshell version- There is government healthcare (I'd get rid of all of it, but since we are looking at realistic solutions rather than my, "pay or die scenario) and there is private healthcare. And the two shouldn't mix.
Government healthcare- Includes Medicare, Medicaid, and VA. There are hospitals set up to care for this. VA hospitals suck, but really that is what the government does. It sucks at whatever it does. So. You have these government hospitals set up, people that would like to remain on Medicare can do so, and the money that they have paid into it goes into the government healthcare fund. As does the VA medical fund, and the Medicaid money allotted by the assclowns in DC. Staffing these places should be Docs fresh out of med school, who will work for 4 years at a salary of 40K, and when they are done with their tour, their medical school bills are paid for. Same with nurses, and other medical staff. Get people off welfare, by training them how to be LPN (I think this is the first step in nursing. takes about 18 months to get certified, these are the nurses that check your blood pressure, can help you to the bathroom), janitors, maintenance, cafeteria, laundry and all the stuff that is required to run a hospital. They get hand me down equipment from private hospitals that get to write off the donations on their taxes. So basically these hospitals are self contained, and the costs are kept to a minimum by trading federal money (money from welfare to now employment) and although the care will not be the best in the country, it would still be some of the best in the world, and nobody is 'left to die". You want the government to take care of you? Here is how the government can take care of you. Create smaller govt clinics that are more numerous to handle all the little BS that costs a fortune when taken to a hospital. Things like colds, flu, eye infections and the like. I hate socialism, but if this is what people want (socialized medicine) than we go ahead and give it to them. As it stands now, they are paying (or not paying) for socialized medicine, but are receiving A+ best in the world, state of the art medical breakthrough miracles. Sorry. You get what you pay for, and this is it.
For the rest of the people who do not wish to partake in the Government Healthcare System, they are not affected at all by the government system. In fact they are in the Private System which is run by private corporations. Insurance companies, hospital systems, doctors, clinics and all are in the free market system. Without government intervention the free market healthcare system will readjust to the government free market, and will raise lower premiums, and the price of services according to the free market. Medical device and pharmaceutical companies will do likewise. Healthcare costs in this country have skyrocketed over the last 40 years largely due to the influence of Medicare and Medicaid. Government only pays about 25-30% of the actual cost of procedures, and visits, so that means the healthcare providers had to make up that money somewhere, so that gouged the regular paying customers (insurance companies) and made the prices go up. Without the government mooching from the Healthcare providers, they can focus on a REAL business model, where profits and loss actually matter, and the competition from others forces the real costs to where they should be.
So basically give those people that want to live on the government teat exactly what they deserve (I'm actually torn on the VA medical system. I would probably keep them separate, double the funding of them {take the money from the other program} since they are really the best of Americans and deserve a hell of lot better care than they are getting right now) and get the government out of the private healthcare business altogether, so that THAT system can thrive and continue to be the best healthcare in the world.
For the rest of the people who do not wish to partake in the Government Healthcare System, they are not affected at all by the government system. In fact they are in the Private System which is run by private corporations. Insurance companies, hospital systems, doctors, clinics and all are in the free market system. Without government intervention the free market healthcare system will readjust to the government free market, and will raise lower premiums, and the price of services according to the free market. Medical device and pharmaceutical companies will do likewise. Healthcare costs in this country have skyrocketed over the last 40 years largely due to the influence of Medicare and Medicaid. Government only pays about 25-30% of the actual cost of procedures, and visits, so that means the healthcare providers had to make up that money somewhere, so that gouged the regular paying customers (insurance companies) and made the prices go up. Without the government mooching from the Healthcare providers, they can focus on a REAL business model, where profits and loss actually matter, and the competition from others forces the real costs to where they should be.
So basically give those people that want to live on the government teat exactly what they deserve (I'm actually torn on the VA medical system. I would probably keep them separate, double the funding of them {take the money from the other program} since they are really the best of Americans and deserve a hell of lot better care than they are getting right now) and get the government out of the private healthcare business altogether, so that THAT system can thrive and continue to be the best healthcare in the world.
Thursday, December 1, 2011
AN Old piece that got me fired by a client
by Ragnar Danneskjöld on Thursday, 25 March 2010 at 23:26
Social justice- What is social justice? I don’t know what it means to you, or Glen Beck, or your preacher, and frankly I don’t care. What it means to me, is that the poor, needy, less fortunate, underprivileged or whatever you want to call these people deserve our help. I believe that too! See I am one of you. I want everyone to succeed, live a great life, have all they want to eat, a great house to live in, a healthy life, a great family, love and happiness. I want that for everyone. Where we differ is that I believe that they should want it enough to get all of those things on their own, and frankly if they do not that is their failure, and their responsibility. I will help them if I can, and if I feel that they are worthy of my help. Liberals on the other hand, also want to help them, and have all those things, BUT instead of wanting them to do it themselves or do without, they feel that nobody should do without, and if they can’t achieve these things that they should be given it. Now perhaps some liberals are truly generous and they will try to help these people by giving their own support to these people, but there are more that feel that they have a right to take from one person to give to these folks. This is not right and it is not moral in my mind. How would they feel if I was hungry, and came to their house, with my gun, and robbed them so I could eat? Is that right? Is that moral? Yet they feel totally okay with having the federal government do that to me.
Health care-"This person can’t afford healthcare, so we should give it to them." Health care is not a right in this country. If you feel strongly that everyone deserves it, then by all means, sell everything you own, and take all the money that you make and give it to these people so that they can afford it. How can you support taking from me to give to them? Is that "fair"? You may believe in your heart that they deserve health care, but I tell you that I do not believe they do. I hear the arguments that they burden the whole system by not having insurance and getting the care anyway, thereby making everyone's cost higher. I have a solution. Do not treat them. Let them die. Oh, now I am really a heartless bastard. Yes, let them die, and maybe the next person who has to choose between getting health insurance and paying the cell phone bill, will choose the health insurance. Do you liberals understand reward and penalty? You reward good behavior, and you penalize bad behavior. Do you have any concept of consequences of one's own actions? If a doctor feels that he can give treatment to people without money or insurance, then let them. But if they choose not to work for free, why are they forced to? Are you forced to do work for free? Surely your time and effort is worth money. Why is a doctor, who has trained more than you any different. This is not saying that I do not feel that doctors that choose to do so are wrong. On the contrary, I find them to be noble. Using the liberal logic, where does this stop? I need some new business cards, but can’t afford to get them right now. Should a printer be forced to give them to me because I have a "need"?
The waste- You know I would not change my opinions on "entitlement programs" (even the name of this pisses me off. As if they are entitled to anything, which I do not believe they are), but perhaps if the billions of dollars were not spent (I say wasted) on pet projects, earmarks, pork spending, and worthless programs, I may have less anger about them. Building a road here, or a bridge there, or a hospital here, or a grant for studying this there. ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!?! WE HAVE NO MONEY! We spend more than we bring in, yet you (both parties) spend money on all of these vote buying projects and gifts. How can 1 single representative or Senator justify 1 dollar of this BS? Pay for what we have to pay for first (things that are already in law, and in the constitution), then if money is left over.... SEND IT BACK TO THE PEOPLE WHO EARNED IT! These damn politicians see it as their money to dish out, and this is insane. All we are to them are machines that send them money. What is wrong with you people!?! Simple math you pandering crooks. You have a need for 1 dollar, you collect 1 dollar. You can’t collect 1 dollar then spend 5 dollars. Any 4 year old understands this principle, and family that has to do a budget understands it, yet time and time again you spend money that a) you do not have, and b) you didn't earn. What would you tell a person that makes 20K a year, and drives a new Mercedes, lives in a 500K house, has an iphone, 60 inch TV, cable with every channel ordered, and eats lobster and caviar every night then you find out that they have 80K in credit card debt? Would you not consider that person irresponsible? Yet we keep putting up with our politicians doing the same thing year after year. At what point will you say ENOUGH!? I am saying ENOUGH! Fire their asses. Why are we sending 1 single dollar to any other country? So they will like us? I feel bad for Haiti, but let’s let George Clooney have his telethon, and let people that want to give to Haiti, give to Haiti. Nobody from DC called me to ask if I wanted to give to Haiti. Maybe they called you, but I didn't get the call. Are we supposed to believe that the people running our government are intellectually and morally superior to us, and that they know how to spend our money better than we do. I think that the politicians should have had to make a phone call or at least mention on the floor the names of the 5 people that paid that 219K in income taxes. 'Mr. and Mrs. Smith, Ms. Jones, Dr and Mr. Brown, Mr. Thompson, Ms. Wong, we believe that this university needs this money to study the sexual habits of college girls, more than you need to send your kids to college, or buy a retirement home, or give to your church, or buy your first home, or buy that boat to take your granddaughter fishing. Maybe that would shame them into doing what is right.
The "stimulus" -what a bunch of BS. What exactly did it stimulate? Not the economy. Not the jobs in the US. Just 800 Billion of wasted money. Then they try to sell it from the jobs "created and saved" BS. Are any of you buying this crap? If you do, then frankly please "defriend" me, because you are not bright enough to be my friend. Want to stimulate the economy idiot? Lower taxes across the board. It worked for Kennedy, it worked for Reagan, and it worked for W after 9/11. It works! Every time it works, yet they won’t do it. Why? I can only think of one reason, and that is that Obama is set upon destroying the economy enough to implement more control. Control over the banks, the insurance companies, the car companies, and transfer power to Washington DC. Maybe I sound like some conspiracy nut, but if you can figure out a reason that Obama and his lot haven't done the one thing that has been proven to stimulate the economy, and gives private business the confidence and ability to hire people I am listening.
Bailouts- Let them fail! Whining that it would have destroyed the whole economy. Awesome! That’s what free markets do. They go up and they go down. When the government gets to choose the winners and losers, there are no free markets. Bailing out the auto companies? Hmm. Why GM and Chrysler, but not Goody’s, Sterling tucks, max factor, and Circuit City? Unions bought and paid for Obama, and he has their backs. In fact, when the Supreme Court decided not to take up the court case on the behalf of Chrysler bondholders, thereby allowing Obama to usurp contract law, I knew something had changed in the US. If you are not familiar let me enlighten you. Bonds have a higher debt precedent that any other in a bankruptcy. What does that mean? It means that when a company goes bankrupt that their assets are liquefied, and the bonds are paid first, then the class a stocks, then the common stock and so on, until there is no more money. Obama decided that instead of following contract law, that he would sign an order stating that the bondholders would receive 15% of their bands, and the union pension plan(which Chrysler borrowed form also) would be paid in full. Therefore, after Ruth Bader Ginsburg decided not to take the case to the court, she was thereby allowing Obama’s edict to be above the law. Travesty and it was widely ignored. I don’t even know that the usual suspects (right wing talking heads) brought it up. I am so sick and tired of the short term memory of the media. Look at the record. Bush Bush Bush Bush Bush Bush!!!!! It’s all Bush’s fault! Yeah really? Funny how although the media had been crying about the horrible economy since 2001, yet do the facts support this? No. Unemployment hovered between 4-5.8% from 2001-2006, and then with the democrats taking back control of the congress in 2006 all the poop hit the fan culminating in 2008. Coincidence? Hardly. Then you have Chris Dodd and Barney frank pointing all the fingers at no regulation in the mortgage industry. That’s like those two standing at the top of a building, pushing a guy off, then blaming the pavement for killing him. The lack of regulation and the corruption of these two is amazing. How they are still in office and not hanging out in Levinworth is beyond me. Look I am not absolving W, but it seems a little incredulous that these assholes are talking about Bush’s deficits and his unfunded policies. UNFUNDED POLICIES?!?! Like the damn Medicare drug benefit program that you democrats said didn’t go far enough, or the “no child left behind” that you now berate, though it was Bush’s attempt at being bipartisan, with the manslaughterer Ted Kennedy? I hear the democrats say, you never said anything when Bush was spending like a madman but you would be wrong. I was screaming at the top of my lungs friends. Stupid spending is stupid spend no matter who is doing the spending. Not a big fan of W, but I am grateful that he kicked some ass and we never was hit again. The demonization of this guy is sickening. “Bush lied and people died.” You people are morons. Every time I challenge someone to back that bullcrap up, they whimper away to come back with some conspiracy BS. Screw you! You can all sit in your rooms smelling each other’s farts and telling each other how great yours smells, but frankly you are morons. Was bush perfect? Hell no! He should have had a better plan for Iraq. On Katrina, he should have done 1 of 2 things. My preference would have been to say, “I’m sorry for the devastation, but it is not the federal government’s responsibility to save the day, and unless we are asked by the Governor, we can’t intervene.” And after the rescue efforts are done say, “Hope ya’ll had insurance!, as it is not the responsibility of the federal governments to take care of you” What he probably should have done, was sweep in there like Patton into Bastogne, and saved them since he should have known that Ray Nagin and Kathleen Blanco were incompetent. Anyway, not a big fan of W, but the more liberals hate him, the more I figure he must be great.
All the corruption in DC is really disheartening. The democrats passed this health care reform bill using every underhanded trick they could think of. Through the bribery (why is nobody going to jail for this) special deals (oh the Unions do not have to pay the tax on "Cadillac plans" but everyone else does?) then this "reconciliation" deal? This common excuse that "the republicans did it" is so stupid it is hardly worth mentioning. This didn't work on my parents, but apparently it works on liberals. Look, you had a filibuster proof Senate and a huge majority in the house. You could have passed universal single payer and really I would have had less of a problem. Sure it would suck, but at least the rule of law would have been followed. It's disgusting how the democrats manipulated the system, but the smug looks on their faces will be smacked off soon. I hope that the Republicans do not follow their example on how to pass legislation that affects all Americans. They can do it. Trust me. They could do some really nasty things. My favorite though is that they could pass a bill that states, "Taxes will only be collected from VT, NY, MA, CT, NJ, DE, RI, MD, WV, MI, IL, MT, OR, WA, CA, HI, NM, CO, AR, and the current revenue levels shall be maintained." Huh? Well I am sure that the Senators and representatives from the exempt states would support that, and apparently special deals for certain states are no longer illegal. You hear the Dems whining about corporations that can now run political ads in support of a position or party, yet where has their outrage been when the unions collect their members money then donate directly to democratic politicians 60.7 million dollars to Obama alone from the SEIU. Where was the outrage then?
In Conclusion: Responsibility. People have to be responsible enough to take care of themselves, and to take care of the people that they care about. It’s not my responsibility to take care of your sick relative. It’s yours. It’s also our responsibility to put people in office that are responsible with our money, and do not spend it on buying themselves votes. I have a soft spot in my heart for children. To me children should be taken care of, and if their parents can’t take care of that for them, they should be taken care of, since they can’t control what sort of people that their parents are. I can hear people now telling me how people work hard and they can’t afford to take care of themselves. Well perhaps they are the most unlucky people in the world, but frankly they are not my problem, and they are exactly where they are in life due to the choices they have made. I understand that people have tragedies in their life, and I feel for them, but it still is not my fault, so I shouldn’t be blamed or penalized for someone else’s luck or choices. If you disagree, then by all means, sell everything you own, and give all your money, time and energy to them, and I will forever refer to you as a Saint.
Anyway. There’s my “hate speech”.
Amendment- And one last thing. Nothing pisses me off more than some whiney ass liberal who thinks that I sit in a room glued to talk radio and the Fox news channel, implying that I get all of my damn opinions from someone else. I am not them and I am certainly not you. When was the last time you wrote an original piece without just posting something from the Huffington Post, CNN or John Stewart? Do you just run around the liberal websites looking for some piece that will stir up the fart sniffers and enrage a few ideological opposites? I have been accused of being a myrmidon of Neal Boortz, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and now Glen Beck. I don’t listen to these people, or watch their television shows. (If I do it is Boortz, maybe an hour or 2 a week) I do my own damn research trying to use primary sources whenever I can, although wading through the government bureaucracy and their websites are tedious at best. I comment on someone else’s link on what Glen Beck said about ‘Social Justice” So I take the time to go look up what the hell, ‘Social Justice” means, look into the background, and post an opinion. Then I get accused of following the Glen Beck Schtick. If anything that asshole is following mine. Just like yesterday. I come up with this brilliant plan to run the US as a corporation and give people 1 vote per dollar that they pay in taxes, then last night I hear Michael Savage say something almost verbatim. Maybe we are all a bunch of weirdos that think the same. Maybe that’s why all the liberals I hear sound the same, as they bypass issues, and go straight for the healthcare is a right, and pre-existing conditions are not a bad thing. Do you people even understand why the hell pre-existing conditions may be a concern from a company that is insuring your health? I tell you what, lets throw out “pre-existing conditions” on all insurance. Why stop with health? I think I would like to take out some life insurance on some dead relatives. Makes as much sense.
I’m done!
Health care-"This person can’t afford healthcare, so we should give it to them." Health care is not a right in this country. If you feel strongly that everyone deserves it, then by all means, sell everything you own, and take all the money that you make and give it to these people so that they can afford it. How can you support taking from me to give to them? Is that "fair"? You may believe in your heart that they deserve health care, but I tell you that I do not believe they do. I hear the arguments that they burden the whole system by not having insurance and getting the care anyway, thereby making everyone's cost higher. I have a solution. Do not treat them. Let them die. Oh, now I am really a heartless bastard. Yes, let them die, and maybe the next person who has to choose between getting health insurance and paying the cell phone bill, will choose the health insurance. Do you liberals understand reward and penalty? You reward good behavior, and you penalize bad behavior. Do you have any concept of consequences of one's own actions? If a doctor feels that he can give treatment to people without money or insurance, then let them. But if they choose not to work for free, why are they forced to? Are you forced to do work for free? Surely your time and effort is worth money. Why is a doctor, who has trained more than you any different. This is not saying that I do not feel that doctors that choose to do so are wrong. On the contrary, I find them to be noble. Using the liberal logic, where does this stop? I need some new business cards, but can’t afford to get them right now. Should a printer be forced to give them to me because I have a "need"?
The waste- You know I would not change my opinions on "entitlement programs" (even the name of this pisses me off. As if they are entitled to anything, which I do not believe they are), but perhaps if the billions of dollars were not spent (I say wasted) on pet projects, earmarks, pork spending, and worthless programs, I may have less anger about them. Building a road here, or a bridge there, or a hospital here, or a grant for studying this there. ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!?! WE HAVE NO MONEY! We spend more than we bring in, yet you (both parties) spend money on all of these vote buying projects and gifts. How can 1 single representative or Senator justify 1 dollar of this BS? Pay for what we have to pay for first (things that are already in law, and in the constitution), then if money is left over.... SEND IT BACK TO THE PEOPLE WHO EARNED IT! These damn politicians see it as their money to dish out, and this is insane. All we are to them are machines that send them money. What is wrong with you people!?! Simple math you pandering crooks. You have a need for 1 dollar, you collect 1 dollar. You can’t collect 1 dollar then spend 5 dollars. Any 4 year old understands this principle, and family that has to do a budget understands it, yet time and time again you spend money that a) you do not have, and b) you didn't earn. What would you tell a person that makes 20K a year, and drives a new Mercedes, lives in a 500K house, has an iphone, 60 inch TV, cable with every channel ordered, and eats lobster and caviar every night then you find out that they have 80K in credit card debt? Would you not consider that person irresponsible? Yet we keep putting up with our politicians doing the same thing year after year. At what point will you say ENOUGH!? I am saying ENOUGH! Fire their asses. Why are we sending 1 single dollar to any other country? So they will like us? I feel bad for Haiti, but let’s let George Clooney have his telethon, and let people that want to give to Haiti, give to Haiti. Nobody from DC called me to ask if I wanted to give to Haiti. Maybe they called you, but I didn't get the call. Are we supposed to believe that the people running our government are intellectually and morally superior to us, and that they know how to spend our money better than we do. I think that the politicians should have had to make a phone call or at least mention on the floor the names of the 5 people that paid that 219K in income taxes. 'Mr. and Mrs. Smith, Ms. Jones, Dr and Mr. Brown, Mr. Thompson, Ms. Wong, we believe that this university needs this money to study the sexual habits of college girls, more than you need to send your kids to college, or buy a retirement home, or give to your church, or buy your first home, or buy that boat to take your granddaughter fishing. Maybe that would shame them into doing what is right.
The "stimulus" -what a bunch of BS. What exactly did it stimulate? Not the economy. Not the jobs in the US. Just 800 Billion of wasted money. Then they try to sell it from the jobs "created and saved" BS. Are any of you buying this crap? If you do, then frankly please "defriend" me, because you are not bright enough to be my friend. Want to stimulate the economy idiot? Lower taxes across the board. It worked for Kennedy, it worked for Reagan, and it worked for W after 9/11. It works! Every time it works, yet they won’t do it. Why? I can only think of one reason, and that is that Obama is set upon destroying the economy enough to implement more control. Control over the banks, the insurance companies, the car companies, and transfer power to Washington DC. Maybe I sound like some conspiracy nut, but if you can figure out a reason that Obama and his lot haven't done the one thing that has been proven to stimulate the economy, and gives private business the confidence and ability to hire people I am listening.
Bailouts- Let them fail! Whining that it would have destroyed the whole economy. Awesome! That’s what free markets do. They go up and they go down. When the government gets to choose the winners and losers, there are no free markets. Bailing out the auto companies? Hmm. Why GM and Chrysler, but not Goody’s, Sterling tucks, max factor, and Circuit City? Unions bought and paid for Obama, and he has their backs. In fact, when the Supreme Court decided not to take up the court case on the behalf of Chrysler bondholders, thereby allowing Obama to usurp contract law, I knew something had changed in the US. If you are not familiar let me enlighten you. Bonds have a higher debt precedent that any other in a bankruptcy. What does that mean? It means that when a company goes bankrupt that their assets are liquefied, and the bonds are paid first, then the class a stocks, then the common stock and so on, until there is no more money. Obama decided that instead of following contract law, that he would sign an order stating that the bondholders would receive 15% of their bands, and the union pension plan(which Chrysler borrowed form also) would be paid in full. Therefore, after Ruth Bader Ginsburg decided not to take the case to the court, she was thereby allowing Obama’s edict to be above the law. Travesty and it was widely ignored. I don’t even know that the usual suspects (right wing talking heads) brought it up. I am so sick and tired of the short term memory of the media. Look at the record. Bush Bush Bush Bush Bush Bush!!!!! It’s all Bush’s fault! Yeah really? Funny how although the media had been crying about the horrible economy since 2001, yet do the facts support this? No. Unemployment hovered between 4-5.8% from 2001-2006, and then with the democrats taking back control of the congress in 2006 all the poop hit the fan culminating in 2008. Coincidence? Hardly. Then you have Chris Dodd and Barney frank pointing all the fingers at no regulation in the mortgage industry. That’s like those two standing at the top of a building, pushing a guy off, then blaming the pavement for killing him. The lack of regulation and the corruption of these two is amazing. How they are still in office and not hanging out in Levinworth is beyond me. Look I am not absolving W, but it seems a little incredulous that these assholes are talking about Bush’s deficits and his unfunded policies. UNFUNDED POLICIES?!?! Like the damn Medicare drug benefit program that you democrats said didn’t go far enough, or the “no child left behind” that you now berate, though it was Bush’s attempt at being bipartisan, with the manslaughterer Ted Kennedy? I hear the democrats say, you never said anything when Bush was spending like a madman but you would be wrong. I was screaming at the top of my lungs friends. Stupid spending is stupid spend no matter who is doing the spending. Not a big fan of W, but I am grateful that he kicked some ass and we never was hit again. The demonization of this guy is sickening. “Bush lied and people died.” You people are morons. Every time I challenge someone to back that bullcrap up, they whimper away to come back with some conspiracy BS. Screw you! You can all sit in your rooms smelling each other’s farts and telling each other how great yours smells, but frankly you are morons. Was bush perfect? Hell no! He should have had a better plan for Iraq. On Katrina, he should have done 1 of 2 things. My preference would have been to say, “I’m sorry for the devastation, but it is not the federal government’s responsibility to save the day, and unless we are asked by the Governor, we can’t intervene.” And after the rescue efforts are done say, “Hope ya’ll had insurance!, as it is not the responsibility of the federal governments to take care of you” What he probably should have done, was sweep in there like Patton into Bastogne, and saved them since he should have known that Ray Nagin and Kathleen Blanco were incompetent. Anyway, not a big fan of W, but the more liberals hate him, the more I figure he must be great.
All the corruption in DC is really disheartening. The democrats passed this health care reform bill using every underhanded trick they could think of. Through the bribery (why is nobody going to jail for this) special deals (oh the Unions do not have to pay the tax on "Cadillac plans" but everyone else does?) then this "reconciliation" deal? This common excuse that "the republicans did it" is so stupid it is hardly worth mentioning. This didn't work on my parents, but apparently it works on liberals. Look, you had a filibuster proof Senate and a huge majority in the house. You could have passed universal single payer and really I would have had less of a problem. Sure it would suck, but at least the rule of law would have been followed. It's disgusting how the democrats manipulated the system, but the smug looks on their faces will be smacked off soon. I hope that the Republicans do not follow their example on how to pass legislation that affects all Americans. They can do it. Trust me. They could do some really nasty things. My favorite though is that they could pass a bill that states, "Taxes will only be collected from VT, NY, MA, CT, NJ, DE, RI, MD, WV, MI, IL, MT, OR, WA, CA, HI, NM, CO, AR, and the current revenue levels shall be maintained." Huh? Well I am sure that the Senators and representatives from the exempt states would support that, and apparently special deals for certain states are no longer illegal. You hear the Dems whining about corporations that can now run political ads in support of a position or party, yet where has their outrage been when the unions collect their members money then donate directly to democratic politicians 60.7 million dollars to Obama alone from the SEIU. Where was the outrage then?
In Conclusion: Responsibility. People have to be responsible enough to take care of themselves, and to take care of the people that they care about. It’s not my responsibility to take care of your sick relative. It’s yours. It’s also our responsibility to put people in office that are responsible with our money, and do not spend it on buying themselves votes. I have a soft spot in my heart for children. To me children should be taken care of, and if their parents can’t take care of that for them, they should be taken care of, since they can’t control what sort of people that their parents are. I can hear people now telling me how people work hard and they can’t afford to take care of themselves. Well perhaps they are the most unlucky people in the world, but frankly they are not my problem, and they are exactly where they are in life due to the choices they have made. I understand that people have tragedies in their life, and I feel for them, but it still is not my fault, so I shouldn’t be blamed or penalized for someone else’s luck or choices. If you disagree, then by all means, sell everything you own, and give all your money, time and energy to them, and I will forever refer to you as a Saint.
Anyway. There’s my “hate speech”.
Amendment- And one last thing. Nothing pisses me off more than some whiney ass liberal who thinks that I sit in a room glued to talk radio and the Fox news channel, implying that I get all of my damn opinions from someone else. I am not them and I am certainly not you. When was the last time you wrote an original piece without just posting something from the Huffington Post, CNN or John Stewart? Do you just run around the liberal websites looking for some piece that will stir up the fart sniffers and enrage a few ideological opposites? I have been accused of being a myrmidon of Neal Boortz, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and now Glen Beck. I don’t listen to these people, or watch their television shows. (If I do it is Boortz, maybe an hour or 2 a week) I do my own damn research trying to use primary sources whenever I can, although wading through the government bureaucracy and their websites are tedious at best. I comment on someone else’s link on what Glen Beck said about ‘Social Justice” So I take the time to go look up what the hell, ‘Social Justice” means, look into the background, and post an opinion. Then I get accused of following the Glen Beck Schtick. If anything that asshole is following mine. Just like yesterday. I come up with this brilliant plan to run the US as a corporation and give people 1 vote per dollar that they pay in taxes, then last night I hear Michael Savage say something almost verbatim. Maybe we are all a bunch of weirdos that think the same. Maybe that’s why all the liberals I hear sound the same, as they bypass issues, and go straight for the healthcare is a right, and pre-existing conditions are not a bad thing. Do you people even understand why the hell pre-existing conditions may be a concern from a company that is insuring your health? I tell you what, lets throw out “pre-existing conditions” on all insurance. Why stop with health? I think I would like to take out some life insurance on some dead relatives. Makes as much sense.
I’m done!
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
What will not be done to save the Republic
To save the Republic.
1) Spending in the United States. Spending must be reduced. Since 2006 spending by the Federal Government has increase 40%. For those that are governmnet educated that's 5 years. What has occurred in the past 5 years, that has necessitated 40% increase in spending? Housing crisis? Banking crisis? Whatever the case may be, there is a very good possibility that we could save the Republic if we could simply undo the spending increases of the last 5 years. All this talk of "spending cuts" is all smoke and mirrors. Cutting 1.2 Trillion dolllars from the next 10 years projected spending excesses of 10 Trillion is like saying, I was planning on gaining 100 pounds over the next 10 years, but instead I will only gain 90 pounds. YAY! We lost 10 pounds!!! Can you see the lunacy in that? if not you are definitely a liberal or an idiot. You pick which one. So when the "debt ceiling" debate was going on, I said, "Call their bluff". There was no default going to happen, but the R's decided it was in their best PR interest to "compromise" and pass the Boehner Plan. A few reps and Senators, tried to hold out, but they were vilified by many on the right, just as they were vilified on the left. From the right, we were told that these people were extremist, hardliners, hobbits, etc. On Facebook, I was told that I supported Obama and Pelosi because I didn't support Boehner's cave. And remember what that "deal" was? It was we will increase the debt ceiling 3 trillion dollars, for 1.2 Trillion in cuts, to be determined by the Super Committee. So what exactly did Boehner gain? Meanwhile the left media decided to act as if just those cuts of 1.2 Trillion were disastrous and it was the Tea Party members of congress, that "held hostage" the deal, and they were to "blame" for the 1.2 Trillion in cuts. Does anyone else see the irony of all of that? The Tea Party members of congress, tried to stop this disastrous bill because it didn't cut enough, and unlike Cut Cap and Balance, which passed through the house with bi-partisan support, had no way of controlling the spending in the future, yet were blamed for the draconian cuts, which were minuscule.
So in conclusion: Reducing spending is the number one thing that could be done to save the Republic, but it will not be cut. Simply cutting 12% of the projected increases over the next 10 years couldn't get done. Republican leaders caved instead of fighting. They had overwhelming support from their constituents to stand firm, yet even with all that support behind them, they negotiated themselves into being blamed for no gains at all. So what makes one believe that they would EVER stand for real cuts? they wont, and eventually the spending will be so high that it is unsustainable, and the economy will collapse under it's own weight.
2) Tax Code- The tax code of the US is currently over 88,000 pages long. Why is it 88K pages long? Because this is where political favors are granted. Laws are written, and in those bills, an exemption for this company (now of course it doesn't say "GE is exempt" it will be a long description of a many different attributes that a certain company would have, or a certain municipality would have), a subsidy for that company, a special exemption for this type of person living in a certain area, or that buy a certain type of product. the list goes on and on. Just as the above spending is out of control, the tax code is another place where power is brokered. This is why in order to save the Republic the current tax code MUST be abolished. It can be replaced with a flat tax (a no exemptions across the board from making 1 dollar a year to making 10 billion dollars per year.), or a consumption tax. (again with no exemptions). I am a proponent of the FairTax, which repeals the 16th Amendment, and replaces ALL taxes with a national retail sales tax. I wont get into it here, but read the FairTax Book by Neal Boortz. Over 30 Million dollars of research has been put into this plan. All nooks and crannies of the pros and cons have been analyzed at length. It is indisputable, although many try to overcome that 30 Million dollars worth of research and 8 years of putting together it together, with a blog post with such esteemed opinions of Hugh Hewitt, who could't grasp that losing a mortgage deduction, when there are NO deductions, would not effect people's individual finances. Anyway. Fair or Flat, 88K pages must go.
So in conclusion: the current tax code is the number 2 issue facing the Republic, yet it stays convoluted because it allows Congress to retain power over the people. Any serious attempt to change it is met with opposition from both sides. It will not be changed. Even Newt 's plan, and Perry's plan for a flat tax is coupled with allowing the current tax plan in place. Why do you think that is? It's to lessen the opposition from the Congress, who can still pick winners and losers based on their backer's needs and wants. Therefore, since the current tax code will remain, the Republic will not be saved.
3) Entitlements- Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are the real bankrupters of the Republic. None of them are sustainable, and any attempt to reform them is met with fierce opposition, and even the Republicans that would like to reform them, cowl in fear from doing anything. Notice the opposition to Obamacare. Almost to a person, Republicans will say how Obamacare is the slippery slope to socialism, and is a socialist program. Yet if Obamacare is socialist, why is Medicare not socialist? Oh yeah, because it is so entrenched in American society now, that it is not seen as it really is. It is socialized medicine for old people. What people pay in does not equal what they take out. This is socialism, in that the extra that comes out, comes from the general funds (which we then borrow from China), which is also coming from a progressive income tax. I am not for letting old people die, but people should get what they pay for. If there is going to be a program to provide medical care for old people it needs to pay for itself. What one puts in should equal what they take out. A VA type of hospital system could be set up with the funds that have been put in. It would suck as much as the VA system sucks, but it should be available for old folks. You want a socialized type of medical care? That is it. Paying for that, but receiving an A+ best in the world, all measures taken to save and prolong life is not sustainable. Sorry. One's health is their responsibility. Taking the government OUT of the system, would force healthcare providers to compete for business, and the free market would prevail.
Social Security is broke. It has been broke for about 30 years now. It is a Ponzi scheme, and should be ended completely, but it will not be ended. the folks that have paid all of their life into the system, should get their money back, and it should be ended immediately. I like Herman Cain's plan of the Chilean Model, and also the Galveston Plan. Both of these plans allow private accounts that are owned by the individual. that's better than what we have now, but frankly NONE should be mandatory. Now if the govt, wanted to offer up some sort of long term retirement plan that PAYS FOR ITSELF!!!, then people who are idiots can choose to allow the government to manage it for them. Otherwise, people should be responsible for themselves and their own retirements. There are hundreds of companies that will set up a variety of retirement plans for anyone doing any job, making any amount of money, and if people decide that they will do nothing to take care of their future selves, then frankly they would get exactly what they deserve. Do I want old people to be poor and dead? Well yes, if that was their choice. Medicaid? Also Socialism, and welfare. Should be done away with completely. Does that mean that I want people who are poor to die, because they cant afford medical care? Nope. But they should get their care from a charity, not the government.
In conclusion: The 3rd biggest problem that could be fixed to save the republic, is the reform/elimination of entitlements. Even the word "entitlements" is ridiculous. What makes anyone "entitled" to anything? At most all they should be "entitled" to is their money back from Social Security, whatever their contributions would buy them at a government VA style hospital, and in the case of Medicaid NOTHING. BUT, as you have seen in this presidential election season, all of them oppose doing away with Medicare, and Medicaid, and hold them up as "great programs" (Okay Ron Paul probably wants to get rid of them, but even he said that Medicare part D wouldn't be high on his list to cut.) that shouldn't be hurt. Social Security reform (lead by Herman Cain, and later picked up by first Perry and then Newt) is at best still a government managed program, and nobody says get rid of all of it and let the people actually be responsible for themselves. So if these are the biggest costs for the next 30 years, why are we not going to do anything to fix/eliminate them? Because it is politically unpopular, because even Tea Party darling Michelle Bachman, uses lines like, "obamacare stole 500Billion from Medicare" as if medicare was any different than Obamacare. Nothing will be done to reform the entitlements, they will continue to grow, will continue in it's aiding of healthcare skyrocketing in the US, and will eventually bankrupt the entire country.
4) Immigration- Any country should be able to control who comes in, and who resides in it. We have now come to the point where even Republicans say that we need to forgive their previous illegal actions, and let bygones be bygones, and POOF* 14 million democratic voters. Oh I know, you think that they will support the kindler gentler more diversity loving GOP. Well you are ridiculously stupid itf you think this. These are not political refugees escaping a Communist country like Cuba, but people leaving a poor country looking for opportunity. That's great but most of these folks (at least the ones I have met and have talked to) are not the people trying to escape a communist country, they are those that would LIKE to live in a communist country. Just because they are socially conservative, does not mean they are fiscally conservative. What has caused California to go dark blue? Too much weed by the surfers? Look at the demographics of California, and the change from the 60's and early 70's Moderately Red state to the bluest of blues. Hmm. I'm not saying I dont want them to immigrate to the US. I want ANYONE, and EVERYONE who wants to come to the US to be able to. Make the system efficient and effective. Make the applicant pay for a full background check and health test. After passing them, they are allowed into the country. After being in the country for 3 years, with no issues, they can become citizens after showing a thorough knowledge of the constitution, a proficiency in the English language, and show gainful employment.
So in conclusion- A huge problem with this country is that in order to pander to certain groups, simple things like "what is legal, and what is illegal" is mushed to conform to political correctness. When such simple issues as this is bent, and caressed into meaning other things, what are we to do?
These are just 4 things that seem to be common sense, and not all that difficult to figure out, yet none of them will be done. If the first 2 were done, than the Republic could survive, but can you HONESTLY say that any one of the 4 will be done? Any of them that the Republicans could fight for? Any sign that the Republicans would ever take a stand on ANYTHING? Could you point to any example where they did? I mean stand for something significant. I can not. And therefore, I do not have any hope that they will. If we keep sending to Washington what we have ALWAYS sent to Washington, we will keep getting what we have always gotten from Washington.
So now that my guy is out, whom to support?
Perry? I like Perry, and I really was looking forward to him being the nominee. When he got in, my guy was at 6% and not getting any traction. Perry had a great record, looked great, and after having read his book, I was pretty stoked. If my guy couldn't win, I was glad that Rick Perry was going to win. He was strong on state's rights, got out of the way of private businesses, and was all around great conservative candidate. Problem was that Perry actually had to talk, and couldn't just give speeches, put out position papers, and ads. After the first debate, I was worried about him. After the second debate, I wondered, "Where is the guy that wrote, "Fed Up"? After the 3rd "You have no heart" debate, I realized that he was going down in flames before our very eyes. Hmm? Then Bachman, jumped the shark with the ritarded Gardisil kids Mom. oops. In swoops Herman, who unlike all the rest of the folks, has a plan. A simple plan. it is attacked by the left, it is attacked by the right. WHY? Because it represented a fundamental change in the way Washington works. So count out most people in the establishment liking or supporting Herman. That is THEIR POWER, and they weren't gonna let some outsider with a simple tax code that is transparent and hard to tinker with win. But anyway, back to whom to support.
Perry is not going to win, and should probably do the respectable thing and endorse someone and get back to the business of being the best governor in the history of the United States.
Bachman? See Perry. Same goes with Santorum, although frankly his endorsement would only gain the endoresee what? 10 people?
Paul. He definitely is the only one left in the race that has any balls to change anything in DC. Too bad his foreign policy is so ritarded. Actually come to think of it it's not his foreign policy that is ritarded, but actually his blame America first mentality. A lot like Obama in that. So no, not him either.
Mittens? Probably more conservative that Ronald Reagan and Margret Thatcher combined, but choosing to run in places like Massachusetts, one has to be a pantywaist scumsucking lib to even get the nomination there, let alone win. So who knows what the real Romney is like. He did pretty good at not screwing up the businesses he ran, and used the money he was born into to jump in at the top. So I like that part of him. I could give a shit about his positions on abortion. Romneycare. That's his achilles heel. So easy to shift a la Perry and say, Hey it's what the people of Massachusetts wanted, the legislature supported it, and I signed it. It sucks and was a horrible idea, but that's what you get from crazy libs in the Peoples State of Massachusetts. But instead it's the hill he wants to die on. Politically ritarded. How about a nice blanket statement from Mittens? "To all those people out there that would not vote for me, due to my ever shifting beliefs and positions: I am a fiscal, social, and defense conservative. I had to say those things before to fool the people of Massachussetts because they are idiots, easily fooled, and wont be voting for the Republican Nominee even if it's me, so fuck them. I'm with you, I've always been with you." The regular Mittens supporters would continue to support him, and the other 75% maybe he picks up 10% of them, and poof* he has enough to win. But he wont do that. No Bullworth moment from him.
Which leaves us with Newt. I like Newt, and thought he would make a good VP for Herman Cain. He is an asshole, and knows his way around the smoke filled back rooms of DC. That's what is needed there, in the position of VP. Now I am supposed to ignore the fact that of all the candidates, HE is THE most inside the beltway candidate, and even when he was out of office, he basically was there with his hand out smoozing and peddling influence for the likes of Fannie and Freddie, and now Medicare Part D. A million here, and a million there, for "consulting". Really? I guess some will buy that load of shit. Whatever. That's the way things work up there. Influence and power are the most valuable commodity in DC, and Newt had the connections, with the right, so companies on the left used him to get their support. Sure, it would be fun to see Newt battle in a debate. But the lingering question remains. Ask 100 people from around this country about the years from 1995-2000. Ask them about the budget "surplus". Ask them about the Clinton Lewisnky thing. Ask them about the economy prior to the dot.com bubble bursting. Ask them about the government shutdown. Then ask them who was to blame, and ask them why the economy was good. I bet at least 70% of people would tell you that Clinton was good, and responsible for the good economy and the budget surplus, and Newt was bad and to blame for Lewinskygate witchhunt, and the government shutdown. newt always got the blame, and Clinton always got the credit. Why? Because the media framed it that way. You dont think they can do the same thing? They already did a pretty good job at blaming the recession on Bush, and letting Pelosi's takeover in 2006 and the rapid decline of the economy, and the increase in spending by 40% since, slide.
So... whom will I support for the nomination for the GOP for President of the United States of America? Who knows, and frankly you should not give a fuck as to whom I would support. Do your own research, come to your own conclusions and vote for the candidate that best represents YOUR beliefs, not the opinions of talking heads on TV, radio talk show hosts, or a loud mouth like myself, but take a bit of advice for me; Chose FOR someone, not against someone, nor for "the person most likely to beat Obama". It is so much more exhilarating to be FOR someone, than it will ever be to be against someone.
Sincerely,
Ragnar Danneskjöld
Supporter of Herman Cain for President, until such time that he officially withdraws from the race.
Monday, October 31, 2011
Herman Cain- You cant beat a winner
But this is only the first of what will be many stories that will be dredged up by the left to discredit Cain. Nobody scares the left like Herman Cain. He shakes the very core foundation of what a black person in this country should act like, and should think like. Black people think like Barack Obama, Al Sharpton, Cornell West, Harry Belefonte, and they act like Jessie Jackson, Whoopi Goldberg, Kanye West, and John Lewis. Black conservatives scare the shit out of the mainstream blacks and the liberal whites who use the mainstream blacks to keep their power base. And here is Herman Cain, a likable, charismatic, intelligent, conservative black person who rose above his station in life without the need of affirmative action, welfare, or political favoritism as a minority. His very being is an athema to what they say is and is not possible in the US.
So it's gonna be bad. It's gonna be ugly. It's gonna make what Sarah Palin, who was also targeted for very much the same reason, went through look like child's play. It will be vicous, and vile, and at times it will seem that Herman will have finally gotten so much abuse that he could no longer continue.
But he hill continue, and he will win. Why? Because that's all he's ever done. He was told he couldn't go to the University of Georgia (not sure why anyone would want to go to UGA but anyway, might be my Carolina bias coming through), nor GA Tech, because he was the wrong color. So he went to Morehouse, and succeeded. He was told that he couldn't make 20K a year, but accomplished this goal coming out of Purdue University working for the Department of the Navy on missile guidance computers. Yeah that "stupid person" as some would have us believe is a real life rocket scientist, and his salary was 20,001 dollars per year. He was told that the inner city of Philadelphia Burger King chain was beyond hope, and that there was any salvaging it. They could just close those units and move into the more profitable suburbs, but he turned them around and made them profitable. He was told that the delivery pizza market was dominated by competitors, and that Godfather's Pizza was going to have to file for Bankruptcy protection, but he turned that company around to profitability. Then he bought the company. Then he sold that company for a profit.
In 2007 he was diagnosed with stage 4 cancer, and had a 70% chance of dying. It spread to his liver, and the chances decreased even more, but he beat it. And that is my point. Herman Cain has been attacked his entire life. By those that would hold him back because of his color. He ignored them and succeeded anyway. By those limiting self beliefs of his family fo making the lofty sum of 20K per year, but he didn't see that as an obstacle, just another hurdle to overcome. He didn't listen to the naysayers that said a business was hopeless and should be scrapped, but instead made it profitable despite the economy, despite the odds, despite the prevailing wisdom, because failing is what losers do. And when the doctors were telling him to get his affairs in order, that his chances for survival were slim, he didn't listen to them. He found the best doctors in the country, sought a solution to his problem and won the biggest battle of his life.
So as these attacks continue, and escalate, and they will, remember that this is a man, who does bend to the wills of others,he makes them bend to his. He does not shy away from a fight, he fights them and wins them. Cause that's what winners do.
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Why I support Herman Cain for President of the United States- Part I
Why I support Herman Cain for President of the United States-
First let me tell you that I am biased. Anyone that tells you that they support a candidate, but will remain unbiased is either lying or they are delusional. I love Herman. I will defend him personally and politically. I will TRY to be as objective as possible, but like I said, that may be impossible. I will attempt to be as even keeled as I can be under the circumstances. Those that have read my other posts about Herman know that I do call out the stupid things that he does, but I WILL defend the good things that he does. So without more ado.Reasons why I support Herman Cain-
1)999 Plan- I am a FairTax guy. I had written an “argument” for a National Sales Tax in 1994 for a logic and critical thinking class, and was arrogant ( I know! Me? ) enough to think that I invented the idea. My thought was, it sure does take a lot of time to do this tax return,(1040 EZ man how I wish I could just do one of those now) and what about all the illegal people, I was thinking specifically of drug dealers at the time, that don’t pay any taxes on all the money they make. I have been a supporter of a National Retail Sales tax since I “invented” it almost 20 years ago. When I wrote my argument long ago, I had no idea about “imbedded taxes”, payroll taxes, estate taxes, or corporate taxes. My argument was strictly to replace the individual income tax with a NRST. That’s it. My goal was to eliminate the loophole of drug dealers, and other organized crime people of not paying any taxes. I had not come to the conclusion yet that a tax on one’s production is parallel to stealing.
So when I first heard of the FairTax, I was beyond excited. I suddenly learned that in every single item one purchases, are the taxes that the manufacturer, salespeople, transportation, and everyone else involved in making that item, till when I purchased the item, paid. I also learned that corporations and other businesses do not “pay” taxes at all, but simply “collect” taxes by putting that as a cost in the good or service, and passing it on to the consumer. Ultimately, only people pay taxes. I also learned that because of the corporate taxes that a corporation had to put into the price of their goods or service, that eventually it became more cost efficient to make said items or services in a country that had lower corporate taxes. Hence, businesses moved their manufacturing to a different country. (Also federal regulations and more importantly government payroll taxes makes labor even more expensive, so by moving out of country suddenly a 13.5% reduction in cost is felt). The other benefits of the FairTax, is that since capital gains are not taxed, people from other countries as well as the US, can “invest” in companies through the stock market tax free. Can you imagine the influx of capital into the US stock market, if all “profits” were felt tax free? It could (and the 45Million in research that has gone into the FairTax has shown) that the stock market “market cap” (total amount invested) would triple in 7 years. That my friends is a lot of expanding business, meaning more jobs here, meaning more consumers here, meaning more revenues here. Easy enough to understand?
So that is the elimination of the corporate income taxes, now the elimination of personal income taxes. Every April 15th we have to report to the federal government not only how much money we’ve earned, but also where we earned it, how we earned it, which charities we’ve given donations to, how many children we have, how much we spent, and what we spent it on in the conduction of earning the money, how far we’ve driven, and even if we’ve lost or won money gambling. ARE YOU EFFING SERIOUS!!! Can there be anything more invasive of one’s privacy short of a gynecological or prostrate exam? But the Federal Government apparently has the need to know exactly all of this information to make sure that you pay exactly your “fair share”. The FairTax eliminates all of this intrusion. The only personal information one has to provide is how many people under a certain age live in a household. This is for something called a “prebate” which I’m not a big fan of, but it does make sense that one should be able to provide the basic needs to their family BEFORE paying the government. Like I said, I would make it straight, no chaser, but understand that this was put in to ward off the “it’ll hurt the poor” charges. The “prebate” does that, but it still doesn’t stop the “it’ll hurt the poor” charges. By eliminating the corporate tax and the payroll taxes, businesses’ costs go down by that much. The costs of goods to the consumer would naturally go down because of competition. (Sure the corporations would love to keep all that extra profit, but company b will accept a little less, lower their prices, and the war is on. I could get into the 23% tax on the goods, but it’s been covered plenty of times. I can do that in another piece, and for now I just wanted to express that I AM A FAIRTAX GUY! If I were to choose one single thing that I would change about the US, it would be to eliminate all taxes, and put in the FairTax. I believe it to be an economic producer the likes that have never been seen in the US.
SO… What’s this have to do with Herman Cain, and the 999 Plan? Herman has answered a lot of the main criticism of the FairTax with his plan.
PART I- THE 9-9-9 Plan
1) 9% corporate income taxes
a) Eliminates corporate tax subsidies
b) Lowers Corporate tax rates from the low of 15% to the high of 35% to 9%
c) Calculations are done on gross income minus expenses- Dividends paid (net income) This last part “minus the Dividends paid” is very important. Currently Dividends (profit issued per share to the shareholder) are taxed on the corporate level, AND THEN taxed again as income to the individual taxpayer. This eliminates double taxation of the same money
d) Makes tax prep for corporations and businesses 1% of what they are now. I use to recruit for corporate tax people. There are people that get Masters Degrees in Taxation. The tax code is so complicated; Home Depot (one of my former clients) had a staff of over 140 people whose sole purpose was corporate taxes. I could run down the list of different taxes, but let’s just say it’s a highly specialized field. Want to know the biggest geeks in the world? Corporate tax accountant, who can rattle on about a FAS109 as if it were the most fascinating movie you’ve ever seen. My point? The average salary of one of these people at Home Depot (not the best payer in terms of actual salary of my old clients) was 70K. The Tax Director? 350K (plus bonus) All of these little nerds counting this transaction, that sale, this asset, that asset’s depreciation, etc. and for what? To come up with the final tax bill owed by Home Depot. And this is not all. On top of Home Depot’s regular “tax department” they also have Delloite and Touche to come in and independently audit all that work. Millions of dollars, every year, just to count the amount of money to give to the government. With the 9-9-9 plan, the standard accounting department that already is in place sends out the “we made this much in gross income, we paid this much in dividends, and we invested this much in the company. It’s called a 10-K and a 10-Q and every corporation has to do them. Already in place. Poof! Millions of dollars saved by the company, more profit to shareholders, more money to invest in expansion. And don’t worry about all the tax people out of a job. They can use their talents on financial analysis to grow the business even more.
e) Corporations that currently are skating (GE) will not skate anymore. They will pay the same as the Waffle House. 9%
2) 9% Personal income taxes
a) Pretty simple. I make 100K per year. I give 10% to my church, making my tax liability 90K. My tax to the government is 8100 dollars. Stroke the check. If I have to explain why this is better than the current tax code then there really isn’t any hope for you. Personally I disagree with the deduction for charitable giving, not because I want to hurt charities, but because I like the simplicity of, I make 100K, my tax bill is 9K. My income is 40K, my tax bill is 3600. My income is 20K, my tax bill is 1800. My name is Alex Rodriguez, my salary is 32M, and my tax bill is 2,880,000. Simple, easy, no cheating, no whining. Just pay your “fair share” (Doesn’t that phrase make your teeth itch?)
b) Not only will this save people in actual taxes paid, but like Home Depot, people can all do this “return” themselves. I personally would save over a grand in expenses paid to an accountant. If I were to try to do my taxes now, it not only would take me weeks, but I’m sure I would screw it up. I can understand my own business and most of the taxes, I’m expected to pay, what I can and cannot deduct, etc, but my wife’s family has a “partnership” in which we are shareholders. I have NO CLUE, how to account for all of that stuff. It’s a whole other section of the 86,000+ page tax code. Am I supposed to become a tax attorney /accountant, just so I don’t screw this stuff up, and end up in jail?
c) Yes I wish there were no income taxes at all, and it was replaced totally by the FairTax. This 9-9-9 is a bridge, to that final goal, and it is SO FAR removed from the current tax code, it’s worth the wait to get to the final goal.
3) 9% National Retail Sales Tax
a) This is the one that folks seem to be focused on as the biggest problem to the plan.
1. By instilling a “new tax” such as the National Sales Tax the Democrats (and republicans) can just crank this percentage up whenever they feel the need. Why yes they can do this but would they? They already do this. All this “corporate jets tax breaks” stuff that Obama wants to get rid of, and that the Republicans want to keep. Did any of you know about that being in the stimulus plan? All the little breaks that are given out to this company, but not that company are bullshit. And they throw these little nuggets in other non-related bills. The best thing I can say to those that say are afraid of keeping the income tax, WHILE installing a new tax is this:
IF the 9-9-9 plan is written, (and I’ve heard Herman say this on radio, but can’t find it in print) to require a 2/3 majority in the Senate to raise the 9% National Sales Tax Rate, or the 9% personal or 9%corporate rate, OR change any provisions in the 9-9-9 plan i.e. “People that buy Low emission vehicles get to write off that purchase from their gross income”, would that quell some of your reservations? The beauty of the 9-9-9 Plan is the simplicity, not only as it is simple to the people to understand it. Come on, a government educated 6th grader could understand it; Democrats will find it a little tougher. Currently as explained above, congress throws little taxes (gas tax anyone) into lots of things, gives incentives (EV vehicles, Energy efficient windows tax credits anyone?) to modify personal behaviors, and they go by virtually unnoticed by people. WHY? Because the tax code is so huge, and complex, that it is easily done. So the argument that, “Congress can just increase the 9-9-9 plan to the 13-13-13- plan, or the 40-40-40- plan” is really moot. Yes, they CAN do that (preferably with a 2/3rds majority vote in the Senate and House), but unlike now, where they can slip little provisions, favors, pick winners and losers in businesses, exempt this sort of income, tax that sort of product more, etc, when the Congress says, We want to change the 9% sales tax rate to 10%, It will be noticed. Like a turd in the punchbowl, it will stand out there, as obvious, and the people can let their representatives and Senators know that they do not want to pay 10% in income or sales tax or corporate taxes. Can you see the brilliance of this? It is transparent. Take a crap in a forest with fall leaves all over the place, and the turd is easily missed, but take a crap in the middle of a white sheet lying on the ground, and it’s easily seen and combated.
So in conclusion, although I understand your distrust of the government in putting in a new tax, with the proper restraint of a 2/3rds majority needed to raise it, or complicate it, coupled with the transparency that the simplicity of it allows us to monitor any messing around of the rates and terms, I believe it to be a MONUMENTAL improvement over our current taxation system.
2. It puts in place the system for a full transfer to the FairTax, which eliminates the corporate taxes, and the individual income tax, thereby ending the involuntary taxation upon the production of an individual, and moves it to a voluntary system based on one’s consumption, eliminating the personal invasion of privacy of the personal income tax. As I mentioned earlier, most states, counties and cities already have a sales tax, and merchants already collect the tax, and pass them on to the county and the state. This system is largely in place already, and it is simply a matter of collecting the 9% (later 23% for the FairTax) and passing it to the states, to pass to the Feds.
3. One objection that I want to address specifically is The federal government has no authority over state and local taxes, which is the fatal flaw in the FairTax, and that without a Constitutional amendment the states can successfully sue to stop Cain's second "9."
I believe you are confused as to what the FairTax Plan and the 9-9-9 plan does. Neither affects what states collect, or how they collect revenue. Both only affect Federal taxes, not state taxes. As far as the Federal Government not able to tax consumption, actually they tax consumption already. Booze, Cigs, and gas are already taxed at the consumer level, and collected by the retailer. Now in regards to the actual FairTax plan, it would only be implemented AFTER the repeal of the 16thAmendment. Hope this cleared this up for you Michael. Sorry your friend would lose business as a Tax accountant, and tax liability negotiator, but pretty obvious why he would be against a plan that put him out of business. Perhaps he could use his Master of Taxation, and do M&A work, and make money off of businesses working, instead of manipulating a broken system.
So there you go. Part I in the Reasons I support Herman Cain, the 9-9-9 Plan. I hope I’ve answered some of the concerns about the plan. No matter what plan we have, if entitlements are not reformed, or eliminated, and spending isn’t cut, then we are doomed anyway, and that’s why tomorrow’s segment will be on Social Security Reform
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
