It's the little things they don't emphasize...this video lays out the basics of the Constitution so anyone can understand it
Friday, August 13, 2010
DEMOCRATS AND GOP BATTLE OVER BUSH TAX CUTS
Neil Boortz on Fox News explaining the effects of tax cuts in an economy in his subtle way:
In case you're wondering: 70% of economist favor extending Bush Tax Cuts. Link to Wall Street Journal article here as the source. Go figure.
In case you're wondering: 70% of economist favor extending Bush Tax Cuts. Link to Wall Street Journal article here as the source. Go figure.
Very Positive step towards Housing Reform by the Obama Team: Cut Out the Community Organizers
The Washington Post reports today that community organizers find themselves on the outside without a seat at the table where the new policies will develop for housing reform — and that they’re not keeping quiet about the betrayal:
Affordable-housing advocates raised concerns Thursday that the Obama administration is excluding consumer and community groups from playing prominent roles in a government-sponsored conference next week that will kick off efforts to overhaul national housing policy.
After the administration announced the 12 panelists for Tuesday’s conference, the nonprofit National Community Reinvestment Coalition said consumer and community groups had been “muscled out” by financial companies, economists and academics without a sense of how housing policy plays out in communities.
“Apparently being a community organizer qualifies you to be president, but it’s not good enough to be part of HUD and Treasury’s think tank on housing,” said NCRC chief executive John Taylor, whose group works with hundreds of community organizations to promote access to financial services for low- and middle-income people.
Inflating housing bubbles by forcing or incentivizing overreliance on subprime loans clearly hasn’t worked out well for most communities; we now have a foreclosure crisis, thanks to people overextending themselves on overvalued homes. The government interventions of the past twelve years have created crisis and instability, and it doesn’t take a community organizer to see that.
Cutting out the community organizers could mean one of two outcomes. Either Obama is serious about recalibrating HUD’s mission towards low-income rentals and away from distorting lending markets to push ownership where the economics simply don’t support it, or this process is just a beard to continue the status quo by claiming that the White House did its due diligence in checking out all of the possibilities.
Thursday, August 12, 2010
A Little on the Economy and Jobless Claims
Great video about the number of jobs lost under the Pelosi-Reid Congress since 2007:
By the way:
By the way:
- Initial jobless claims today jumped to their highest level in almost 6 months.
- The Department of Housing and Urban Development have begun issuing emergency $50,000 loans at zero interest to unemployed homeowners in an attempt to stall foreclosures, using $1 billion of Porkulus funds for the effort and $2 billion from the same source for indirect aid through state governments.
- foreclosure seizures have increased by 6% over last year
- Home foreclosures are spreading in areas that didn't have problems before, like in the Northwest and Midwest
- The US bailout of financial institutions, and in particular AIG, wound up rescuing foreign firms, according to a new report from the Congressional Oversight Panel.
- That $26.1 Billion Jobs package for public servants? There's already waste and abuse, reported a day after its passage. States that don't need the money are recieving it.
Hispanics Fire Back at Harry Reid
Yesterday Harry Reid said this:
“I don’t know how anyone of Hispanic heritage could be a Republican,” said Reid. “Do I need to say more?”
Seriously, this has been the issue for African Americans for how long? Nice to see the Democrats play the race card (i.e. if you are minority, you must vote Democrat). We have got to get past these political stereotypes and learn about the issues.
Dr. Manny Alvarez speaks out against Harry Reid’s prejudiced (NOT RACIST) comments about voters of Hispanic descent:
“I don’t know how anyone of Hispanic heritage could be a Republican,” said Reid. “Do I need to say more?”
Seriously, this has been the issue for African Americans for how long? Nice to see the Democrats play the race card (i.e. if you are minority, you must vote Democrat). We have got to get past these political stereotypes and learn about the issues.
Dr. Manny Alvarez speaks out against Harry Reid’s prejudiced (NOT RACIST) comments about voters of Hispanic descent:
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
Milton Friedman on Libertarianism
More from Milton Friedman about the principles of Libertarianism. Just felt like I had to share this four part series.
Milton Friedman - Socialism vs. Capitalism
This guy pretty much said it. I've found a new hero.
I just realized that I'm a pure capitalist and not the current definition as defined by the progressives of today. If it exists, I'm a Constitutional Libertarian Capitalist. I'll define this later.
I just realized that I'm a pure capitalist and not the current definition as defined by the progressives of today. If it exists, I'm a Constitutional Libertarian Capitalist. I'll define this later.
Monday, August 9, 2010
More From Black Conservatives
Some more from the Black Conservative press conference. The first two address racism within the Tea Party movement and the last addresses the 14th Amendment.
Michael P. Fleischer: Why I'm Not Hiring (Rehash on How Businesses Work)
Straight from the Wall Street Journal Opinion page
Why I'm Not Hiring
When you add it all up, it costs $74,000 to put $44,000 in Sally's pocket and to give her $12,000 in benefits.
By MICHAEL P. FLEISCHER
With unemployment just under 10% and companies sitting on their cash, you would think that sooner or later job growth would take off. I think it's going to be later—much later. Here's why.
Meet Sally (not her real name; details changed to preserve privacy). Sally is a terrific employee, and she happens to be the median person in terms of base pay among the 83 people at my little company in New Jersey, where we provide audio systems for use in educational, commercial and industrial settings. She's been with us for over 15 years. She's a high school graduate with some specialized training. She makes $59,000 a year—on paper. In reality, she makes only $44,000 a year because $15,000 is taken from her thanks to various deductions and taxes, all of which form the steep, sad slope between gross and net pay.
Before that money hits her bank, it is reduced by the $2,376 she pays as her share of the medical and dental insurance that my company provides. And then the government takes its due. She pays $126 for state unemployment insurance, $149 for disability insurance and $856 for Medicare. That's the small stuff. New Jersey takes $1,893 in income taxes. The federal government gets $3,661 for Social Security and another $6,250 for income tax withholding. The roughly $13,000 taken from her by various government entities means that some 22% of her gross pay goes to Washington or Trenton. She's lucky she doesn't live in New York City, where the toll would be even higher.
Employing Sally costs plenty too. My company has to write checks for $74,000 so Sally can receive her nominal $59,000 in base pay. Health insurance is a big, added cost: While Sally pays nearly $2,400 for coverage, my company pays the rest—$9,561 for employee/spouse medical and dental. We also provide company-paid life and other insurance premiums amounting to $153. Altogether, company-paid benefits add $9,714 to the cost of employing Sally.
Then the federal and state governments want a little something extra. They take $56 for federal unemployment coverage, $149 for disability insurance, $300 for workers' comp and $505 for state unemployment insurance. Finally, the feds make me pay $856 for Sally's Medicare and $3,661 for her Social Security.
When you add it all up, it costs $74,000 to put $44,000 in Sally's pocket and to give her $12,000 in benefits. Bottom line: Governments impose a 33% surtax on Sally's job each year.
Because my company has been conscripted by the government and forced to serve as a tax collector, we have lost control of a big chunk of our cost structure. Tax increases, whether cloaked as changes in unemployment or disability insurance, Medicare increases or in any other form can dramatically alter our financial situation. With government spending and deficits growing as fast as they have been, you know that more tax increases are coming—for my company, and even for Sally too.
Companies have also been pressed into serving as providers of health insurance. In a saner world, health insurance would be something that individuals buy for themselves and their families, just as they do with auto insurance. Now, adding to the insanity, there is ObamaCare.
Every year, we negotiate a renewal to our health coverage. This year, our provider demanded a 28% increase in premiums—for a lesser plan. This is in part a tax increase that the federal government has co-opted insurance providers to collect. We had never faced an increase anywhere near this large; in each of the last two years, the increase was under 10%.
To offset tax increases and steepening rises in health-insurance premiums, my company needs sustainably higher profits and sales—something unlikely in this "summer of recovery." We can't pass the additional costs onto our customers, because the market is too tight and we'd lose sales. Only governments can raise prices repeatedly and pretend there will be no consequences.
And even if the economic outlook were more encouraging, increasing revenues is always uncertain and expensive. As much as I might want to hire new salespeople, engineers and marketing staff in an effort to grow, I would be increasing my company's vulnerability to government decisions to raise taxes, to policies that make health insurance more expensive, and to the difficulties of this economic environment.
A life in business is filled with uncertainties, but I can be quite sure that every time I hire someone my obligations to the government go up. From where I sit, the government's message is unmistakable: Creating a new job carries a punishing price.
Mr. Fleischer is president of Bogen Communications Inc. in Ramsey, N.J.
For every dime taken directly out of business, it's another dime taken from you. This will be one of the hardest lessons that most of us will have to learn because we've been conditioned to dislike the system. It used to be that you get rewarded for doing the right things, but the current administration (and the last) have put out the message that bad behavior trumps all others.
This is the wake up call.
Why I'm Not Hiring
When you add it all up, it costs $74,000 to put $44,000 in Sally's pocket and to give her $12,000 in benefits.
By MICHAEL P. FLEISCHER
With unemployment just under 10% and companies sitting on their cash, you would think that sooner or later job growth would take off. I think it's going to be later—much later. Here's why.
Meet Sally (not her real name; details changed to preserve privacy). Sally is a terrific employee, and she happens to be the median person in terms of base pay among the 83 people at my little company in New Jersey, where we provide audio systems for use in educational, commercial and industrial settings. She's been with us for over 15 years. She's a high school graduate with some specialized training. She makes $59,000 a year—on paper. In reality, she makes only $44,000 a year because $15,000 is taken from her thanks to various deductions and taxes, all of which form the steep, sad slope between gross and net pay.
Before that money hits her bank, it is reduced by the $2,376 she pays as her share of the medical and dental insurance that my company provides. And then the government takes its due. She pays $126 for state unemployment insurance, $149 for disability insurance and $856 for Medicare. That's the small stuff. New Jersey takes $1,893 in income taxes. The federal government gets $3,661 for Social Security and another $6,250 for income tax withholding. The roughly $13,000 taken from her by various government entities means that some 22% of her gross pay goes to Washington or Trenton. She's lucky she doesn't live in New York City, where the toll would be even higher.
Employing Sally costs plenty too. My company has to write checks for $74,000 so Sally can receive her nominal $59,000 in base pay. Health insurance is a big, added cost: While Sally pays nearly $2,400 for coverage, my company pays the rest—$9,561 for employee/spouse medical and dental. We also provide company-paid life and other insurance premiums amounting to $153. Altogether, company-paid benefits add $9,714 to the cost of employing Sally.
Then the federal and state governments want a little something extra. They take $56 for federal unemployment coverage, $149 for disability insurance, $300 for workers' comp and $505 for state unemployment insurance. Finally, the feds make me pay $856 for Sally's Medicare and $3,661 for her Social Security.
When you add it all up, it costs $74,000 to put $44,000 in Sally's pocket and to give her $12,000 in benefits. Bottom line: Governments impose a 33% surtax on Sally's job each year.
Because my company has been conscripted by the government and forced to serve as a tax collector, we have lost control of a big chunk of our cost structure. Tax increases, whether cloaked as changes in unemployment or disability insurance, Medicare increases or in any other form can dramatically alter our financial situation. With government spending and deficits growing as fast as they have been, you know that more tax increases are coming—for my company, and even for Sally too.
Companies have also been pressed into serving as providers of health insurance. In a saner world, health insurance would be something that individuals buy for themselves and their families, just as they do with auto insurance. Now, adding to the insanity, there is ObamaCare.
Every year, we negotiate a renewal to our health coverage. This year, our provider demanded a 28% increase in premiums—for a lesser plan. This is in part a tax increase that the federal government has co-opted insurance providers to collect. We had never faced an increase anywhere near this large; in each of the last two years, the increase was under 10%.
To offset tax increases and steepening rises in health-insurance premiums, my company needs sustainably higher profits and sales—something unlikely in this "summer of recovery." We can't pass the additional costs onto our customers, because the market is too tight and we'd lose sales. Only governments can raise prices repeatedly and pretend there will be no consequences.
And even if the economic outlook were more encouraging, increasing revenues is always uncertain and expensive. As much as I might want to hire new salespeople, engineers and marketing staff in an effort to grow, I would be increasing my company's vulnerability to government decisions to raise taxes, to policies that make health insurance more expensive, and to the difficulties of this economic environment.
A life in business is filled with uncertainties, but I can be quite sure that every time I hire someone my obligations to the government go up. From where I sit, the government's message is unmistakable: Creating a new job carries a punishing price.
Mr. Fleischer is president of Bogen Communications Inc. in Ramsey, N.J.
For every dime taken directly out of business, it's another dime taken from you. This will be one of the hardest lessons that most of us will have to learn because we've been conditioned to dislike the system. It used to be that you get rewarded for doing the right things, but the current administration (and the last) have put out the message that bad behavior trumps all others.
This is the wake up call.
Sunday, August 8, 2010
The U.S. Constitution Page is Up
It's finally done. I have put up the U.S. Constituition in it's entirety, followed by the 27 Amendments to the Constitution. I explain my reasons for doing so, but some things for you to know:
- The dates when each Amendment was ratified has been included for historical reference
- Any Amendment following the Bill of Rights (first ten) has a link to the history behind them
- I've pointed out parts of the Constitution that have been overridden by other parts, just so you can see which will take more precedence over the other
Schwarzenegger's learned an Important lesson AFTER 7 YEARS
This is just a shame. He had seven years to make this happen for his state, and instead, he's passed laws that punished business through tax and regulation in order to pay for California's bureaucracy and social programs. His message is mixed too, he claims that taxation is the sole problem, but gives examples of overregulation.
The key point here made by Schwarzenegger (and good for him for recognizing it) is that if it takes California eight months to approve a business for opening while only 30 days in Colorado and 22 days in Texas, businesses will invest first in those states and put California far down their list — especially when considering the high taxes California also imposes along with its regulatory burdens.
Take this seriously, our Federal Administration is headed down the same path as California.
The key point here made by Schwarzenegger (and good for him for recognizing it) is that if it takes California eight months to approve a business for opening while only 30 days in Colorado and 22 days in Texas, businesses will invest first in those states and put California far down their list — especially when considering the high taxes California also imposes along with its regulatory burdens.
Take this seriously, our Federal Administration is headed down the same path as California.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)