Archive for December, 2016

LET’S TALK ABOUT THE JOBS AMERICANS WON’T DO AND HOW TO SAVE $MILLIONS

December 20, 2016

As president, Barack Obama managed to turn our culture from one of pride and responsibility into one of government dominance and citizen dependence. With a few of his signature moves, he encouraged acceptance and addiction to government control.

It’s true, very true, that there are jobs of labor that Americans refuse to do. Why should they submit themselves to exertion when they can sit at home and have money deposited into their bank accounts or their EBT card replenished each month?

Why work when it takes up your free time and demands that you be somewhere at a specific time, for a designated period and perform a defined task? Transportation becomes a problem if you have to report to an employer. Public transportation is often slow and indirect. Gasoline, maintenance and insurance is costly for a personal auto. Walking or biking is out of the question because the employee is often spent by the time they get coffee in the break room before beginning a work shift.

Americans are trained for a mediocre existence, not for productive and rewarding work. Flipping burgers, making up hotel beds, sweeping floors, picking grapes and oranges are all time and labor intensive tasks that are now beneath the dignity of Americans. These tasks and others of like ilk are rapidly becoming beneath the dignity of immigrants too, legal and illegal alike, thanks to the generosity of our government.

When sending money to support family members abroad, it is necessary to take advantage of all income avenues and streams. If that means using a stolen social security number to obtain stipends and benefits from the government while cleaning houses, mowing lawns or hauling trash for homeowners without reporting the income, so be it. The dual income model also works for citizens, just not as often because most of the “under the table” jobs are those Americans won’t do.

These habits and ethics are promulgated by liberals and, in particular progressive liberals such as HRC and Marxists like BHO. They are necessary to develop and build upon a socialist structure of government dependence. They promote voluntary enslavement to the ignorant, indolent and slovenly.

Turn now to a culture where everybody works for what they receive; a society that requires recipients of taxpayer funds to partake of meaningful toil in order to justify the benevolence bestowed upon them. Rather than sitting at home (in section 8 supplemented housing) awaiting the next cash infusion, why not make it mandatory that the recipients pick a head of lettuce or clean a motel.  How about removing graffiti from walls and bridges or picking up roadside trash?

Encouraged employment” worked when President Bill Clinton reluctantly signed the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA). Colloquially known as the Welfare-to-Work Act, it passed the House with 256 ayes (226 Republican) and 170 noes (165 Democrat). The bill also passed the Senate with a 73(R) and 1(D) approving with 24(D) rejecting. Most surprisingly, Chris Dodd was the sole Democrat to approve the measure. President Clinton now claims credit for the success of this measure.

The Welfare-to-work program, thanks to the warmhearted Democrats, is now so diluted and polluted that it is no longer a viable program, thus opening opportunities for illegal workers and unreported income. A re-institution of the program with some minor modifications would benefit Welfare recipients, the economy and the country greatly.

Depending on the state of residence, a family of four can receive as much as $46,000 in combined stipend and related benefits. (The actual cost to taxpayers, for this inefficient government interference assistance exceeds $120,000 per recipient.) For equivalence, a working family paying payroll and income taxes, would have to earn approximately $57,500 That works out to about $27.65 per hour for full time (40 hr/wk) employment. According to the New York Times, the median family income in 2015 was only $56,500 (about $27.15 per hour, 40 hours per week). Therefore, it is advantageous for a person of limited education, skills or desire not to seek employment and simply live off the generosity of the government and contributing taxpayers.

A program that would supplement wages for entitlement awardees rather than handing them cash and perks is one possibility to end, or at least moderate, the viscous cycle. Perhaps a tax break to the employer or even a reimbursement for a portion of wages may be in order. Granted, it might be difficult to incentivize employers with this carrot given that a family of four on Welfare receives about 102% of the median worker income for the same family size. But it would definitely reduce the federal and state financial burden for low-income families.

Of course, this would mandate that each benefit grantee (unless legitimately 100% disabled) seek and obtain employment – at any level available. Social welfare case workers and “job developers” currently employed by the taxpaying few, would also be expected to do outreach in local communities rather than spending the workday playing solitaire on their our computers or texting friends and family.

Help Wanted signs appearing in a particular area would warrant investigation, program explanation and contractual offering to hire the most job needy and capable. Though no obligation to hire benefit recipients would be required of any business, mutual gain for employee and employer should cause enough interest to invest in the program. Example: If a business hires Jane or John for an open entry position and pays them minimum wage + 25%, the program reimburses the employer 40% of the total wage paid.

To present an example, some assumptions are required. For this demonstration let us consider:

  1. a state minimum wage of $9.50 per hour. The federal minimum is currently $7.25.
  2. an employer burden of $23 per $100 in wages or 23%. (This figure, entirely dependent upon the Worker Compensation Insurance cost for a particular position, also includes SSI, Medicare, unemployment insurance.)
  3. compensation for sick or vacation time or additional benefits burden are not included in this formula.

Given the parameters above, the true employer cost for a minimum wage worker is currently $11.69 per hour, not $9.50. Adding 25% to the $9.50 per hour means the minimum wage for a program participant is $11.88. The new cost to the employer including burden is $14.61 per hour as the burden is figured on the $11.88 per hour figure.

By reimbursing the employer at a rate of 40% of the new hourly wage ($11.88 x .40 = $4.75), the business now has an employee at an hourly cost of $7.13 (not $9.50) plus the burden of $2.73 or $9.86. The employee receives $2.38 per hour above minimum wage for a starting position and the employer saves $1.83 per hour per employee. Both entities contribute to the federal tax revenue whereas only the employer does now with the Welfare recipient drawing from it.

The savings realized by the employer could then be awarded to the most productive employees.

Based on the $46,000 annual figure, under this program the taxpayers’ burden is reduced by $36,120 annually and the participant regains his or her self respect. This is not intended to make a person now on Welfare wealthy. It is not meant to compete with the median income of the U.S. It would simply offer a hand up rather than a hand out. It would also offer the opportunity for someone to increase their own income by demonstrating their worthiness before the lower level jobs are overtaken by electronics and robotics.

The suggested program will track participants for a period of 180 days. This 180 day term allows the participant sufficient opportunity to become familiar with the job and expectations. It allows the employer to evaluate the participant and determine whether or not to continue his or her employment.

An option available to the employer to terminate employment of the participant, for cause, at any time within the 180 day period is always open and would provide feedback to the program case workers and administrators regarding the individual participants. After three terminations by different employers within the 180 day term, eligibility for Welfare or program participation is revoked. (This will keep players from gaming the system and frustrating employers.)

The model identified above is nothing new or innovative. It has been used in numerous situations by non-profit organizations (NPO) for decades. What might be considered new would be direct state or federal involvement through established Employment Development Departments.

Is this the perfect solution to jobs and Welfare? Nah, it’s just a hell of a lot better than paying people to waste their time sitting at home and collecting benefits as is being done now.

LIBERALS IN GOVERNMENT ARE CRAZIER THAN THOSE THEY WANT HOUSED AND CARED FOR AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE

December 18, 2016

Liberals constantly show their dementia through their actions. If it’s not taxing workers through health care it’s taxing them at the store or through utility usage. To liberals in government, any amount of money a person or family earns in excess of absolute necessity is “disposable”. Disposable income is surplus income which is best used by liberals in government.

As a young navy recruit, I was advised, “If it moves, salute it. If it doesn’t move, paint it”.

For liberals in government the saying is “If it exists, tax it. If it doesn’t, create it, label it and tax it”. The left simply cannot understand that extracting money from the economy for studies to satisfy the predetermined outcomes of those studies ruins the lives of millions of people. Then, they promote more taxes on the “rich” (that’s anybody with any disposable money) to help those they impoverished through excess taxation. *Note the potential downward spiraling cycle.

New York City’s mayor Bloomberg put a tax on sugary drinks of 16oz or larger. Why? Because they exist and he wanted more money for the city to waste. In addition to the gasoline tax (which, by the way, is greater per gallon than the profit oil companies make), some states have tried to add a mileage tax to the use of personally owned vehicles. Why? Because they exist.

Governor “Moonbeam” Brown of California has a bill on his desk creating a tax on bovine flatulence. For those of you who prefer colloquial vernacular that would be termed cow farts. Yes, cow farts – your average, everyday, run-of-the-mill livestock gas passing! Why? Because ranchers and farmers try to derive a living by providing food and drink to the public through cattle ranching and dairy farming. They exist, therefore there must be a tax. The federal EPA is also trying to drive ranchers and farmers out of business with their own version of the tax.

California has already diverted the agricultural water supply away from the central valley where they once grew crops that supplied the United States and many other foreign countries with fruits and vegetables. Those growers now own barren soil rather than producing nourishing food stuffs. They still pay taxes on the useless land at the highest rate of potential use, they just can’t maximize or even realize the use for which they pay the taxes. After generations of production but with no income and land of little value, some families have simply allowed the state to claim the family farm.

I guess the good news might be there is talk of California seceding from the union. That would mean a savings of billions of federal dollars for the rest of the nation. Well, that is, unless liberals in congress vote to grant foreign aid to the newly formed country and continue taxing the rest of us to pay for it.

TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION AND THE CHANGES IN AMERICA

December 16, 2016

First a bit of American history for the uneducated public school attendees and graduates of the past few decades. This essay will serve to fill in for Gen-Xers and Millennials why conservatives dislike overbearing government intrusion. Unlike the subjects of submission and indoctrination taught today, this lesson will not include the acceptance of alternative lifestyles or gender confusion aboard ships sailing the Atlantic. The readers will be put upon to individually or collectively (I know you like that word) seek and define any micro-aggressions or cultural appropriations for which to find offense.

 

THE BOSTON TEA PARTY

‘Twas December 16, 1773 when the Sons of Liberty decided to take action against the British government for establishing a tax directly on the Americas for imported tea. The colonists believed that the Tea Act should not include tea ordered from India for shipment directly to the new world.

The Tea Act followed the Stamp Act of 1765. The Stamp Act required all British colonies to use paper produced in Britain and embossed with a revenue stamp for documents used officially as well as many other uses such as newspapers etc. The tax restricted the colonies’ ability to function on their own and procure paper stock from companies and countries of choice outside of Britain’s rule.

These taxes inhibited the freedoms sought by the colonists and the reason for venture to the new land. They forced the colonies to comply with and submit to British rule without having a voice in Parliament representing their own well-being.

The colonists rightfully believed, that beyond restraining their rights and freedoms, the mandated tariffs allowed no input from the affected and offered little benefit. In rebellion to the ever increasing and ongoing taxes the British government demanded from its outlying entities, the Sons of Liberty destroyed an entire shipment of tea by throwing it into Boston harbor. This act of defiance became known as The Boston Tea Party. It was the first in a series of defiant and aggressive acts that culminated with the Revolutionary War.

 

AMERICA TODAY

Fast forward 243 years. We, Americans, find ourselves in a similar situation of obedience through taxation by a government we have submissively allowed to over-regulate every aspect of our lives. We have blindly and ignorantly granted a graduated decline of our economic, moral, spiritual and personal freedoms and rights. Significant and relatively rapid change is needed to avert adverse reaction.

Cloward and Piven, true non-violent anarchists of the 1960s, advocated for the destruction of our financial and economic systems by overwhelming the recently instituted Welfare program. They encouraged people, eligible or not, to participate in government handouts to the point of causing a monetary crisis and breaking the system. The end goal was the socialist ideal of a guaranteed annual income that would end poverty. Their strategy did not take hold as desired until the election of our outgoing president, an ardent disciple of America’s destruction.

As president, Obama has increased the government’s obligation to care for indigents by increasing taxation and regulation on businesses thereby reducing prosperity and employment. Rather than destroying the economy from outside the government as advocated by Cloward and Piven, he managed to suppress the nation from the top post of the United States and the free world. He did so by spending beyond the limits set by congress, inflating the economy and allowing a flood of needy immigrants. By encouraging, if not ordering, his appointed minions in various government agencies to enact unnecessary regulations handicapping business and job growth, they also contributed to the stagnation of our economy.

In his eight year span, President Obama expanded the welfare rolls by seeing to it that meaningful and gainful employment was minimized. (Between 2009 and 2016 welfare spending grew by nearly 19% and $150 billion.) The 84 year old Frances Fox Piven is proud of the accomplishment regretting only that her husband, Richard Cloward, is no longer alive to share in celebration.

In 2008 and without cohesive leadership, men and women banded in small groups throughout America managing to command attention under such names as TEA (Taxed Enough Already) Party Patriots. The effort was recognizably insufficient to stifle the oncoming destruction. Either the president’s loyal followers continue to ignorantly deny the promised change as detrimental to the stability of the nation and the world or they accept and laud the affect of the design. The rise in popularity of Bernie Sanders is testimony to such sentiment.

Through the bi-annual elections since 2008, the people of the country have shown their support for the Constitution and disgust with the despotic, Marxist rule of our current administration by electing Republicans in all phases of government. With the election of 2016, there comes a significant change in the attitude and being of our national leaders. From the White House to congress to the governorships throughout the land, the people have shown their desire to return the nation to one of respect for the laws, opportunity and prosperity.

While it is yet too early to predict the outcome, the transition team is putting together a cabinet of patriotic military generals and other ranking officers who are disciplined and capable of righting the country once again. Their respect for the country and fellow countrymen is entirely different from the recent past administrations.

If the president elect can effect half of his campaign statements, there will be no need for a second confrontational uprising during the 244th anniversary of the Boston Tea Party as the government will no longer be one of repugnance and oppression. It will instead be one of support and security for the citizens.

Merry Christmas to all, and to all a good fight!

“FAKE NEWS” AND THE NEED TO REINSTATE THE FAIRNESS DOCTRINE

December 14, 2016

We have fairness in broadcasting today. Not all of it is to the liking of the left leaning outlets controlling about 85% of the news, and that seems to be the problem. There was little rebuff with the repeal of the original 1949 FCC mandate because by 1987 the majority of news outlets had a significant liberal influence. The few others were scoffed and marginalized by the many. Truly, the only controversy came when facts surfaced that did not coincide with the coveted stories of the day.

The Fairness Doctrine, introduced by the FCC in 1949, required that broadcast licensees present controversial issues of public importance with honesty, equity and balance. Federal oversight included reprimands and fines for noncompliance issued at the discretion of the FCC commissioner. The guidelines (typically acceptable for any government agency) were ill defined and arbitrary. Print publications were not included in the doctrine.

With the wider opportunity for voices other than those deemed “the only truth”, liberals now want to change our speech and the presentation of ideas. Political correctness, inclusiveness and gender fluidity all allow for pigeonholing today’s non-conformists or traditionalists as bias and bigoted. Liberals (socialists) want to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine with tighter guidelines and more controls that align with their agenda. Ergo, fake news.

The latest seems to be Russians hacked the DNC to overturn the election outcome. It makes all Russians suspicious whether or not anyone of Russian descent or even anyone inside of Russia had anything to do with the information theft.  Where is the mention that the emails were true or that they were generated and distributed by a phony, lying, deceitful, conniving and unlikable Democrat candidate?

How better to take control of a population than to create a situation and amplify it to the point of crisis? Fake news is a perfect way of introducing a problem. Simply fabricate some “news”, The Russians Did It – The Russians Did It, post it on the World Wide Web, await the inevitable dispersal and declare it phony information pressed by the opposition. By making it appear as if it is coming from your opposition there is cause to declare and allege it’s false thereby proclaiming immediate credibility for your side. This practice has been around for decades and known as False Flag incidents or operations. The new twist is nothing more than progressive adaptation.

Journalism is no longer objective reporting of recent circumstance or events. It has become increasingly biased, opinionated and political whenever possible. By tweaking what is said or how a situation unfolds, the reporter can influence the thinking of those receiving the information. It need not be entirely false, misleading is generally sufficient. It’s all in the presentation.

A headline like “Cop Shoots Black Man” is all many will read or hear. It’s all many want to hear. It’s all they need to know. The underlying story might be that the black man was a terrorist who tried to assassinate the cop or tried to evade the cop and blow up a bank building or such. It may also be later revealed that it was not a black man, but a man in black clothing. The lack of information is as important to the story as that presented. None-the-less, the original story will incentivize some to riot.

With a new administration on the horizon, expect desperate cries of need for an Information Czar or Minister of Truth to oversee and direct our enlightenment. It will be nothing more than an attempt to further subjugate us under the ruling thumb of pro-socialists. It may well come in the form of another attempt to re-institute an updated Fairness Doctrine.

 

IT’S TIME TO END THE CREDIT CARD SPENDING AND PAY THE BILLS

December 7, 2016

For just shy of eight years now the United States has been economically hindered by the distorted interpretation of economist John Maynard Keynes’ twentieth century economic theory. Application of Keynesian economics extended the Great Depression longer than necessary as it has for the recent recession.

Classic economic theory suggests that world and national economies experience rises and falls. Periods of stagnation can be moderated with reasoned spending and by controlling variable expenses. Keynesian economic theory, on the other hand, advocates that increased government spending in times of downturn spurs the economy resulting in shorter downswings. The flawed theory doesn’t work in a personal or household situation and it most certainly doesn’t work for individual states or nations. In fact, the larger the entity and economic platform the more incongruent the premise becomes.

Take the economic basis to the personal level for a moment. If you’re out of work, out of savings and your unemployment ends, your only legal choices are to live off your credit cards or borrow from friends and family to pay your bills. When you begin borrowing to continue spending more than you can repay, this is called deficit spending. Increasing that spending is simply beyond foolish. To continue this path without obtaining gainful employment or other legitimate income sources, severely limits your choices. When debt increases and money shuffling through borrowing and making minimum payments is no longer an option, selling your assets and bankruptcy become reality.

Governments have opportunities that individuals do not. They can print more money to cover their debt. You cannot. However, when the government prints more money, each one of your dollars, each one of your pennies is worth less. Therefore. it costs you proportionately more for groceries, clothing, gasoline, heating and cooling…everything. They can take more of your money in the form of taxes, levies, tolls, etc. You, on the other hand, have to make do with less or borrow more without concern for repayment.

For eight years now we have had a government that spends without concern for repaying the lenders. Congress is complicit, if not primarily responsible for repressing economic growth by allowing this to happen. Each bill passed with government spending appropriations only stagnates growth, indebts each American and prevents GDP increases.

It’s time to free the reins and allow the private sector to flourish. It shouldn’t matter if those at the top also benefit. Let them elevate their status as long as the rest of us increase ours!

Let’s treat the national economy as if it were a for-profit business we care about. Let’s stop the useless spending on studies to justify more spending. Let’s stop the deficit spending and begin reducing the debt. Let’s make government (agencies and departments, teachers, public works employees and everybody receiving taxpayer funded paychecks) accountable for performance. Let’s make public wages and salaries merit based.  Let’s downsize (or rightsize) the government and allow those non-critical employees an opportunity to contribute to the economy in the private sector rather than burdening it.

LET’S MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!