Category Archives: Economics

A New Year Message For 2013

The year is now 2013 and I wanted to take a moment to write a big thank you to all of the young people who voted for Obama to have a second term, and for keeping the Senate in control of the tax and spend Democrats. Thank you for allowing yourselves to be the sacrificial lambs for myself and my generation. You are truly amazing and I appreciate your willingness to give so much to us.

By voting for this group of losers, you have ensured that my generation will be able to spend like drunken sailors, get all of the benefits before we die, and you will be picking up the tab well after we are gone. There will be very little (if anything) left for you, we will have used it all up.

This President and Congress, like so many before them, are once again kicking the can down the road so that nothing can collapse on their watch, as it should have done years ago. They are spending more, taxing more, and borrowing more so that my generation can live in comfort and not need to worry about paying anything back.

The deficits are climbing, no one is cutting any spending, and they are working hard to raise whatever tax they can to make up for it. What budget balancing that cannot be accomplished by these methods will be attempted on more borrowed funds. Once borrowing reaches the legal debt ceiling limit, they will simply raise it again so they can borrow more. When that does not work, they will raise taxes again and the whole cycle will repeat.

The great thing about all of this is, I will have Social Security and Medicare until I die. But when it comes your turn, there will be nothing and you will likely die of hunger, illness, and possibly malnutrition…. because no one wants to look at reforming these programs now, before they break the bank when it is your turn.

Because you voted for Obama and his plan to make government a perpetual Santa Claus, you will be forced to eat healthier and live longer. But as luck would have it, the healthcare system will not be able to serve you when you get old and sick, and Social Security will not be there for you as you age. What little resources remain will go to those who are now your age, so they can be fed and kept healthy, while being slaves to the whims of government.

I have used this blog as a platform to warn you against these coming events, many others with more far-reaching audiences have too. You labeled us as right wing tea-baggers. You said we wanted to take this country back to the stone age and even called us racist for trying to get this message to you.

As a father raising two children I sacrificed much, so they could have what they needed for the time they were unable to provide it for themselves. I have been willing to sacrifice some things in my life today, in order to preserve your future, for you and your children. But you would have none of it. Such altruism has never been known.

So someday when someone comes across this sleepy little blog and this particular post, may you know how grateful I am that you chose the chains of government dependence over the liberty of self-sufficiency. It was just long enough to get me to my grave. Because no one wanted to make the hard choices now, you will be in misery looking back with much regret at the choices I would have gladly made alongside with you today.

Peace out, peeps.



Filed under Administration, Congress, Economics, Food For Thought, Progressives

Taxes And The Business Cycle 101

From this essay by Penn Jillette, we get this little snippet:

“It’s amazing to me how many people think that voting to have the government give poor people money is compassion. Helping poor and suffering people yourself is compassion. Voting for our government to use guns to give money to help poor and suffering people is immoral self-righteous bullying laziness. People need to be fed, medicated, educated, clothed, and sheltered. If we’re compassionate, we’ll help them, but you get no moral credit for forcing other people to do what you think is right. There is great joy in helping people, but no joy in doing it at gunpoint.”

–Penn Jillette

It’s amazing at how many people take offense at something like this. They truly believe that the government’s role is to tax people and give it to others who are less fortunate, than the ones who are taxed. Since the initiation of Johnson’s Great Society, the goal for government has been to wipe out poverty. But sad to say, it hasn’t been able to it.

Here’s why:

If government truly took money from Biff Anderson CEO and President of Entrepreneur Inc. and gave it to Ms. Molly Coddle who has nothing in the way of skills and cannot seem to hold a job, it would be one thing. I might even be persuaded to rethink my position just a little. But this is not what happens.

What really happens is, the government taxes Mr. Anderson and puts it into the Treasury. The Treasury funds a government department that has throngs of employees, with salaries larger than their counterparts in the private sector–better benefits too. The department is run by a political crony of someone who is in office (because that person was owed a favor for helping someone get elected). He/she usually gets a healthy salary, and expense account to go with it.

Many of these government employees are in unions that demand more from the Mr. Andersons of the world and the skilled workers that he hires. The union leadership gets their cut from the union members. So when the government employees get their checks, the union gets theirs before the employee. On top of that, the employees must pay taxes. Union dues out of the employees’ checks and taxes are in many ways, a double dip for the unions.

So let’s look at this from another angle.

Progressive government lovers will identify a problem. Ms. Molly Coddle is in need of a program to give her money so she can survive.

Government goes along with it. It sets up a department that requires money from the Andersons. We know it takes money to run the department that sees that she gets it. The union gets their cut. The government employees get theirs. The companies that do business with the government supplying the offices get a cut, so do the utilities that must heat the building, provide the electricity, and phone support. Ms. Molly Coddle gets her money after everyone else gets theirs.

So what if we eliminated the bureaucracy and red tape for money to transfer from Biff to Molly? What if we let Biff give to a private organization that will help Molly get skills and help her pay her bills while she gets them?

He can write it off on his taxes. And without the extra expense of higher tax rates to fund a wasteful government entity, he will have some money to invest in his business’s growth. About the time he can accumulate the necessary funds to do this, he realizes he will need to hire some people to help his business get bigger. And wouldn’t you know that Molly is about to complete her course work, which now gives her the skills to perform one of those jobs that Biff needs filled?

What about those government workers who will lose their jobs?

Biff and all of his CEO friends will need more help than Molly. With interest rates low, the bank is not going to help them make money in CDs. So the best way for them to make it is to invest in business expansion. This will mean openings in the private sector. Less government + more private sector jobs = more freedom.

Molly comes home tired at night. But she knows that she is not dependent on anyone else for her well-being. So on payday, she can pay her bills and treat herself to some fun once in awhile, instead of watching the mailbox for that check. That’s freedom.

Leave a comment

Filed under Economics, Food For Thought, Local Government, State Government

Wealth Redistribution 101

Ask anyone from the Occupy Movement what they want from the One Percenters and all of them will give some form of an answer that when analyzed closely, all boils down to wealth redistribution. Rich people have money because they wanted it, so they worked for it and earned it. But the Occupiers want what belongs to the rich man because they feel entitled to it, out of a delusional mindset that tells them it’s not fair that the man who worked for it has it, and they do not. Some may have wealth due to inheritance, but that still doesn’t negate the fact that someone before them, worked for it and earned it…..and left it to his/her designee by his/her own choice.

With this in mind, take a look at this video of one such Occupoop. Listen closely to how he attempts to make his case to someone who started with nothing, and now has much:

Did you listen closely to Harrison Schultz as he made his weak case for wanting some hard-working wealthy person to just up and GIVE him a job….. as opposed to FINDING one on his own, based on his diligence and qualifications? Finding something would mean he would have to do some work, it would denote the active as opposed to the passive. It means he would need to pound the pavement, going places to fill out applications, and selling himself as a person who wants to work. Someone giving him a job strongly implies that he does nothing to get it and is a tell-tale sign that he feels entitled to it. It means he feels it is owed to him and is a self-disclosing statement that he is a lazy person.

In spite of Harry and his ingenuous verbalized desire for a real job, it appears he already has one.

Schultz claims to be a co-organizer of Occupy Inc., according to his credentials he put up in his LinkedIn page. This movement has been raking in money from Soros Inc. and it appears the architects of this anarchist movement have been living quite well in the process. Some of them stayed in posh quarters while their programmed followers were camping out in the elements, stirring up trouble, and generally trashing everything they came in contact with in the process. At night when the chill set in, people like Schultz, Peter Dutro, and Brad Spitzer were in the lap of luxury, all warm and cozy.

But let’s get back to Harrison Schultz for a moment, let’s look at his LinkedIn resume:

Business Intelligence Analyst at Atrinsic
Freelance Strategic Analyst at Euro RSCG World Wide
Adjunct Instructor, Department of Sociology and Anthropology at St. John’s University
Consultant at MDRC
Temp at Clarity Temporary and Permant Staffing
Office Assistant at The Executive Source
Medical Records Clerk at Saint Mary’s Columbia Hospital
American Heart CPR Instructor at Saint Mary’s Columbia Hospital
Capoeira Instructor, Grupo Maculele at Sage Arts Unlimited
Student Intern at The Planning Council of Milwaukee WI
Assistant Head Lifeguard at Milwaukee County Aquatics
Lifeguard I at Milwaukee County Aquatics

In the video, Schultz claims he was a business intelligence analyst for a paper clip company. His resume shows he worked for Atrinsic, an online advertising and marketing company. Nothing in their website says a thing about paperclips. In the grander scheme of things, it really doesn’t matter much. But we all know if a man will lie about something so seemingly insignificant, there’s a good chance he’ll lie about anything… if he can benefit from it.

You can read the rest of his resume and decide of you believe his sad saga or not. But the point is, no one will be begging someone trying to obtain a PhD in the areas of Sociology of Deviant Behavior, the Sociology of Play, and Social Change….UNLESS….they are planning on making a career in the area of community agitation.

Nothing says I can become a One Percenter faster than someone who has written a dissertation on how to organize a mass protest that will attract social deviants like rapists, and anarchists who like to defecate on police cars in public. Nothing will guarantee a job for Mr. Schultz better than a doctorate from New School University in New York, a den of progressive academics who hate capitalism. It is highly doubtful the curriculum, there, is tailored for the kind of degree that will increase a person’s chances of becoming a successful person who will create jobs in the private sector. It’s better suited for someone who will set up a dummy company that can receive stimulus money from the government and filter much of it to a progressive candidate’s campaign, or an organization that will attract mindless zombies who are still trying to rebel against their parents’ ideals. It’s better suited for a culminating project at a radical university that very few people think about, when they think of hugely successful enterprises.

I have said it before and I will say it again, because I think it bears repeating.

The best way to redistribute wealth from the ultra-wealthy is to work hard to develop a good or a service that they will want to purchase from you. If it is truly excellent, their friends will see what their buddies bought and they’ll want it too. Once you do this, you separate the rich man from some of his money and it becomes yours. If you are smart, you can use that money to develop something else or find new markets for it, so you can expand the business and make even more money.

The Occupy crowd is not able to comprehend this. If they could, they’d be working on that next best thing that would blow the world away, like Steve Jobs did. And they would then come to realize just what it was that set Jon Lovitz off last week.

Leave a comment

Filed under Economics, Hypocrisy, Progressives

Public Potpourri

—Obama has admitted, he fabricated the New York girlfriend described in his book.

One of the more mysterious characters from President Obama’s 1995 autobiography Dreams From My Father is the so-called ‘New York girlfriend.’ Obama never referred to her by name, or even by psuedonym, but he describes her appearance, her voice, and her mannerisms in specific detail.

But Obama has now told biographer David Maraniss that the ‘New York girlfriend’ was actually a composite character, based off of multiple girlfriends he had both in New York City and in Chicago.


Just out of curiosity, I think most people who have an ounce of critical thinking skills have to ask the most pressing question. What other things were actually composites in that book?

—So with the last story in the front of our minds, I guess it should come as no surprise when we read about Obama pushing a false GM recovery story.

The Obama camp can’t stop clucking about how he saved GM and the car industry. But if the GM bailout is such a success story, why can’t it pay back its debt to taxpayers?

Maybe it’s because the government doesn’t want paid back, so it keeps its interest in the corporation. Maybe this the plan for all businesses it can get its hands into, to influence and control.

Something to think about.

—Here are the state rankings by ChiefExecutive.Net on the best states to do business in the nation.

Draw your own conclusions from the data, but the interesting thing you will note is:

1. Indiana just became a “Right To Work” state and moved up one notch from last year.

2. Wisconsin saw the public employee unions lose a battle to keep its members from skating on paying for part of their own retirements and healthcare. Despite the pro-union rhetoric, like everyone else, they must contribute. As a result, the state moved up four notches from last year.

—Sadly, former NFL linebacker Junior Seau was found dead of a gunshot wound.

Some reports call it “an apparent suicide”. It sounds a little suspicious when we hear reports that the police checked the girlfriend’s (who found him) hands for gunpowder residue. But on the other hand, he did drive his car off a cliff awhile back, saying he fell asleep. If it was by his own hand, I have to wonder why such a drastic act to a smart young man who still had many years ahead of him and much more to give.


Filed under Administration, Economics, Hypocrisy, Sports

The Folly Of Marx: Greed, Lust, And Envy

After reading this piece on the personal socioeconomic dynamics of Karl Marx’s life, I began to do some thinking about the man who so many current day progressives worship as a demigod in their futile pursuit of absolute equality. Here are some things that I pondered in that process.

This article is a look into his personal life and it digs a little deeper than many who worship his ideology will want people to know. It certainly reveals more than the Wikipedia version, where it just mentions  he lived in poverty. It’s is more of a contrast than many have been led to believe. The portrait progressives paint of this man is an idea is based on a driven academic who labored tirelessly to defeat a perceived enemy. He wanted to beat down bourgeois capitalism and at the same time, elevate the status of the worker. He wanted to take property that was owned and give it those whom he felt it was owed. What they do not want us to know is how Marx neglected his own family in the process.

Marx was an outcast by his own choice and developed an attitude that the world owed him something, which is not unusual for those who are easily given over to class envy. Marx had the education. He could have used the opportunities afforded him, which could have put him in a better position to advance his causes and beliefs without making his family suffer in the process. But he didn’t and it begs the question: If a man does not demonstrate responsibility on a micro level, how can he be trusted to do so on a macro level?

Marx gets the lion’s share of the credit for the concept of socialism. While he wrote more about it than anyone else up to that time, he was not the father of it (by any means). From the beginning of time, there has been greed, lust, and envy. With the best intentions in their hearts, many men have come along the way and attributed them as direct causes of poverty, proclaiming the need to rid the world of them. If only there could be a society that was based on equality, a place where everyone would share the wealth equally. There would be know need for money. They could just trade services and help one another, from the kindness of their hearts–knowing that all needs would be met.

This fallacy has played out many times before with similar results, with each retrial being a “different” approach by someone who thought they knew a little more about how to make it work. Each retrial has the same outcome.

One only needs to read the story of Robert Owen and his utopian experiment of New Harmony, a little town that sits on the banks of the Wabash River in Indiana. (He bought it from George Rapp, who failed at his own attempts to create a utopian society, based on religion and the second coming of Christ.)

Owen’s goal was to create an egalitarian society based on the utopian socialist principles that Marx had yet to discover for himself. As you might guess, the Owen colony failed miserably within four years. The reasons for the short existence of this community can be safely surmised by people who are capable thinkers and understand the human condition. It doesn’t take a doctorate in sociology or human studies to figure it out.

Greed is a necessary evil that drives humans. You can take a human being out of a mainstream society that is filled with it, but you cannot take the inherent greed out of the human. Even with the promise that no one would get preferential treatment over another, Owen’s society could not succeed because people watched other people getting the same rewards for doing less and less. What was the use for a citizen to work hard, when his neighbor was getting the same reward…. for goofing off?

It’s difficult to believe that the outcomes of experiments such as Owens’ were not known to Marx, for New Harmony was busy failing while Marx was just a lad. Owens’ stature was elevated in the democratic socialist circles back in Britain, while he was away in the U.S. failing. He was well-known to many like Francis Scott Piven is known in today’s socialist academic community. And with the notoriety in that clique, you have to ask, what it was they failed to see in the world of research.

Marx likely had all kinds of access to the works of Owens and his contemporaries, it’s difficult to see why he didn’t look at those failures and realize that it was a useless notion that people could ever be equal in socioeconomic terms. The only reasoning I can come up with is, he was stubborn. He thought that Owens just didn’t do it right and he would need to correct his mistakes and the others who failed up to that point.

Marx continued his pursuits (all the while his family suffered) thinking that he could get it right, where others hadn’t. He likely became obsessed with it and overlooked feeding his own family, while feeding that obsession. He never realized his own influence while alive, but the nations that were beset with the poor outcomes from trying to prove his system was viable were sacrificed under the same stubborn spirit and misguided will.

The Soviet Union and Communist China failed miserably economically under much of his teaching. For the greater part of the 20th century, both nations were deceived into thinking that this was the answer for the world’s poverty and injustices.  With both having now realized the error and having adopted capitalism as a basis for their economies, it’s evident more than ever that Marx was not right in his larger assertions. Even Vietnam has a booming capitalist economy, after the many years of attempting to demonstrate that forced Marxism was the hope for Southeast Asia.

Those nations that have made the conversion have done as well as could be expected, while others like Cuba and North Korea have maintained their status quo. In their continued contempt for free market enterprise, both are starving their people because of the stubbornness of their leadership. If this wasn’t enough to make you shake your head, we now have Venezuela making a useless attempt to drive the calendar backward one more time, in an attempt to once again demonstrate that the others didn’t do it right.

This flies firmly into the face of modern day progressives who are still telling themselves that Lenin, Mao, Castro, and the rest of the Communist goons, all had the right idea but just went about it wrong. They think that Obama’s  model of socialism will do better than those that have failed before him. They are just arrogant enough to think they have more answers than those who spent their lives trying to implement utopia on the earth many years ago, when life was so much simpler and wants were far fewer.

In all of the modern day progressive thought patterns and the variables they dream up to make their way better, they fail to take into account the one constant that cannot be removed. Greed.

The Soviets saw what Americans had and noted they did not have them. They saw their ruling class with everything given to them, for doing nothing more than being in the ruling class. In all of the many years of Communist indoctrination taught to the masses, they could not remove greed, lust and envy from the human condition. They could force the people to repeat chants, regurgitate socialist theories, and become endeared to a system that preached the evils of capitalism. But they could not take reality from their minds and remove the desire to accumulate wealth for their own selfish purposes.

They saw, they lusted, they envied. And so it goes today.


Filed under Economics, Progressives

Keynesian Economics: The Structure Of A Failure

Today, Reuters reported an explosion in Naples, Italy. The target of the blast was the office of Equitalia, which is a tax agency. Last year, Greek riots were taking place in Athens due to the fear of government entitlements drying up. And in 2010, who could forget the hissy fit riots by the French because of pension reform?

Why are these demonstrations turning ugly?

European nations that have embraced the Keynesian model are finding that the baby boomer generations will require more than what the government can take in and provide for them. Europe is already taxed to the gills and the population is highly dependent on entitlements. Europeans believe government owes them.

So what happens when revenues cannot meet the demands of the expenditures? With taxes already through the roof, the only answer is to borrow money.

Of course we all know that there comes a time when the debt has to be paid. The thing that makes this difficult is, the same conditions that caused the Euro governments to go into debt in the first place are still present. If a population cannot bear to absorb more taxes, the only real option left is to cut spending. But whenever any of these governments try to reform programs that are becoming increasingly expensive, the population goes into a rage. They take to the streets, damage is incurred, people get hurt…. all because the economy is wrapped up into a large government model with no opportunity for growth.

So when an article makes the claim that Keynesian economics leads to violence, we can have a better understanding of why. Getting people used to getting free stuff that they do not have to pay for and then taking it away, only leads to anger and rage. Giving men a fish to eat every meal but not teaching him how to catch it himself, only leads to desperation and violence.

This is what the current group of Democrats in this country have embraced as their economic model. Take away, give away, and pay for it by taxing the producers so they cannot produce enough to maintain. Then, borrow like hell in the process to make up the shortfalls.

It’s easy to see why trying to import Euro economics is foolish and stupid. America has always been best when it exports its ideas to Europe, and Europe has always been at its best, when it imports them.


Filed under Economics, Progressives

Occupy Inc.

Many of those involved in Occupy Inc. have made their scenes over those “evil corporations” and their one-percenter management personnel’s salaries. Soros Inc. is the money and organization behind it all, he is a one-percenter. This movement has made every effort to divert attention from a certain percentage of those one-percenters, who are being singled out. Soros good-Koch bad is the simple version, but it’s more than this.

Special interests are the primary guiding forces in politics, have been for almost the entire history of the modern democratic era. Both political parties have them, they’re just different ones. The ones who are involved in Occupy Inc are made up of them.

There are four kinds of protesters who seem to be turning up in the NY gathering. All four have different purposes for being there:

1.Those back by unions.

SEIU is using money that was laundered to them, money that likely originated from stimulus funds. This is the Alinsky model of community agitation, get money from taxpayers and use it to promote their own interests. Use it for advertising and membership drives, and do it by creating agitation that gives the impression of a crisis. It’s nothing new, but it’s getting bolder and more brash.

2. Academia–both students and their academic leaders.

Some students get excused from class so they can show up at the protest site, probably even get extra credit. Getting the next generation involved in this kind of thing is important to keep the cause moving forward, whatever that cause may be at the time. It’ll die out eventually, until this group of newly influenced agitators get old enough to gain professorships and influence a new generation to do the same. The ones in tenure now are the ones who learned this, back in the 60s and 70s.

3. Homeless–Street people, who have something they can attend free and hope to get free stuff.

Hey, look what’s here. Sleeping these streets on any given night and hanging out in the open is usually pretty boring with the same old faces, same old mundane existences. NOW…we got a party on. Free stuff too, if you can find it. Listen to word of mouth and be where they say to be and they’ll take care of us. Never mind where it comes from, just take it, it’s ours.

4. Ordinary people who are sincerely frustrated.

There is a lady whom I have known for 13 years, worked with her for most of them. We love her dearly. She lost money in her 401K and she’s not happy. She spent a few hours at a satellite site locally because she felt it gave her an opportunity to vent her legitimate frustration. I believe there are others like her who just want to express her displeasure. But in many cases, the anger may be directed at the wrong people.

All of these people are there because they are being misdirected. Instead of the people who make money and create jobs, why not take a look at Washington and realize that the excessive regulation has put pressure on people who invest money in things that affect jobs and 401K returns? Why not look at who controls the strings and who the strings are attached to?

We can start with the President. If this had been Bush, we would have DC flooded with this kind of action. The special interests that he was beholden to would be listed in the NY Times, MSNBC, and other liberal media organizations, daily. We saw it with Halliburton and the oil industry the entire eight years of his presidency.

So who owns the current President? Too many to list. You can learn all you want from Open Secrets.Org. It is there we can learn that Goldman Sachs gave over a million dollars to Obama’s 2008 campaign. Of course it was not the company itself, but was collected from employees by their PAC. But they did lend their name to the PAC for a reason. We all know that Goldman Sachs was deep into the housing bubble. We all know they made money off of the fact that the bubble did burst. And we know they got TARP money that they were forced to pay back after they reported record profits shortly thereafter. With the massive holdings of this money swirl, it’s easy to see that this is part of the 1%.

Even Obama, as an individual, is part of the 1%. But yet, none of these protesters want to believe that Obama and his government are in the pockets of many one-percenters and is actively looking out for the interests of those he deems to be important. Some, like GE, even get sweetheart tax deals where they pay nothing. In this case, we have a CEO who is on Obama’s jobs council and a CEO who just send a whole division of his corporation to China, and the jobs that went with it. And nothing gets said by hardly anyone……including the media that romanticizes all of this.

The purpose of this movement is simple. It is to misdirect the anger of the disenfranchised, as well as the ones who benefit the most from their disillusionment. They want these people to blame capitalism and cause chaos, so there will be justification to punish those who benefit most from it. The ones who did not give money to Left Wing causes or Obama’s campaign are the targets. The ruse is set up to draw attention form the massive failings of the Obama Administration.

From the beginning of civilization some people have been able to acquire more than others. This will never change. In the days of the staunchest communist societies, there was a ruling class and a non-ruling class. In the USSR, there was the party membership, and those who did not belong. An oligarchy existed then, and it had all of the money and power there was to have. Bribery and extortion was prevalent. It encouraged laziness and non-productive behaviors, because there was no incentive.

I just cannot understand how people can allow themselves to be blind to what us right in front of their noses. Bailout money was given to huge banks who overextended credit to house buyers, and they kept foreclosing anyway. Money has been spotted to dummy companies like Solyndra, in essence transferring tax dollars to huge Obama donors. They are in that same one percent.

So to the protesters I say fine, protest all you want…. if you want. But know who you are rubbing elbows with and know who is bankrolling this entire thing. Know that behind all of these scenes is a a group of one-percenters who are using you in their war with the remaining one-percenters, the ones who aren’t going along with the Obama lie.


Filed under Administration, Economics, Progressives