One of the easiest things Romney could do when elected to help fix the government is when the Cabinet level jobs are empty, don’t fill them. Allow the head of the EPA, DOE, Dept. of Education to resign and then don’t fill those positions. Start eliminating positions and having appointees resign from the previous administration and then don’t fill the positions.
Posted by hanson807 on August 22, 2012
Posted by hanson807 on April 30, 2011
is getting wider and wider. We are moving into a time when most of the gulf between the democrat party and the republican party has no compromise or if it does it is the negative definition of compromise. To expose or make vulnerable.
We have been going around in this country about taxes since the federal income tax started in 1862. Our president says that lower taxes for wealthy Americans is unfair. And if you go to the Huffington Post you will find Sam Stein telling you that passing a massive spending bill like health care was actually a tax credit for the middle class and most people according to some targeted quotes beleive their taxes are fair. Of course that was in April before the CBO and everyone else came out with a bit of honesty and owned up to the health care bill as being an increased tax burden. But all of this begs the question, by whose definition of fairness? Is it fair that 45% of the population pay no federal income tax what so ever? Who is that fair too? Secondly, if they aren’t paying any income tax what so ever, how could it appear unfair to this group is someone is paying 25-34% of their income as taxes? It also begs the question, what is the proper course for our government to take? If you beleive in the constitution, the federal government has no right to take control of healthcare. So here is where the compromise can’t be had. Either you beleive that the government has the right to control healthcare, or you don’t. The answer is there is no middle ground. You are on one side or the other.
This is but one split. There is a split between government control and no government control. Either you want more control or you want less. If you don’t want the government in the Auto industry, they fact that they only control GM is not bipartisan, you just lost and they gained control.
The difference between a communist regime and a fascist regime, in my opinion, is how it came into power.I believe that fascist regimes come to power via an election and communist through the over throw of a government. Currently we have a regime who is taking over banking, heavy industry and now the medical industry and insurance industry. There is no middle ground for people like me. A little control is more control than I think the government ought to have. Secondly, who are these people who are taking control? The current president has never run a business in his life nor has he worked for anyone but governmental entities. The people he hires are in the same boat with most working for law firms or consulting firms whose main business is how to interact with the government. Some would call these business men but they were just in a private sector job figuring out how to bilk the government. They didn’t produce a product of any sort.
One has to think about why our country was founded as it was. The idea was a government that did a few necessary evils. It talked to foreign governments as our representatives. They had courts to settle disputes and punish those who deprived others of property or life. The rest of living was left up to the citizens and the government had nothing to do with it.
As time marched on we added stuff like education. Who could possibly argue that children shouldn’t be educated and that this education is a contribution to society. There is no advantage to having an uneducated society in a free society. We added mine safety, we added a labor relations board and a war department. All sounded like or were advertised as things we simply couldn’t live without. Then as time marched on we added stuff like social security and medicare and medicaid advertised as being necessary to support the poor and elderly. But the amounted to a move on the part of federal government to gain more control. All of this pushed the federal government further and further into control of every day life.
What we have now is people having to ask uneducated, unqualified bureaucrats for permission to work on, drill or modify their own property. Who are the people at the EPA and what are their qualifications? Currently the head of the EPA is Lisa Jackson. In her adult life she has never worked for anyone but the government. She has never owned a business or worked for a company. Right out of college she went to work for the government. Business has to talk to her before they get to make a decision. How is she qualified to make a decision that effects a company and its employees? She has always been a government employee. Think about that for a second. She has more control than most of the CEO’s who have paid her salary for her entire career. They didn’t get to make bad decisions and if they did they were still stuck paying her. Then the EPA steps up and claims the responsibility of regulating CO2. That amounts to a control over every single business in the country from farming to delivering flowers. And what is the right that she has? She has the right of your private property up to and including your lawn mower which emits CO2. No thanks and that is not in the constitution.
The split in America is getting widder because those people like myself believe the government is taking controls it has no right too. We don’t exist to enhance, fund and serve the federal government. That was what our fore fathers disliked about a monarchy. They, as we do, existed for themselves. They could farm, go to market and buy and sell products all without the slightest involvement of the government. Today it is nearly impossible to do anything at all without the government being involved in some way shape or form. It has not improved our country. The split is with those that think the government should be doing these things. There is no middle ground.
Posted by hanson807 on June 29, 2010
sounds like a hokey infomercial. What idiot would recommend to someone going broke that you spend more money? Well, lots of people like Krugman do. He is not the only one who points to the recession spending of 1981-82. Scot Sumner bends over backwards to agree with him also. It simply isn’t possible to spend our way to prosperity. They have never known or maybe just never acknowledged where wealth comes from. It is not printed by the government. Those bills you have in your wallet are just like a written check, they are only worth something when there is money in the bank. If you print another check book, that isn’t the same as putting money in the bank.
We got lucky after WW II, and we got lucky after 1980. Both had new industries that didn’t diminish old industries and contributed millions of jobs and wealth to the economy to recover from recession/depression. Today we don’t. That doesn’t mean we couldn’t. We actually have one close at hand but it would take some courage.
We could drop all taxes on the medical system. We could make all medical 100% tax deductible. We could reform the laws concerning medical malpractice and the laws concerning testing of new drugs. What could happen is to have the US become a place to take medical holidays. People would come from world round to be treated in our country. We could develop new drugs, procedures and treatments with a fury never seen before. We are developing pharmaceuticals faster now than ever. If we open ourselves up to development, we could start the next giant leap forward if we had the courage to get out of the way.
We could also turn to robotics and batteries. These fuel industry and engineering. Again, we would have to make an effort to make these fields attractive. Reduce the taxes on the industries, reduce taxes on exports and imports of metals. Again we are looking for something to fuel the recovery. Wealth made, not confiscated from those who work.
Posted by hanson807 on January 29, 2010
when the ends are polar. The democrat party wants to nationalize health care. They want the government to control health care. The conservatives don’t want any government control. So there is no compromise possible.
This is like be held up by a mugger. He says he will compromise. You have 100 dollars in your wallet and several credit cards, he will only take 60 bucks and one of the credit card. Did you compormise? He got money he shouldn’t have and a credit card of yours that he shouldn’t have. What did you get? Well a democrat would tell you that you got 40 bucks and the rest of your credit cards. Everyone else would tell you what really happened, you got robbed.
A person can compromise only when a principal is not violated. If you both agree that an outcome is right, you can compromise on how to get there. When the way to compromise is to allow the other side to violate a principal that you have, you have simply lost and you will gain absolutely nothing. They will gain everything.
This is the Health Care debate. Those who believe that the government should not be involved in health care have no middle ground with those who believe in government control of the health care system. Either you stand by the principal of no government control and vote 100% of the time against the health care bills or you capitulate and violate your principal. If you can be shamed into violating your principals, you don’t have any. The president tried to shame the republicans into crossing the aisle and voting for the health care bill. The principal is clear, no government control. Stand by the principal and vote against it with pride.
Posted by hanson807 on July 29, 2009
for what? The US oil consumption is down. Coal production and consumption is down. We are in a depression currently and even electrical use is down. So it appears that we are cutting back on our energy consumption. The cost of doing business is already limiting our energy consumption, so why do we need a cap and trade?
The European Union currently has a failed system. Although some analysts, those who are liberal and at universities at least, are saying it is a success. But what Success? Even the report from Pew Reports says that it was a failure from 2005 to 2008, but now from 2008 on its a success. Of course manufacturing is diving so the use of coal, gas and other power sources is dropping. Starting in 2008 the consumption has declined as the economy dropped. This should be solid proof that the only way the system will work is in declining markets. Other than that, it is a dismal failure. Also, it relies on member states to report actual quantities and has no means to measure them. So they can lie and aren’t caught.
Here is a best case scenario of what kind of corruption we will likely see. Senators and Congressman through friends and front companies purchase closed or out of business steel mill or other similar plants, receive their allotment of CO2 credits then sell them in the market and make millions. Secondly, it sets a new artificial low mark for the steel mills. The price of steel or any other material will have to pass what could be made by selling the credits. If the price of the commodity drops below what they could sell the carbon credits for, they close the doors and lay the off the workers. The credits and their value have now become an artificial floor for prices in the US. Foreign competitors now know how to kill our industry, price just under the Cap and Trade value and bankrupt us. A fake market will fool everyone but the dollar. It can never be fooled.
The only true answer to lowering the use of carbon based fuels is to have alternatives that are viable. The problem is, as alternatives show up and they are viable they price of the carbon based fuel goes down. The alternatives, by the nature of being alternative will be expensive. Third world countries won’t use them they will use the less expensive fossil fuels. Nuclear is viable but opponents can force the price of nuclear power up by unreasonable demands during the production of the plant. They can drive the price up by telling the nuclear plants they can’t store spent fuel on site, you can’t reprocess the fuel and use it again, and we will make sure there is no where to ship the waste. So we want to use less fossil fuels but we don’t want to use nuclear. Vote accordingly.
The cap and trade is being pushed by a bunch of folks who plan to benefit monetarily from the system. They can set up a bureaucracy and put the jobs in plum list for the incoming administrations. This will be another road block to get around to prosperity.
Posted by hanson807 on June 20, 2009
was what the democrat party was after, they could do it without taking over the healthcare system. There are steps the congress and the senate could take to make healthcare more affordable for everyone and add an incentive for people to get healthcare.
Right now if you want to deduct medical it can only be the portion that is greater than 7.5% of your income. “You can deduct only the amount of your medical and dental expenses that is more than 7.5% of Dental Expenses your adjusted gross income (Form 1040, line Expenses? 38).(chapter 21) If this was changed so that all medical expenses were tax deductible and not subject to the above 7.5% rule, the entire cost of your medical insurance could be deducted. Then the government would have no need to raise taxes to give you money to pay your insurance. Secondly, they could give companies a tax credit equal to 15% of the money that they pay for health insurance for their employees. The company would have incentive to provide good health insurance. Again, the government would have no control and would not have a hand in selecting your health insurance or dictating cost to the company.
Other steps could be taken to reduce the time drugs and medical procedures are approved by the FDA. For new drugs and procedures a tax free period could be enacted. This would stimulate bio-medical research possibly providing much needed jobs for the economic recovery.
These are simple, government free methods of stimulating growth, lowering taxes and keeping the government out of the healthcare business. But that isn’t the goal is it? That is not what the left wants. To do these things is to admit the private sector and individuals can solve problems that the government can’t. And that is something they are not about to do.
Posted by hanson807 on June 16, 2009
The oil and coal production and use have been declining now for almost a year. Parts and use of trucking has dropped significantly in the past year. Airline travel is also dropping off. Trucks are shipping 13% less freight. These kinds of declines do not show a slowing of the decline of our current economy, they show just how deep we have currently droped.
Tax receipts, the money the IRS takes in has declined 34%. This is indicative of a huge decline. That shows that the American public has taken home significantly less pay than the previous year. This means they will buy less cars and trucks, less goods and services in the following months. The current unemployment level is 9.4%. The only thing the report said was that the rate of loss of jobs has declined. That really means nothing. As the percentage grows, there are less and less jobs to lose so the percentage will continue to drop. The unemployment by mid August will be above 10%. I would predict that if it hits 12% the government will be forced to raid all 401k’s to bolster the social security funds to maintain benefits to recipients. The talk about taking the 401K money has started. More designs are being drawn up to gain control of more financial markets.
What has happened is not that complicated. We have come to the end of a cycle. The computer age, the age we are in, grew for years and bolstered our economy. As the factories became more efficient and the market began to age we reached a plateau. We had 9/11 and then the war in Iraq. The entire time we had a press that disliked Bush. So the press talked the economy down as well as all of the democrat politicians. Since most are liberal, they have wanted us to fall. The problem is, we are a keystone species. Our economy drives the economies of China who some see as a major player with the posibility of over taking the US in economy. However, with the decline in the US economy we see a corresponding and larger decrease in the Chinese economy. Amazingly enough, the talking heads beleive that the amount of government control in China will actually help their economy and enable them to improve the economy faster. Is it any wonder that these same talking heads want more control here?
I beleive we need to start looking at new technologies and industries to rescue the economy. Start investing in upcoming industries such as robotics and bio-science. We have not seen the jump in biological science that we will see. The increase in drugs and medicines is exponential. Also look for jumps in technology that hooks humans to computers. The thing not to do is beleive we can have a return to where we were. I am not saying it won’t be as good. Of course it will. As a matter of fact it will be significantly better by all measures. But the government is lying about slowing the job loss and regaining jobs. This is a change in our economy. It is an opening for a new technology to emerge and a push to leave things behind. We are having this dip because we are in the lull between era’s. The government can’t spend our way out of it. We can invest and grow our way out of it but not by old industries and ideas. Look ahead, the economy of the old era is in decline.
Posted by hanson807 on June 6, 2009
The oil and coal production and use have been declining now for almost a year. Parts and use of trucking has dropped significantly in the past year. Tax revenue has dropped significantly as well. Currently it is a downward spiral. As less people are employed and factories shutter, the demand for oil and coal go down. As less people are employed there is less tax revenue and less products are purchased and then factories get shuttered.
The spiral will continue until there is no real end in site at this time. Contrary to what the government says, we are no where near the end and we have not even come close to the bottom. The government has no answer when asked what will make the economy stronger.
We are on the verge of two possible revolutions that could bring us out of the depression we are in currently. I should first premise this with a discussion of the last two severe economic situations we were in. The great depression ended after WW II. But not because of WW II. It ended because we started an entire new industry. The mass production of kitchen and household appliances. It created millions of new jobs around the world making stoves, washing machines and refrigerators. Although refrigerators were created just after the first world war, production didn’t really ramp up until after the second world war. The US was broke after WW II. The war left an immense debt. Manufacturing however had some major improvements and the boom in manufacturing got us out of debt. In 1980 IBM released the IBM PC. This innovation was the start of the computer revolution. Sales and advances brought us out of the recession. For those that argue Reagan did, sorry he didn’t. He was a good president and lowering taxes as well as standing up to tyranny were good things to do, the computer age came in 1980 and that is why the economy boomed. Let me clarify why it boomed. Millions of jobs were created. Both making computers and programming them. Secondary markets on the computers themselves drove an immense amount of wealth as well. There was E-Bay and day trading. None of these jobs was a replacement of another industry. It was just a brand new industry with millions of jobs. As sales picked up, capital picked up and we were off and running.
What will get us out of this economic slide will be a new industry. The question is which one. Of course it could be two industries but I don’t know I am only making an educated prediction based on information I read. I think it will either be robots or some extraordinary medical advances.
In the Iraq war, when we started we had a few predator drones. Some considered them a waste. But we will consider them part of the flat earth society. Currently we have more than 15,000 drones and robots deployed in Iraq. Some are for ordinance disposal and some for actually patrolling the border. Well one has to ask, how about moving irrigation pipe in the field or picking tomatoes? I believe this will also alleviate the illegal alien issue as well. I think that the next big car manufacturer will be the one that builds a car without a single human hand. No cost or overhead of employees. Also consider the textile industry and what that will mean. More done by robots at home and less imports. Localized manufacturing because of robots. What will we export? Almost everything. Our imports will be natural resources for production. Our schools loaded with robot engineers and boom will rush on.
The second great advance will be medical. This is the only one that the government can crush before it gets going. Currently there have been advances in growing sheep and pigs without an immune system. Also advances in growing organs in these animals. So organ replacement is coming. This will be a huge industry and will require biomedical researchers as well as animal care facilities capable of handling the animals without immune systems. Secondly, the animals will only be used for a short time. Possibly 5 to 6 years before the researchers figure out how to regulate all the growth factors so that the animal is not necessary. Now the problem is, the government can crush this research. Some of this research is being done in Japan right now. The Japanese people have religious issues with organ transplant so they need an alternative to getting an organ from a human. Innovation is turning to these animals. Animal rights activists coupled with liberal left will use it as a wedge issue and get it out lawed. This will slow the progress immensely.
So currently we are sinking. When this liberal congress and senate pass health care regulation the economy will take a nose dive that no one has ever witnessed before. After several years we will through off the yoke of government control and a new 20 year era of growth will come because of robot development and biomedical research.
Posted by hanson807 on May 29, 2009
Today we have people wondering if capitalism is still better than socialism because of current market issues. The government intervention in business is at an all time high, that is why we are in this bind.
I picture the ideal system as pure capitalism. The ownership of the means of production by the individual and the free trade between people. The problem is there will always be dishonest people, snake oil salesman who have to be dealt with. So we have some reglatory agencies and laws that regulate trade. A necessary evil but one that can be controlled. Also one that can get out of control.
Take for instance the car industry. It is now at the point that the government is in control of car design. They assign design. The CAFE standards set gas mileage goals. Instead of worrying about the safety of the car, the government uses it power to socially engineer the market. Never mind that they have never made a car. They now dictate the performance of the vehicles. By what standard do they make the rules? A person such as Senator Kennedy who has no engineering background and no education can dictate to the auto industry that it will make a car with a given gas mileage per pound. He doesn’t even know the physics or mechanics behind what he is ordering to be done. He just passes a law. The companies are actually fined for failing to meet the goals set by men who have never worked outside of a government job in their lives. Men who have neither the education or qualifications to make such demands, are doing so.
The FDA decides on what drugs are safe enough but how are they doing? Not every drug is safe for every user. That is true of everything. It is genetics. Some people are allergic to peanuts, do we stop growing peanuts? How is one tested for a peanut allergy? Do we test you at birth? No we don’t. We find out over time because who could possibly afford testing every new born for every food allergy? Yet we pull drugs off the market or don’t allow them to go to market because a few people get sick or can’t use the drug. I don’t advocate removing the FDA but it is now in the business of drug research and does more to hinder the release of life saving drugs then we need. Government regulation gone awry.
The thing is the government needs the business to support it. The business doesn’t need the government. The people of the United States don’t need the government to survive. We like it to do certain things so we support it with cash from our pay checks. Even Chavez, Castro and the Communist Chinese need capitalism to support their governments. There are few companies out there that would go under if the government disappeared. Our government is about to find out how it is to survive when the economy is sick. So we have gotten ourselves away from the founders dream of a country that went about its business with a small decentralized government running in the background for self defense and security. Capitalism is the real King. It drives everything including our socialist leaning current government. For those that don’t think that is true, pay attention. The next 2 years are going to be a very painful lesson.
Posted by hanson807 on April 7, 2009
Of course many here would say the Geithner would. He said he was open to the idea. So what? That isn’t what I mean. Who would back the currency? That is the little problem with a currency. It isn’t worth what you want it to be worth but what people believe it is worth. It’s value is determined by the perceived value of the people using the currency. Today, the dollar has a perceived worth because of the standing of our country. As the perception of us goes down so does the dollar. But who would lend the global money their reputation? Who would back its worth and what would that worth be? Secondly, once we agree to back the global currency we will be forced to back the IMF and the country of its choice to protect the value and backing of the currency. You ready for that?
It seems odd that a man who is supposed to be a master of monetary policy, Geithner(why would he be given that position if he wasn’t), is unable to understand why a global money would not work. There would be nothing to back this money. When you have a US dollar, the wealth of our country and the word of our people give that money its worth. We agree by our spending habits and our use of the dollar to its worth. If you bring a US dollar from over seas to here it has the same worth as one that has never left the country. This will not be true of a global dollar unless we back the global dollar with our economy. Only when people know who backs the dollar and what it is worth will they use that dollar. Maybe that is why around the world, the global money is the US dollar.
That being said, it begs the question: Why would Geithner and Obama want to destroy our credibility and make the US dollar worthless? Why would they even suggest for a second that we use anything other than a US dollar as the trade standard? What is their global view of the United States, that they would be willing to scrap our dollar for another? It shows disrespect for our country and its worth. It shows that they have no idea what our country is worth and that they have no idea how economies work. It shows they have no admiration and show no difference to America over any other country in the world. It shows the real agenda of the Obama administration is to tear down America and become subservient to other countries.