More Bad Police Officers
Indianapolis has ten police officers who have been charged with wrong doings. They are not alone. Fort Wayne has at least two police officers who do not understand the difference between a law passed by elected representatives and a hand written sign taped to a school door that no one knows who put up. Yet in their depositions clearly knew there was no law against anyone videotaping their child on public property. Would it not be great to make up your own rule, write it on 8 x 11 ½ paper, tape it to a wall, point it out to a police officer and have the police enforce it? Wow, I can think of lots of rules I would love have enforced. How about you?
Vallue of the US Dollar v. Oil
Oil appears to be unable to make up its mind which way to go. The past couple of weeks has identified the true culprit behind the rise in oil prices, Deficit spending. AS the dollar’s value fell yesterday, the price of oil rose $6. Today the value of the dollar rose and the price of oil fell $6. The fastest and most direct way to reduce the price of oil and ultimately gas at the pump is to eliminate Budget Deficits.
Obama's New Spending Proposal
Today I heard that Obama has a new proposal. It is to have government provide preschool for those ages 0 to 5. The estimated cost is $10 Billion. Do we really think this is all it will cost?
Age – SSA’s 2008 estimated population in that age group
0 - 3,948,269
1 - 3,933,651
2 - 3,929,484
3 - 3,933,759
4 - 3,945,410
Total 19,690,573. The cost then is projected at $507.86 per child, this is just plain stupid. The average cost in Indiana of a student in public education is $6,000 per student. This means that Obama projects about 9% of those ages 0 to 5 of the targeted age group, would participate, yet he envisions every child participating. I guess childhood is now under attack.
We need less government, not more. The more individual responsibility the government takes the less disposable income we all have.
Who is to blame for our economic mess?
There are two sides to every discussion. In Paschal’s editorial of 8-19-08 (Newsentinel) he states the economic problem lies with republicans and that people should leave the Republican Party. I would add that we should also leave the democrat party as well. For that matter, there should be no political parties at all. Which programs have the largest unfounded liabilities: Social Security at $19 Trillion, Medicare at $12 Trillion both created by Democrats? Which party is addressing these two large problems, neither? Which party borrowed over $120 billion for stimulus checks to taxpayers, Democrats? Which party passed the Medicare Rx drug bill, Republicans? Which party says the 2008 deficit will approach a half trillion dollars, both republicans and democrats. The truth is the 2008 deficit as of August 15 was $599 billion and over the previous five days is growing at $6.3 billion a day!
Both parties are out of control. Both parties have bought votes by promising earmarks, tax credits, stimulus checks or programs at the taxpayers’ expense. If we as Americans want a particular program then we as Americans should have the fortitude to make the sacrifice in terms of paying taxes to pay for it or go without the program. It is not morally or ethically right to borrow money to pay for programs and services we want today and pass the bill onto our children and grandchildren.
I really have no input or concern with Canyon Cliffs. The only thing I find interesting is that a group of people want to dictate what a person can or cannot do with their property.
We all disdain imminent domain. However, is this not what the public is trying to do with Canyon Cliffs? Along the coastal areas of the US many states, counties and local communities attempt to limit building in order to preserve the beauty of the area. The problem is someone owns the property and the courts have ruled that limiting their ability to develop or use the property for its intended purpose is the same thing as taking property without just compensation.
Do not get me wrong, I love nature and preserving woods. The problem is we the people do not own this particular track of land. Based on what I have read and all the out cry over this development, I think the best thing those who are opposed to this development can do is to combine their resources and buy the property.
I guess I must be dumb. I heard on WOWO when Tori head of the Airport said that the Kitty Hawk pullout would cost taxpayers $2.8 million next year. He was rationalizing or spinning this to not be such a bad thing. The reason is that they had paid $23.8 Million and Kitty Hawk had paid over 400 people wages totaling some $74 million. So taxpayers paying $2 to get $7 was not a bad thing.
Ok what am I missing or more importantly what is this person trying to pull? First it was $23 million in taxpayer’s money (investment). The 400 people though taxpayers did not share the $74 million with the rest of us who invested the $23 million. So Tori is incorrect in saying the taxpayers got $7 back for $2 invested. The taxpayers did get something back, but the something they got back paid for government services these 400 workers received, just like the rest of us. I doubt that the taxpayers actually netted anything thing.
Here is a novel idea. I think the Airport Authority needs to go back and chop, cut, tear $2.8 million from the budget they have. They can lay people off just like any other company has been doing (RV’s, GM, etc). They could cut salaries and benefits just like a regular company does when they lose a large contract.
No new taxes for the airport. Sink or swim like the rest of us.
Indiana's Rainy Day Fund
It does not surprise me that the proposal for Indiana's rainy day fund is 10%.
“Daniels proposes implementing tax credits if the money in the state's main checking account and reserve funds exceeded 10 percent of that year's budget. The money would be doled out to taxpayers on a per capita basis on the next year's income-tax filings.”
This may explain why our budgets are feast and famine. What happens when Indiana is hit by a recession? Unemployment goes up, unemployment payments increase, tax revenues decrease and red ink abounds. Looking at the last ten years shows this happens often. So my question is why does an educated person propose 10% as the bench mark when money is returned? Recessions last 2 to 3 years with tax revenue drops of 20 to 30%. It is clear that 10% is a drop in the bucket and is just politics. If he were serious and up front with the taxpayers, he would propose a rainy day fund of 50%.
However, unless there was some sort of “true” lock on this rainy day fund, some stinkin politician would spend it. Therefore, it is probably best that we have no rainy day fund.
Our Governor now wants to privatize the lottery. He states we can get $1 billion up front for leasing it to a private concern. He proposes to use the money to fund scholarships.
Call me mean or greedy, but having a wife who paid her way through college and I having paid my way through college, I still ask why do we the taxpayers need to fund other people's college educations? Don't get me wrong, college can be useful. However, we have so many attending college now that not all can find positions that utilize this college degree.
This mindset of leasing government "property" to private concerns to operate and make a profit from has me baffled. If the state makes more money by doing this, then the state must really be messed up in administering programs (we all know this).
Before adding another government program, we should pay down debt and reduce taxes first.
I think Mitch has not seen a green back he does not want to spend or a government property he does not want to lease. Maybe we should lease the governor's position? How much could we save?
Who decides what wage to pay a person? Is it what the job can support in terms of selling a product or service or is it government's role to mandate that this job is worth X dollars?
I can truly appreciate that low wages make it difficult to survive. As a member of the US Navy, my pay came out to about 1/3 that of minimum wage. However, I did have the advantage of being fed (though the food was gross), healthcare (I got blown up and spent months in the hospital only to be given a bill for $75,000 but later reduced to $3,000) and don’t forget the free lodging (1 bunk that was 72 inches long by 22 inches wide and I could not extend my finger tips with my elbow bent high and a mattress that was made of foam and two inches thick. Oh, and I had a blue curtain I could draw closed.
The problem with a minimum wage position is who decides what a position is worth? If people can find other work, then that person will have to pay more to entice some one to work or find another means of accomplishing what labor was doing.
I started on minimum wage, but moved up the scale. I do not know many who stay at minimum wage. The question I have is how many are there and what type of jobs are they doing?
A person deserves only the wage they negotiate. Government does not set what is fair. They have no idea what is fair. Just look at the continual budget deficits for the past 48 years.
We could also compare labor rates another way. Farmer A uses a horse and plow. He can farm 25 acres this way. Farmer B uses a tractor and farms 2000 acres. Should both farmers be paid the same hourly rate even though their yields are totally different? Minimum wage jobs exist because these types of jobs are outdated, but remain due to being cost effective only at that wage. If there were no people to perform these jobs, then an alternative means would be found.
Mindy Waldron is an administrator with the Fort Wayne-Allen County Department of Health. Yet she has taken it upon herself to actually create law. In her recent article she wrote:
“After SB 404 was adopted into law, local health departments cannot create any local standards or be less restrictive than state standards.”
“though Indiana’s Food Code doesn’t specifically forbid permanent outdoor cooking, it doesn’t specifically account for it either, which puts Indiana counties in a difficult position when regulating this issue for the safety of the consumer.”
“So what happens when a law is silent on an issue? You rely on an interpretation of the law by the official agency in charge. “
I looked up SB 404 and found it did not deal with food at all. Therefore, I contacted Wendy. She provided me with the following IC-16-42-5-0.5/0.7, IC-15-52-5-5.2 and IC-16-19-3-4.
“Except as provided in this chapter, a corporation or local health department may not impose any: (1) sanitary standards on; or (2) locally prescribed monetary penalties for the violation of any state law or rule concerning; food handling or food establishments.” The plain and literal language is clear, Wendy is not authorized to write rules in this area. All that she is allowed to do is follow the rules identified by the state.
If a statute does not address a particular concern or is silent, then there is no law or statute forbidding it. Statutes restrict, they do not give rights. She states Indiana’s Food Code doesn’t specifically account for or allow permanent outdoor cooking, therefore, it is not illegal. In other words the law is moot.
What Mindy Waldron (the state) has done is extend by implication a statute beyond its plain and literal language given it by our elected representatives and signed by the governor; in essence she has created law. This is a violation of Indiana’s Constitution, Article 1.
If the law is silent on an issue, you do not interpret something that is not there, you remain silent as well.
However, as my recent experience dealing with FWCS and FWPD taught me, there is no shortage of ignorant state workers who attempt to do the exact same thing; extend by implication a statute beyond its plain and literal language given it by our elected representatives and signed by the governor and in essence create law, yet know there is no law prohibiting what you are questioning. Just be careful when you question the “state”; they may arrest you for exercising your first amendment right to question them and when they cannot, may arrest and charge you with disorderly conduct.
William Larsen's Economic Stimulas Plan
Another Economic Stimulus Plan
Obama is proposing another Economic Stimulus Plan. This is just plain amazing. Does this individual understand economics at all? Let us follow the money trail.
1. Congress votes and passes a plan to GIVE each family $1,000. Hey we would all like to have an extra $1,000 right?
2. Let us say the president signs the bill and it becomes law.
3. The US treasury is responsible for securing the funds needed to pay all government obligations.
4. This new Economic Stimulus Plan is a new government obligation.
5. The US Treasury looks at incoming revenue and sees that they borrowed money last month to pay the governments obligations. Pretty easy math to figure out that if you already borrowed $700 billion this year, then you will have to borrow the $1,000 time 105 million households to pay this new obligation.
6. The US treasury then submits requests for bids on loaning it $105 billion.
7. The bids come in from all over the world. With cash tight, they need to pay a little higher interest.
8. The interest will be about $5 to $6 billion the first year and compound at 5 to 6% a year. Based on past history, it will never be repaid, just rolled over into a new refinanced US Treasury Note.
9. These new dollars spread abroad will lead to further devaluation of the US Dollar.
10. Further decline in the US Dollar leads to higher imported goods such as oil.
11. This increases the trade deficit that results in ever more US dollars abroad.
12. This in turn further leads to a declining US dollar, increasing the trade deficit more and so on.
This is not an economic stimulus package but a US economic destruction. We cannot borrow or spend our way out of this economic crisis!
We need elected representatives who can make the tough choice between wants and needs. Ear marks must be eliminated.
In 1937 the employee's maximum FICA tax was $30. Today the employee's maximum FICA tax is $8,109. My Economic Stimulus Package would be to repeal the Social Security Act pertaining to Old Age and Survivors Insurance. This would provide not a one-time rebate, but the employee keeping both the employee’s and employer’s portion of the SS-OASI tax totaling $11,424 (maximum wage base).
· It would not result in any borrowing since it is your money.
· You could use it save for retirement, college, pay for health coverage, mortgage and more.
· It would restore a family’s ability to participate in the American Dream where in a land of opportunity, a person can work hard and prosper.
The Social Security Lottery
McCain I hear supports raising the retirement age to extend (not save social security) the ability to pay full benefits to a select few (those born prior to a specific year). Instead of addressing the root cause behind social security’s problem, both McCain and Obama are treating a symptom. I wrote this years ago. It is just as appropriate today as it was then.
THE SOCIAL SECURITY LOTTERY
October 24, 1998
I was appalled when I heard several senators and congressmen state privatizing Social Security would end up reducing future projected benefits by 20 to 30%. Do they not realize Social Security is already broke? Increasing the age of retirement to 70, increasing FICA taxes, and paying five more years into the broken system only kills off another 16% of the people living between 65 and 70. Even this is not enough to save the system. Social Security is a lottery! If you live long enough, you might get something.
Let's look at the Social Security Lottery. Let's make it really simple. Inflation has been eradicated and is zero until the year 2050. Based on a 2% wage growth, I will pay $303,607 into Social Security. What do I get for this bet (contribution)? I get to play the Social Security Lottery. Social Security in exchange for my $303,607 allows me to bet I will live long enough to collect a $2,419 monthly benefit for life starting at age 70!! But that's not all! I may be eligible for Medicare! Doesn't this sound exciting?
TOTAL PAID IN $303,607
BENEFIT PAID $2,419 PER MONTH
PAY BACK IN 10.5 YEARS
TREASURY INVESTED AT 5% grows to $1,109,126
Now I must warn you there is a catch to this fantastic sounding payout! You may not live long enough to collect a penny! That's right, living to age 70 is very tough for a large percentage of the population. The probability of living to age 70 is only 62%. This means 38% of us will play the game and not collect a penny, slightly better than a 50-50 chance, flip a coin. Their contributions go to the lucky winners over age 70.
Below is a chart that shows the odds in collecting my winnings. Your odds will be the same, however, your payout and contributions may differ from those listed. Do you wish to play the Social Security Lottery?
ODDS IN 10
I LOST THIS MUCH
I LOST THIS MUCH AT 5%
* 1 in 99.72.
If you do not wish to play the Social Security Lottery, contact your Senator and Congress person immediately and express your dislike for the Social Security Lottery. Tell them to submit legislation to eliminate this type of gambling. My 10 year-old son, eight and six year-old daughters have already told me they do not wish to play