Simple Government

Dollar No Longer Leading Reserve Currency

2009-10-13T13:27:00.000-07:00

This is not good!!

Previous blog articles have talked about the danger to the dollar.

The National Debt: A Clear & Present Danger
The Recession is Over: Really?
Follow-up: National Debt - A Clear & Present Danger

These articles may sound alarmist to some. However, the trend is continuing and it is not good. The dollar is no longer the leading world reserve currency. Last week, several nations discussed a plan to quit trading oil in dollars.

This lack of appetite for dollars in the world stage is not good for inflation. The dollar lost 10% of its value in the last 3 months. As this happens, foreign holders of dollars try to unload the dollars. The more they try to unload dollars, the more the value of the dollar drops. This will drive up the cost of imported goods, which is almost everything you buy at Walmart or Target. This is not good.

The New York Post reported:

"Bernanke could go down in economic history as the man who killed the greenback on the operating table."

- SG -

An Inconvenient Truth: Polar Bear Population Increasing

2009-10-12T04:47:00.000-07:00

Oops!! Someone cut his microphone. The global warming debate isn't about actual facts . . .

- SG -

Busting Kneecaps - The Congressional Way

2009-10-09T16:58:00.000-07:00

The stakes in Congress are high and the Democratic leadership will not tolerate independent thought or constituent representation. Here is a clip from the Rachael Maddow show. For those who don't know Maddow, she is very liberal and is a part of the liberal Air America Network.

- SG -

Obama & The Nobel Peace Prize

2009-10-09T06:43:00.000-07:00

The Nobel Society lost credibility with me when they gave the peace prize to the known terrorist, Arafat. Many of the awards that followed continuted to degrade my respect for their agenda. It is hard for me to more clearly articulate my thoughts than the UK's TimesOnline:

The award of this year’s Nobel peace prize to President Obama will be met with widespread incredulity, consternation in many capitals and probably deep embarrassment by the President himself.

Rarely has an award had such an obvious political and partisan intent. It was clearly seen by the Norwegian Nobel committee as a way of expressing European gratitude for an end to the Bush Administration, approval for the election of America’s first black president and hope that Washington will honour its promise to re-engage with the world.

Instead, the prize risks looking preposterous in its claims, patronising in its intentions and demeaning in its attempt to build up a man who has barely begun his period in office, let alone achieved any tangible outcome for peace.

Click for the full article. It is a very good read.

- SG -

Free Market Health Care Reform: The Modified Mackey Plan

2009-10-03T13:47:00.000-07:00

The Quick & Dirty

The health debate rages on with indifference to fundamental facts we know to be true. Despite claims to the contrary, the rhetoric is controlled by the special interest groups and meaningful and effective proposals are being overlooked. The Whole Foods CEO, John Mackey, offered such a proposal, yet it didn’t get any discussion beyond how many of his patrons were offended by his views. Meaningful health care reform doesn’t require massive government intervention. It requires embracing fundamental free market principles that work every time they are tried.

The Details

Uber-Liberal icon, John Mackey, alienated many of his Prius driving patrons when he spoke up in the health care debate. His crime seems to be cleaving to free market principles that enabled the global footprint of Whole Foods stores to serve those who value causes over actual science. I am not one of the millions who donates an incremental $4000 to Whole Foods grocery in pursuit of the wholly unsubstantiated belief that organic foods contribute to a healthier body. However, Mackey scores high marks for understanding human behavior that enabled him to build the 10 largest grocery chain in the nation from a small store front in Austin Texas. His balkanizing article in the Wall Street Journal laid out 8 basic principles for health care reform.

Mackey is also a proponent of high deductible insurance and believes it is instrumental in lowering the cost of health care. Whole Foods employees, who vote on benefits annually, have a high deductible plan with an $1800 annual company contribution to health saving accounts (HSAs). This unleashes the power of 40,000 employees shopping for the best and most cost effective health care they can buy. This also removes the pestering investigation of what insurance will or will not cover. If they want a therapeutic massage, they take part of their $1800 health bucks and buy a massage. Life is easier because they are truly in control of their health care decisions.

The Mackey proposal was so bountiful in truth and common sense it was hard for me to think of any amendments to his proposal. However, after some time, I’ve thought of a few additions to John Mackey’s initial proposal. For the sake of argument, assume that companies currently pay an average of $8000 per employee for health benefits.

Establish a standard score card for insurance companies to pitch their insurance plans. This allows consumers to compare apples to apples.
Give employees full control of the $8000 health bucks to spend as they choose
Allow employees to purchase insurance from any policy using the standard score card.
Employees can choose to buy plans over $8000 with personal contributions.
Employees can deposit any surplus from the $8000 into a Health Savings Account to pay for services they purchase.
Allow employees to donate part of their $8000 health bucks to a pool for the uninsured.

The combination of the Mackey plan and the amendments above would create a force of hundreds of millions resource optimizing consumers. Rudimentary economic theory says that consumers optimize scarce resources and determine the market price as a part of this optimization. However, the concept of scarcity is eliminated in a system of low deductibles where the consumer only receives benefit by driving demand higher and receives no benefit for driving demand lower. A system lacking forces driving demand lower also lacks forces driving price lower. Again, this is a rudimentary economic concept taught in an introductory economics course. Yet the loudest voices driving health care reform are ignoring the rudiments of economic behavior.

It is time to put politics aside and focus on some basic free market reforms that don’t grow the size of government and embrace the free market principles that have brought $500 computers and free cell phones. The mighty consumer never sleeps and companies that survive are those who find ways to meet the needs of the ever demanding consumer. It is time to embrace the principles that brought us the iPod and other good things.

- SG -

Absolutely Wrong: Obama Assassination Poll

2009-09-28T15:34:00.000-07:00

Someone created a poll on Facebook proposing and collecting a vote on the potential assassination of President Obama. The poll asks if the President should be assassinated with the following voting options:

No
Maybe
Yes
Yes, if he cuts my health care.

SG objects to this poll in the strongest possible way. Any threat on the president of the United States is a threat on the entire citizenry and the American way of life. SG is thankful that Facebook is cooperating fully with the Secret Service and hopes they will find whoever set up this poll. Furthermore, SG hopes that:

The perpetrator will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law (hopefully life in prison) if they are a US citizen
The perpetrator will be hunted down and killed if they are a foreigner.

SG hopes Americans of all parties and political persuasions will unite in this line of thought. Any threat on the life of an American president is a treat on America itself. We still have a system of elections and a free press. We still have a government representative of the majority, even if some of the majority changed their mind since the election. Disagreement with the president needs to be resolved within the confines of scheduled elections and the First Amendment.

- SG -

President Obama has Misplaced Priorities

2009-09-28T10:36:00.000-07:00

The President seems to be having problems setting priorities. Some of the issues on the President's plate include:

Brokering a bipartisan health care bill impacting 17% of the US economy
Completing the Cap and Trade bill started earlier this year (a campaign promise)
Activating the stimulus bill and providing the promised transparency (only 20%-30% of funds have been disbursed)
Other policy efforts to prevent unemployment from rising above 10%
Address the detention policy in Guantanamo Bay (a partially started campaign promise)
Develop exit strategy for the war in Iraq (a campaign promise)
Address the war strategy for Afghanistan (a proposal from General McChrystal has been on the President's desk since late August)
Stop Iran's & North Korea's growing missile capability (now at 1600 mile range)
Stop nuclear proliferation in Iran after just learning about additional nuclear capabilities
Address social security: For the first year, Social Security payed out more than it took in.
Get the budget deficit under control

There seem to be a number of high priority items on the President's desk. However, last week he spent time with David Letterman instead of General McChrystal. This week he is flying to Denmark to lobby for the Olympics in Chicago (Note: Olympics typically add to budget deficits and rarely break even.)

The President just seems to have misplaced priorities.

- SG -

Rich Tax Hurts Growth & Lowers Tax Revenue

2009-09-28T09:50:00.000-07:00

The Lie
The United States in embroiled in an ongoing battle of the classes that have resulted in slogans such as "the rich need to pay their fair share."

Accordingly, states such as New York, Maryland, New Jersey and California instituted a "millionaires tax." However, instead of generating budget surpluses, those states are experiencing budget deficits. High earners have been fleeing these states to move to states with either no or lower income tax. This results in significantly lower tax revenue because the state loses all ability to collect tax from those individuals. Buffalo Sabres owner Tom Golisano, was paying $13,000 per day in taxes to live in New York and decided to move to Florida which has no state income tax.

States are starting to ask the wisdom of their decision. New York Governor, David Patterson, had always warned targeting the rich could backfire, and fears that's just what happened. The nonpartisan Maryland Public Policy Institute has also been critical of the tax policy.

"You can say, 'The millionaire is evil,' but they don't just put their money in a coffee can. . . . They employ people ... That fact is, you need rich people to keep working hard so they will invest." - Maryland Public Policy Institute

The Truth
According to the IRS, the rich overwhelmingly carry the tax burden in the United States.

Top 1% pay 39% of all income tax
Top 25% pay 86% of all income tax
Top 50% pay 97% of all income tax

Singapore has budget surpluses and is issuing dividends of $1.8 billion to its citizens. US corporations have been moving operations overseas to benefit from the 5% Singapore tax rate and escape the 35% corporate tax rate in the United States. The impact in Singapore:

$6.4 billion budget surplus (4% of GDP)
Refunded $1.8 billion to citizens in 2008
Personal income tax rate capped at 20%
Abolished estate duty (death tax) to make Singapore more attractive to wealthy individuals
5% corporate income tax to encourage business moving to Singapore

The Lesson
It is very simple. Aggressive tax policy discourages growth and reduces tax revenue. Progressive tax policy encourages growth and benefits citizens at all income levels.

- SG -

Support for Health Care Reform Hits New Low

2009-09-28T05:34:00.000-07:00

A Rasmussen poll shows support at a new low for the proposed health care reform. Now 41% of likely voters support the reform while 56% oppose it.

One week ago I made the prediction that President Obama will have his children in front of the cameras as a push for health care reform. Although Michelle Obama did bring her children into the public discussion, they have yet to stand the children in front of a camera.

The last week provided a variety of international news that distracted from the message on health care. The variety of speeches in the United Nations and the revelation of Iran's nuclear progress have dominated the President's time.

The President remains committed to health care reform and I expect him to get back on message. I still expect the Obamas to stand their children in front of cameras to promote health care reform.

Follow Up: National Debt - A Clear and Present Danger

2009-09-24T05:30:00.000-07:00

On September 8th, the blog posted an article called "National Debt - A Clear and Present Danger." To some, the article may have sounded alarmist. However, HSBC, the largest bank in the world, just released a disturbing report:

The sun is setting on the US dollar as the ultra-loose monetary policy of the US Federal Reserve forces China and the vibrant economies of the emerging world to forge a new global currency order, according to a new report by HSBC.

A question was posted to the blog about when the inflation spiral would begin. Unfortunately, you don't know until it has begun, however, the storm clouds are forming.

Crucially, China and rising Asia have reached the point where they can no longer keep holding down their currencies to boost exports because this is causing mayhem to their own economies, stoking asset bubbles. Asia's "mercantilist mindset" of recent decades is about to be broken by the spectre of an inflation spiral.

This is a serious issue for the United States. People won't care about health insurance if they are paying $20 for a bottle of shampoo and $50 for a package of razor blades. The threat is real and requires immediate attention.

- SG -

Indoctrination: School Kids Praise Obama

2009-09-23T16:58:00.000-07:00

"For all your great accomplishments, we say hooray!" - Song from school kids

Is the role of schools to teach students how they should think about a particular president? No, they should teach respect for the office.

Indoctrinating school kids is truly disturbing. For those who think Obama's speech to school kids was only about working hard, think again. Obama used it as an opportunity to indoctrinate school kids on his version of health care reform.

Lenin must be chuckling now.

- SG -

Tyranny: Congress at Work

2009-09-23T13:47:00.000-07:00

The Quick & Dirty

Tyranny is a slow process where the citizenry slowly sacrifices liberty for other things. Sadly, our government is demonstrating more and more tyrannical behavior. The current congress is demonizing and punishing discent. Our president is medling in state soverignty. It is our duty as the citizens to recognize it and stop it.

The Details

Our founding fathers had a true understanding of tyranny. After years of living under the abusive power of King George, they made the decision that the risk of death was a better fate than life in tyranny. After defeating the most powerful military on earth they built a democracy distrusting of government and gave power to the people.

In fact, any government stands because the citizenry allows it to stand. The founders feared the encroachment of government abuse and warned Americans to not allow it to happen. However, our Congress and President are increasing in their tyrannical behavior.

The President has been meddling in state sovereignty in at least Massachusetts and New York. He lobbied Massachusetts to change a state law to influence the composition of Congress. later, Obama asked the sitting governor of New York to not run for re-election. These actions clearly overstep the role of the presidency. Our founding fathers built a system of checks and balances that protected state sovereignty and did not give the president power over the legislative branch.

Congress is demonstrating even greater tyrannical behavior.

This behavior is shocking and is such a great departure from the view of government our founders had. However, they knew of the corrupting nature of power and cautioned Americans against such encroachments on the voices and wills of the people.

It is the duty of the American people to preserve liberty. The founders paid in blood for our liberty. It is our duty to make sure our government is truly representative and to do so before it requires more blood to restore it to the foundations. We, the people deserve more and must demand more. It is our right. It is our duty to do so.

- SG -

In Support of The Office of the President

2009-09-22T18:22:00.000-07:00

In the heat of the current political climate it can be easy to forget our unity in our diversity (e pluribus unum). A blurb in the news re-centers me and reminds me of that commitment.

"God willing, your end will be at the hands of the Muslim nation, so that the world and history will be free of your crimes and lies," - Al Qaida to President Obama

I am no fan of the President's policies. However, any threat against the President is a threat against me, my country and this great democracy. Insha Alla, God willing, any enemy - foreign or domestic - that comes against my nation's president will stand against me first. I hope and trust I will not stand alone. E Pluribus Unum.

Semper Fi

- SG -

Subverting Democracy: Tele-Town Halls

2009-09-21T18:13:00.000-07:00

All wrongs are wrong, but not all wrongs are equal. Some of the protests in the town hall meetings were mean and excessive. Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) correctly described some as rude. In response, many representative switched to tele-town hall meetings.

Unfortunately, several representatives from both parties used it as an opportunity to control and manipulate the voice of the electorate. Some of the infractions include:

Yes, the rudeness in some of the town hall meetings was wrong. However, the response is totally unacceptable. The United States is a representative republic where the voices of the people is essential for our democratic process. The founding fathers believed in distributing the power to the people and allowing a few to represents their needs in Congress. There is a natural and appropriate rage that dates back to the Declaration of Independence.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism , it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. - Declaration of Independence

The voices of a free people will not be quieted. The will of a free people will not be thwarted. Children of this independence, secured by blood, understand that their life as free people can not be subverted as long as they boldly stand in defense of that right. Those who stand in opposition of the will of the citizenry invoke both the spirit and the actions of the founders of this great nation.

A government encouraging freedom encourages the voice of the people and does not screen them out. The more the government opposes the voices of the people, the louder the voices become. The free people of America understand that it is both their right and their duty to throw off such a government and provide new guards for the future.

Yes, there were some behavior that was inappropriate in the town hall meetings. However, the responsibility falls on the representatives of the people to encourage speech and to be responsive to those voices. Against such actions there is no shrill voice.

- SG -

Obama Disputes Tax & Websters Dictionary

2009-09-21T04:35:00.000-07:00

President Obama has made multiple promises to not raise taxes on the middle class. However, the Baucus Bill from the Senate has raised concerns this promise will be broken. The bill requires individuals to purchase health insurance or face up to $3800 in fines from the government. Furthermore, the insurance under Baucus Bill will charge upto 13% of family income.

Obama's Sunday media blitz involved multiple questions about the additional cost burden to the middle class. The toughest debate was on ABC over the deffiniton of tax.

OBAMA: No, but -- but, George, you -- you can't just make up that language and decide that that's called a tax increase. Any...

STEPHANOPOULOS: I -- I don't think I'm making it up. Merriam Webster's Dictionary: Tax -- "a charge, usually of money, imposed by authority on persons or property for public purposes."

OBAMA: George, the fact that you looked up Merriam's Dictionary, the definition of tax increase, indicates to me that you're stretching a little bit right now. Otherwise, you wouldn't have gone to the dictionary to check on the definition. I mean what...

Most people view the dictionary as a centering tool to pull people back to an undisputed view. It seems the president does not like using the dictionary to define language.

UPDATE: The Baucus Bill calls the disputed charge an "excise tax." Perhaps in addition to a dictionary, the president also needs a copy of the Baucus Bill.

- SG -

Mainstream Media Missing Another Good Story

2009-09-20T05:46:00.000-07:00

The nation and the news media found itself shocked as multiple videos rolled out showing ACORN workers offering legal and tax advice for setting up a brothel that would house underage prostitutes trafficked in from El Salvador. In days past this was the work of 60 minutes or other shows bankrolled by the major news networks. However, these videos came from a couple individuals in their early 20's with a $1300 budget.

There is a story here that goes beyond ACORN. James O'Keefe, producer of the videos, has a history of doing the same type of videos for other causes. The amusing and shocking videos are at the very least thought provoking. Some of O'Keefe's subjects include:

Planned Parenthood supports donations with the stated purpose of limiting the black population
Getting Rutgers University to ban Lucky Charms cereal because of its anti-Irish bias
Involving local Massachusetts governments in potential insurance fraud by marrying 2 men despite them saying they were committed heterosexuals and they were only getting married to get insurance coverage to cover a specific medical condition
Getting public reaction to walking around with a sign saying "A wise white male would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a Latina."
"Love Thy Prisoner" campaign getting liberals to become pen pals and potential foster homes for jailed terrorists.

O'Keefe has a knack for exposing the absurd by being absurd. His exposes are entertaining and very revealing. British news services have taken notice of O'Keefe's work, however, the mainstream media is ignoring him. Perhaps the media should get over their hurt feelings for getting scooped and look into this good story.

James O'Keefe's videos can be found at Veritas Visuals.

- SG -

ACORN - A Bad Nut

2009-09-19T07:44:00.000-07:00

The Quick & Dirty

Videos have surfaced that elicit a shocking condemnation of the community organizing group, ACORN. ACORN officials insist the videos represent issolated incidents. However, monting evidence indicates that ACORN is just a bad nut.

The Details

Most people have probably seen at least one of the ACORN videos by now. Some are asking if these are isolated incidents or if it is indicative of a broader problem.

The videos document a pimp and prostitute going into an ACORN office seeking tax, housing and mortgage advice. As they engage the ACORN workers, the tale gets progressively more bizarre and disturbing. The key points of their story are:

The prostitute is trying to get away from a bad pimp
The new pimp & boyfriend that is with her is trying to help her get away from the bad pimp
They want a housing loan to set up a brothel
The new pimp wants to use proceeds from prostitution to fund his political campaign
They are trying to find a way of funneling money to the new pimp without getting caught
They are buying a shipment of 13 El Salvadorian girls
They plan to make these girls prostitutes in the brothel
All of the girls are less than 16 years old

Shockingly, multiple ACORN offices had the same response which was to provide advice on all of the above including how to file a tax return without raising suspicion.

ACORN responded to the first video by saying it was an isolated incident that had failed at all other ACORN offices. Then a second video showed up from the DC office. ACORN again said it was an isolated incident and that several offices, including New York, had turned away the duo. Then a third video from New York showed up documenting the same behavior. Eventually videos from 5 different offices started showing a trend.

ACORN insists these are isolated incidents and do not reflect the organization as a whole. However, questions persist. In January 2008, the Chicago ACORN office closed after a mass exodus of paid and volunteer staff due to concerns over mismanagement and lack of financial transparency by the national headquarters.

Many of the Chicago workers have joined a new organization called Action Now, but some have curious concerns. Latrell Smith of Action Now said the videos are sobering and infuriating. He also said:

"I wonder if we could be next." - Latrell Smith, Action Now

Of course, there is no cause for concern as long as Mr. Smith is not providing legal and tax advice on setting up brothels for trafficking under aged sex workers.

The curious paranoia of Latrell Smith and the multitude of condemning videos seem to indicate broad systematic issues with ACORN. The lack of financial transparancy concerns those believing in the ACORN cause as well as others. ACORN just seems to be a bad nut.

- SG -

Obama's Next Move For Health Care

2009-09-18T14:34:00.000-07:00

President Obama is losing the battle on health care reform. Today, approval for reform dropped to 56%. Also, today, the First Lady made her first appearance to bolster her husband's efforts in health care reform.

SG's prediction is the President will have his kids in front of the cameras within the next week to promote health care reform. Let's see what happens.

- SG -

To Russia With Love: An Obama Anniversary Present

2009-09-18T12:46:00.000-07:00

The Quick & Dirty

President Obama promised in his campaign to improve relationships with world leaders. His progress is questionable. Secretary Clinton gave Russia a ceremonial button that was labeled "overload" instead of "reset." Obama was unable to persuade the British government against the release of the Lockerbie terrorist. Yesterday Obama upset Poland while making Russia happier than they ever expected. He cancelled the deployment of a missle shield to Poland on the 70th anniversary of Russia invading Poland.

The Details

It is true that Bush was not seen favoribly in the world arena. Recognizing a weakness, Obama campaigned on that point saying he would restore American diplomacy to the world. However, his results are questionable.

In one of the first moves to restore relations, the White House sent Hillary Clinton to Russia to communicate that they would like to restart relationships. She took a button that was supposed to be labed "reset" signifying the resetting of relationships. However, the button said "overload" instead which communicated a much different message. Now, exactly how hard is it for the US State Department to find a Russian translator before giving the gift?

Then Obama went on the road himself to build international relationships. One month later the Lockerbie terrorist was released from prison to return to Lybia. Not only did he return to Lybia, but he was flown in Kadafi's jet and recieved a hero's welcome upon landing in Lybia. It seems that despite plees with the British government, Obama was unpersuesive in stopping this move.

In the latest of Obama's international policy he made a long term enemy happy while alienating long time allies. The Bush administration promised to set up a anti-missle screen in Poland and the Czech Republic to protect against potential Russian agression. Obama decided to not deploy the missles. He did this while gaining no concessions from the Russians at all. Putan, the Russian leader, was described as exuberant.

If this wasn't insulting enough, Obama announced this move on the 70th anniversary of the Russian invasion of Poland. A Polish newspaper headline read, "We have been sold to the Russians!"

Hopefully President Obama will find his way in international deplomacy. Thus far he is not living up to his promises.

- SG -

New Plan: Put First Lady on Health Care Reform

2009-09-17T09:24:00.000-07:00

Consistent with the Obama administration's continually evolving practices, they announced a new strategy today. The First Lady is on the case.

Great strategy . . . . but, hasn't this been tried before??

- SG -

Obama Painting on 9/11 Anniversary

2009-09-15T11:52:00.000-07:00

President Obama is flying Air Force One like a kid with no lines at Disney World.

9/9: New York to attend Walter Cronkite's funeral
9/12: Minneapolis for health care rally (The same day hundreds of thousands of Americans gathered on the National Mall to be heard by their government)
9/14: New York for anniversary of Lehman Brothers dissolution
9/15: Warren, Ohio to meet with GM workers
9/15: Pittsburgh, PA to address AFL-CIO & Campaign for Arlen Specter
9/21: Back to New York for David Letterman show

In 12 days, the president is making 3 trips to New York. However, despite the president's willingness to fire up Air Force One, he did not seem motivated to fly to New York to stand in solidarity with those remembering the tragic events 8 years ago.

So, what warrants a flight to New York by President Obama?

Walter Cronkite - certainly a respected man, but he died a natural death - not at the hand of terrorists
Lehman Brothers - a company that does not exist from an industry he openly criticizes
David Letterman - A comedian who makes jokes about base ball players knocking up under aged girls

So, where was the President on 9/11? He was painting.

- SG -

The Ression is Over - Really?

2009-09-15T09:56:00.000-07:00

The Quick & Dirty

Federal Reserve (FED) Chairman, Ben Bernanke, declared the recession is over. This would be exciting news. However, Bernanke's policies draw international criticism and suspicion of a double-dip recession stretching into 2010. There is an ongoing fundamental shortage in the money supply retarding the recovery. Unfortunately, the only obvious path out is for the FED to print money which will drive inflation.

The Details

Ben Bernanke held a conference at the Brookings institute where he declared the recession is over. This is a questionable claim since the US economy has yet to report a single quarter of growth since the recession began. In his remarks, Bernanke did acknowledge that the tight credid supply and soft labor market present challenges moving forward.

The FED usually stimulates the economy by increasing the money supply. However, the normal tools the FED uses are limited.

Decrease interest rates - The FED dropped the rate to almost zero last December
Reduce the lending reserve ratio- The government required banks to increase their reserves to prevent default
Buy bonds (print money) - It is inflationary and scares off foreign investors which drives inflation.

The article, "National Debt: A Clear & Present Danger" talked about how foreign investors are losing their appetite for dollars. The credit situation in the US is also troubling international observers. Tim Congdon from International Monetary Research observed that the money supply is decreasing at an alarming rate. If the money supply is decreasing there is no real way to grow out of the recession.

"There has been nothing like this in the USA since the 1930s," he said. "The rapid destruction of money balances is madness."- Tim Congdon, International Monetary Research

David Rosenberg, chief strategist at Gluskin Sheff, would like to see Bernanke buy bonds (#3 above), however, it is recongnized that would be viewed adversly by China, the largest foreign holder of US debt. Buying bonds equates to printing money which drives inflation. This could accellerate China's divestature of US bonds which would also accelerate inflation.

Bernanke said recovery would be challenging. Challenging is political code for a real mess with no clear answers. The Obama administration is trying a method from the Great Depression which is to spend the way out. However, that did not work in the 1930's and it is certainly inflationary potentially leading to hyperinflation.

- SG -

NHS, Beer & a Couple Brits

2009-09-14T21:12:00.000-07:00

Last night I had beers with a couple of Brits and the discussion turned political. Initially we had a contest to see who had the greater scandal. I thought I had them with ACORN, our government funded organization that gives legal advice for setting up brothels. However, they countered with a Nazi-dressing, prostitute-whipping Formula One chief. We decided to call it a draw and move onto health care.

We talked about Gordon Brown defendeding the National Health Service (NHS) as a matter of national pride. However, when I asked about their experience with NHS, they didn't have an answer. Both of them have supplemental private insurance and never use NHS services. Incidentally, they are very happy with their private insurance. However, they are not happy that they have to pay into the NHS when they are not using it.

Government entitlements do not reduce the gap between rich and poor, but instead it increases the gap. In the US, welfare has created an entire class of people stuck in the mud while the rest of society advances. In Brittan, the poor use the NHS and those who can afford it use private and superior health care.

- SG -

White House Message to Protestors: "You Are Wrong"

2009-09-13T11:54:00.000-07:00

". . . . But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. . . . " - Declaration of Independence.

We have not reached the point where should overthrow our government. However, there are very valid complaints by both conservatives and liberals that the government is usurping power and ignoring the voice of the electorate from which all governmental powers are granted.

Hundreds of thousands of protesters assembled on the National Mall on September 12th to protest both Democratic and Republican elected officials who are spending excessive amounts of money and saddling the nation with outrageous debts.

On September 13th, the White House responded with a very short message for the protesters: "You are wrong."

One of the most powerful aspects of the United States is the distributed power that rises out of the electorate. It is disturbing to see such a terse dismissal of the voice of the people. The US is certainly at a point where a higher level of accountability is due. As the Declaration of Independence states, it is our right and duty to do so.

- SG -

Tea Party Protest Attendance - The Real Number ?

2009-09-13T07:16:00.000-07:00

The Quick & Dirty

A massive Tea Party rally was held on the National Mall on September 12th. The protest included Democrats, Independents and Republicans who are tired of runaway government spending. There is a dispute regarding the actual numbers of attendees ranging from thousands to millions of protesters. Using the method that counted Obama's inauguration it was certainly hundreds of thousands in attendance.

The Details

Aerial photographs is the accepted method of estimating crowds on the National Mall. The Obama inauguration estimated 1.8 million in attendance making it the largest crowd on the Mall ever. Looking at the graphic below you can that estimations are done by the percentage of the Mall covered in people and by the density of the people on the Mall. (SOURCE: Clark McPhail, University of Illinois | GRAPHIC: Todd Lindeman - The Washington Post - January 19, 2009) One thing to note on this graphic is there are 240,000 ticketed seats near the Capitol steps.

Various news sources have disagreed about the size of the rally. One thing that is odd in the reporting of this event is the lack of an aerial photograph that could be used for a proper estimation. Local news agencies have numerous helicopters that should have this footage. For some reason, these photographs are not available.

Based on various terestial photographs, it appears that the majority of the National Mall was filled. This puts the attendance in the 100's of thousands of attendees. This is a significant number that should not be ignored by politicians of all parties in Washington.

- SG -

It is Not True - Well, Perhaps a Little True

2009-09-12T08:54:00.000-07:00

The Quick & Dirty

Representative Joe Wilson made headlines when he shouted out "You Lie" to President Obama in the address to the joint session of Congress. The charge is response to the president's claim that the reforms would not insure illegal aliens. The president refuted the claim immediately. However, buried in a Friday evening press release, the White House admitted that illegal aliens will be covered with government funds.

The Details

The discussion of health care reform has been riddled with distortions and exaggerations from both sides of the debate. However, President Obama promised to set the record straight and remove all distortions in his address to the joint session of Congress on Septemeber 9th.

President Obama made the following claims in his speech:

I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits either now or in the future. Period.
Nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have.
Don't pay attention to those scary stories about how your benefits will be cut. ... That will never happen on my watch. I will protect Medicare.
Requiring insurance companies to cover preventive care like mammograms and colonoscopies "makes sense, it saves money, and it saves lives.
There are now more than 30 million American citizens who cannot get coverage.
The reforms I'm proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally.

The Associated Press found problems with all of the statements above. Representative Joe Wilson sat quietly through the claims to a point when he cried out "You Lie!" President Obama's resonse was "It is not true."

Two days later the President seems to be in agreement with Representative Wilson. In an attempt to minimize news coverage, the White House released a Friday evening statement acknowledging that illegal aliens will receive government funded health care.

- SG -

The Double-Talk Continues

2009-09-12T07:04:00.000-07:00

Many politicians have mastered the art of saying a lot while saying nothing. This serves them well because they can change their view of something without actually contradicting themselves.

President Obama, on the other hand, has mastered the art of contradicting himself and not getting caught at it. Quite often he will contradict himself in one speech. Instead of people asking how he can mean both contradictory things, people are left talking about what a great speaker the president is.

This seems to embolden the president to continue his pattern. In the president's speech to Congress he criticized opponents for using scare tactics.

"Instead of honest debate, we have seen scare tactics." - President Obama

The president raises a valid point. Scare tactics are not productive and the nation should engage in a productive debate of the issue. However, the president has been using scare tactics himself and continues to do so in this debate. Only 3 days after his criticism above, the president stirred the flames of fear again by telling those with health insurance to worry about losing it.

"A staggering new report indicates that under the status quo, around half of all Americans under 65 will lose their health coverage at some point in the next ten years. " - White House Web Site

America is facing many challenges. Unemployment is continuing to rise and 10% of Americans are trying to find work. The president's use of scare tactics to further his agenda is bad medicine for the nation's current ailments.

- SG -

Is Personal Responsibility Only For Children?

2009-09-09T07:48:00.000-07:00

President Obama strongly pushed personal responsibility in a speech given to the nation's school children.

I find this intriguing considering personal responsibility is missing from his proposal for health care and other policies the President is pushing.

Does the President believe that personal responsibility is only applicable to minors?

Partisan Paranoia Becomes Valid Concern

2009-09-09T07:34:00.000-07:00

The Quick & Dirty

President Obama’s speech to students sparked debate from many parties. Parents fearing the President would be pushing his political agenda pulled their kids out of school. The White House responded calling their fears silly. However, it turns out the fears were not silly and the President did indeed push his political agenda on students.

The Details

The press was abuzz for a week about the President’s speech to students across the United States. Opponents were unrelenting in their claims that it would be a platform for pushing the President’s agenda on students. Proponents cried foul saying it was unfounded paranoia to question the President’s motives in addressing the nation’s students.

The Obama administration sent a curriculum to schools suggesting that students write letters to the President saying how they could help the President. This sparked reactions by many parents fearing the President was enlisting minors to do his bidding which in turn prompted the White House Press Secretary, Robert Gibbs, to say:

"I think we've reached a little bit of the silly season when the president of the United States can't tell kids in school to study hard and stay in school,"

In an attempt to quell fears, the curriculum was updated removing the request for students to write letters to the president. Furthermore, the President released an advanced copy of the speech for parents to review so they could feel comfortable about allowing their kids to hear the speech.

One would think the President would make every effort to avoid saying anything about his personal agenda after the strong backlash surrounding this speech. However, despite assurances to the contrary, the President still pushed his health care agenda to students at Wakefield High School in Virginia.

Yes, this is silly season. The White House berates opponents for a fear that turned out to be true. It is silly season when President Obama oversees the largest spending spree in US history and turns around the next week calling for fiscal responsibility. It is silly when President Obama berates politicians for catering to special interest groups as he stands behind the AARP podium. (The AARP, by the way, is indeed a special interest group).

The President has great charisma and people want to believe in him. However, as time progresses and more people see the multiple disconnects between words and actions the President will suffer a loss in trust. People will more closely scrutinize his words and realize the President contradicts himself in most of his speeches. It is inevitable that the American people will lose their trust in President Obama as the honeymoon ends and people actually listen to what he is saying.

For today, there are many vindicated parents whose “silly” fears turned out to be true. Yes, the President did take this opportunity to push his political agenda on minors.

- SG -

The National Debt: A Clear and Present Danger

2009-09-08T18:14:00.000-07:00

The Quick & Dirty

A question posted to the blog asks when the U.S. national debt will start to impact America. Unfortunately, the debt has been impacting the U.S. for decades and the impact is increasing. Warren Buffet cautions against the debt driving America to a Banana Republic economy. China, Russia and the United Nations are currently petitioning against the dollar as the world reserve currency. Americans face a clear and present danger to their way of life.

The Details

I studied under a presidential economic adviser in the early 90’s who said the national debt was impacting trade deficit and relationships with Japan at that time. The fact is the U.S. debt has been impacting the America for decades. Recent news shows a disturbing trend as other countries are losing their appetite for dollars.

The impact of dept on a society is hardly a 5 minute discussion. The complex network of implications impacts all areas of life. However, a couple key implications are crippling inflation and diminished US influence in the world arena.

Inflation is a self-feeding mechanism. The higher inflation goes, fewer creditors are willing to fund the US debt. The fewer creditors willing to fund the US debt, the weaker the dollar becomes. The weaker the dollar becomes, the higher inflation goes. This self-feeding mechanism, once started, is almost impossible to stop.

This mechanism crippled several Latin American economies resulting in triple digit inflation. The inflation was so bad that store owners quit selling goods in the domestic currency. These Latin American economies are also called Banana Republic economies. The obvious concern to the citizenry is how do they buy groceries when the grocery store does not accept the national currency.

The statement above may sound extreme and beyond comprehension for the US. However, Warren Buffet has exactly that concern. Buffet is considered one of the sharpest financial minds in the United States. His advice is courted by multiple CEOs. He is a close friend of Bill Gates and has promised his $30 billion fortune to charity upon his death. By every metric, Warren Buffet is a financial genius and his fear is the US is moving toward a Banana Republic economy described above.

China is one of the largest holders of US debt. Recently a Chinese official said of US monetary policy:

"If they keep printing money to buy bonds it will lead to inflation, and after a year or two the dollar will fall hard. Most of our foreign reserves are in US bonds and this is very difficult to change, so we will diversify incremental reserves into euros, yen, and other currencies,"

The United Nations is also concerned about the US debt and has proposed replacing the dollar as the world’s reserve currency:

"Replacing the dollar with an artificial currency would solve some of the problems related to the potential of countries running large deficits and would help stability,"

More than half the debt is held by the US government. If the debt goes into default, guess who pays. If the debt gets paid off, guess who pays. If hyper-inflation spirals the value of the dollar downward, guess who loses the value of their investment. The US citizens lose under all of these scenarios.

The national debt is problem today. It is beyond the fear inducing discussions of what could happen in the future. This article only touched on a couple aspects of the national debt and the reality is it is a complex issue with many more concerns. The government is running the up credit card. The American citizens have to pay the bill and it is due today. The national debt is a clear and present danger.

- SG -

Public Option: Foolish Fight for Liberals – No Victory for Conservatives

2009-09-04T05:24:00.000-07:00

The Quick & Dirty

There has been a major battle about the inclusion of a public (government) option in health reform. The liberals are foolish to waste political clout for what could be easier in Reform V2.0. Conservatives feeling victorious in stopping the public option have achieved no victory at all. While declaring victory over socialism, they have accepted an equally disturbing structure. With or without the public option, the government is seizing unprecedented control that will drive up health care costs.

The Details

This is a challenging article to write because the politicians are started changing their positions since I outlined the story and they are continuing to change. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is warming up to the position presented here and Olympia Snowe (R-ME) is simultaneously pulling the pin out and jumping on the grenade that will fragment and lacerate the Republican party.

To understand the implications of the various health care proposals it is important to understand the difference between socialism and fascism.

Fascism: a political philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

Socialism: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

In practice, the government runs both the fascist and socialist systems of health care. The difference is not a matter of control but rather a difference of ownership. The proposed bill (HR 3200) requires that all insurance be sold through a single store front called an exchange (page 72, 84 of HR3200). The government also strictly regulates all insurance plans sold through the exchange. So, the government owns the only storefront and regulates everything sold through that storefront.

As a backlash to the insurance companies, Congress has subpoenaed insurance company financial records and continuously besmirched their character by calling them “villains” who have “been immoral all along.” Today, Nancy Pelosi gave a very clear threat to the insurance companies which is quoted below. The heavy hand of Congress is not encouraging debate and discussion typical of representative governments.

If they want no public option, but a trigger, you can be sure that the trigger will bring on a very robust public option. So, if I were advising insurance companies, I'd tell them take this bill the way it is now."

Nancy Pelosi is the Speaker of the House and third in line for the presidency. It is problematic when the Speaker of the House is threatening private businesses who are engaged in lawful behavior.

Health insurance costs will increase due to the single storefront and strict control of plans sold through that storefront. This will happen with or without the public option. Price is driven down by the existence of multiple storefronts that interface with the consumers to figure out what best fulfills the consumer’s needs.

The liberals have gone wrong by expending so much political clout fighting for the public option. Their best strategy would be to warn the American people of the impeding price increases and make them believe it will be because of the lack of the public option. When prices indeed increase (due to a single storefront), they can drive through the public option with broader public support.

The Republicans have gone wrong by accepting a fascist approach. Even though it isn't socialism, it isn't any better. It is still an increase in government control and it will still result in increased prices and increased deficits.

- SG -

First, Un-American. Now, Domestic Terrorists??

2009-09-02T04:53:00.000-07:00

The Quick & Dirty

For some strange reason Nancy Pelosi thought it would be a good tactic to call red blooded Americans un-American for exercising their First Amendment rights. Obviously, she didn’t realize that would rally Americans against health care reform. In a phenomenal failure of judgment, Obama’s Organizing For America is planning to hijack the September 11 anniversary to dub fellow Americans with the title "Right-Wing Domestic Terrorists." I can’t wait to see how this goes down.

The Details

The town hall protesters have shocked and confused the Democrats for the last month. This sent some Democrats into hiding with fewer sightings than Bin Laden himself. Many have resorted to telephone town hall meetings instead of facing their constituents. There is even one man in Ohio who has camped in front of his Congressman’s office for 5 days and nights. However, he has been unsuccessful in tracking down his representative.

This has certainly been confusing for Democrats since they seem to believe only leftists are allowed to protest. Certainly Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” is written in some special hieroglyphics that can only be read by liberals. Dazed and confused, Pelosi fired off a USA Today article saying that the protesters were un-American. How was she to know Americans would react negatively to being called un-American? She certainly didn’t expect people to dig up videos of her praising leftists when they were disruptive in meetings. This must be a very confusing time for Democrats.

Obama’s group, Organizing For America (OFA), is preparing an initiative that is certain to alienate more Americans than they can imagine. They are planning to hijack the 9/11 anniversary to campaign against the Americans who have been speaking up during the town hall meetings. A quote from the OFA web site reads:

“All 50 States are coordinating in this – as we fight back against our own Right-Wing Domestic Terrorists who are subverting the American Democratic Process, whipped to a frenzy by their Fox Propaganda Network ceaselessly re-seizing power for their treacherous leaders.”

At some point OFA took down this web page. However, The Heritage Foundation was able to capture screen shots that can be seen by clicking on this hypertext. Clearly, OFA did not learn from the Pelosi incident that Americans vigorously defend free speech. They have greatly underestimated the coming backlash when they compare Americans exercising free speech to foreign terrorists who killed thousands of Americans, and do so on the solemn anniversary of 9/11.

I was on an overseas business trip on 9/11 and remember watching the second plane fly into the World Trade Center. It was a hard because I was isolated from my country and could not fly home to help. Instead, I spent the following week on foreign soil and had to hear the local commentators say that America deserved the attack and brought it on themselves.

Like most Americans, I have great reverence for the 9/11 anniversary. How dare Obama and the Democrats compare free speaking Americans to foreign terrorists who murdered thousands of Americans on American soil.

- SG -

Dr. Phil to RNC: How’s That Working For You

2009-09-01T14:15:00.000-07:00

The Quick & Dirty

The Republican Party seems to have lost its way. The article, Unconscionable Pandering, touched on one way the Republican National Committee (RNC) is sending mixed messages in the health care debate rather than communicating a consistent and reasonable approach toward governance. A Rasmussen Report released today says that 74% of Republicans feel their elected officials are out of touch. Mr. Steele, how’s that pandering working for you?

The Details

On August 28 I wrote a blog about RNC Chairman, Michael Steele, pandering to senior citizens on the matter of health care. The article accuses Mr. Steele of adding to the confusion by violating his self-proclaimed principles of small government and fiscal responsibility.

Indeed, Republican voters do not identify with the rhetoric and actions of the RNC. According to a Rasmussen poll released today, 74% of Republicans do not believe the Republicans in Congress are representing their interests and values.

One popular opinion is that Republicans should move closer to center. However, according to the poll, 55% of Republicans feel their party officials are more liberal than themselves. 84% of Republican voters feel their congressmen should stick their values as opposed to trying to work with President Obama.

Another part of the centrist belief is that conservative Republicans can not court independents. However, according to the Rasmussen poll, 58% of unaffiliated voters think Republicans should not waiver on their values. Only 33% of unaffiliated voters believe Republicans should cooperate more with the President.

It seems that Republicans would like to see Republicans acting more like Republicans. Independents would like to see Republicans acting more like Republicans. Only 24% of Americans think the Democrats should pass the health bill without Republican support. The only group that wants Republicans to move to the left is the Democrats.

Mr. Steele and the RNC are lost without a clear and consistent message. They are denouncing “tax and spend” liberals while they themselves contribute to record deficits and proposing expansions of government. The natives are restless, yet the RNC is doing more of the same. So, Mr. Steele, how’s that working for you?

Link to Rasmussen Report

- SG -

Unions Unions Everywhere

2009-08-31T20:51:00.000-07:00

The Quick & Dirty

Don’t look now, but the unions are taking over. The issue isn’t so much that they are taking over, but rather the values of wealth redistribution they are pushing. The Obama administration has a more than cozy relationship with unions that are impacting various aspects of life. The latest is the AFL CIO tax proposal with the stated purpose of redistributing wealth. Until now, I didn’t realize unions set tax policy.

The Details

It is so hard to know where to start this article. Should we start with the Obama administration giving the UAW 55% ownership of Chrysler while ignoring the bond holders? How about the UAW getting almost double ownership of GM of bondholders while shareholders are totally wiped out? It is certainly tempting to ask why the SEIU has semi-exclusive access to the White House and has been providing “security” for many of the town hall meetings on health care.

Those are all tempting areas to analyze. However, the appointments and power being given to the AFL CIO are far more disturbing when you realize how they are planning to use that power.

Last week I read an article about the president of the New York State AFL CIO being named as chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. This was surprising since such positions are normally held by economists and experienced financial managers of large financial firms. By the way, the New York FED is the largest of the 12 regional banks spread through the country. The obvious question is how much does a labor union know about managing the money supply and the complex monetary policy controlled by the Federal Reserve.

At some point I shrugged it off and moved on with life. However, today I saw a story that brought it back to prominence. The news article titled “AFL-CIO, Dems push new Wall Street tax.” This raises numerous questions and concerns. The first question is why the AFL CIO is setting tax policy? The article cites the purpose of the tax as multi-fold:

Cut down the number of trades
Give the government part of the action
Take a bite out of Goldman’s profits
To pay for government projects

Is punishing corporate profit and getting a part of the action the role of our government? When did profit become a punishable offense?

I was so taken back by the claims in this article I questioned the bias of the author. After checking the AFL CIO web site, it is clear the author wasn’t biased at all. A quote from the AFL CIO web site reads:

“There is no question that the association of the union movement with shared wealth is absolutely a reality—and we need to get back to it.”

This is disturbing on so many levels. According to the Obama administration, we are in the middle of the worst economy since the Great Depression. The Obama response is:

Appoint a Union leader, not a financial manager, to the largest Federal Reserve Bank in the nation.
Destroy the equity of bond holders and investors in GM and Chrysler and give it to the unions
Institute tax policy with the stated purpose of redistributing wealth as opposed to financial stimulus
Demonize and punish private industry when it is profitable
Use union muscle to push a health care agenda that will increase the deficit

The unions are certainly at the center of a lot of changes being pushed by the Obama administration. These actions don’t seem focused on improving the economy, but rather they seem focused on an agenda that is far left of center.

- SG -

Water, Health Care & Rationing – Part 2

2009-08-31T16:14:00.000-07:00

The Quick & Dirty

Part 1 of this article established that rationing will be a part of future health care. This article explores 2 assertions. First, health care is not a human right. Second, universal health care is not the most fundamental service lacking government redress. The best thing a society can do for its people is to minimize human suffering by making it maximally accessible.

The Details

When I set out this morning for my run across the parched land I was hit with a couple stark facts.

My garden is wilting because water is being rationed
My water cost about the same as my health insurance

During the run I was overwhelmed by the fact that my water bill was about the same cost as my health insurance. I am self employed and purchase individual insurance and do not have the benefits of being in a group plan. Some are probably thinking that I live in a palatial estate with expansive gardens which drive the cost of water. Well, actually, I live on 1/3 of an acre and water about half of that. My health insurance costs $91 per month and water costs between $80 and $90 depending on the month. My neighbor’s bills run over $200 per month for water since he has more people in his house.

The question I kept pondering during my run was of relative importance between water and health care. I am a compassionate person and want people to have both water and health care. However, are either of those a human right? If either is a right, which is a more fundamental right. Our founding fathers in one of the most powerful documents in history said:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

How bold were our founding fathers who committed these words to paper knowing the danger they faced as they defied the most powerful military on earth. At the heart of this movement was a man named Benjamin Franklin who said:

“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

I am a strong supporter of human rights and stood ready for 6 years in the Marine Corps to defend the essential rights of Americans and the nation itself. It is impossible for me to read the words above without it bringing tears to my eyes. Having had a blood stake in defending these rights, I’ve questioned what are essential rights.

It is impossible for a right to be a right when it infringes on the rights of others. Our founding fathers said the pursuit of happiness is a fundamental human right endowed by our creator. Imposing a tax on my pursuit of happiness to finance someone else’s pursuit of happiness disqualifies their pursuit as a fundamental right. Their right is defended by me recognizing and not interfering with their own pursuit of happiness. A brilliant definition of human rights reads:

Fundamental rights which humans have by the fact of being human, and which are neither created nor can be abrogated by any government.

So, the obvious question is how is health care a fundamental human right if it requires taxation of the citizenry to establish this right. If it is indeed a human right, the right exists in a vacuum of existence. Does someone have a right to health care if they are dropped on a deserted island? If so, how is that right fulfilled?

Those with the intellectual honesty to admit health care is not a fundamental right may assert that it is a fundamental service government should provide the citizenry. There are some valid aspects of this argument. However, before declaring it as a fundamental service, one must question what services are more fundamental and that brings us back to water.

Humans can not survive more than 3 days without water. However, humans can and do survive days, weeks, months and years without health care. The epiphany from my run was that my water bill was the same cost as my health insurance. Under this scenario, isn’t the government provision of water fundamentally more essential than health care while costing no more? Why do people not assume it is the government’s responsibility to provide water? How about food? Groceries cost far more than water and are more essential for living than health care. If health care is a fundamental service the government should provide, why does it not first provide free food to the citizenry?

As you can see, it is possible to go through numerous examples of services the government could provide that fulfill needs more fundamental than health care. However, health care strikes an emotional nerve that resonates with many people and causes most to forgo basic logic and respond to an emotional plea.

Health care for all is something that strikes my heart strings and it is honestly my desire that all have health care. On that thought I feel unified with most people of all political persuasions. However, it passes neither the test for a fundamental human right nor the test for a fundamental human need. A compassionate society of free people staunchly defending human rights will find ways of making health care maximally accessible without taxing the citizenry in the process.

In the words of Benjamin Franklin, those who would sacrifice fundamental liberties that make us a free people for the sake of security found in government provided health care deserve neither liberty nor health care.

- SG -

Water, Health Care & Rationing – Part 1

2009-08-31T12:04:00.001-07:00

The Quick & Dirty

People are debating whether rationing is written into the health care bill or not. The Democrats are being honest when they say that rationing is not written into the bill. However, it is not honest to imply there will be no rationing. A close listen to President Obama will reveal that he has not denied rationing. Indeed, rationing is on the horizon if this health bill is passed.

The Details

When I set out this morning for my run across the parched land I was hit with a couple stark facts.

My garden is wilting because water is being rationed
My water cost about the same as my health insurance

One fact that makes my observation interesting is water is the most abundant resource on earth. Despite water being the most abundant resource in the world, my plants are wilting. Interestingly enough, I am a short walk from a lake that currently has 7 trillion gallons of water.

One person could argue that there is plenty of water to meet needs because it is the most abundant resource and the fact that there are 7 trillion gallons of water next to my house. However, the reality is there is rationing under way. If I get caught watering my wilting plants more than 1 day a week, I will get a $500 fine.

Health care is not an abundant resource. Current projections show a 29% shortfall in primary care physicians without any health reform. If universal access is passed into law the shortfall will increase significantly. If President Obama is correct that there are 47 million uninsured Americans that would be covered under the house bill, then the loading on the current system would increase 18%. This would result in a 40% shortage in primary care physicians.

A second grader can look at those number and know there will be rationing. If you doubt that, place 6 candy bars in the middle of 10 second graders and watch what happens. What is not clear is the criteria the government will implement for rationing.

When asked about rationing, President Obama and the Democrats give one of two responses:

The bill does not include rationing (a true statement)
There is rationing now (a true statement)

Notice they never say there will be no rationing.Considering the ferocity of the debate about health care, they have every motivation to say there will be no rationing if they indeed believe there will be no rationing. It is a cleaver strategy to avoid the reality of rationing.

Again, envision 10 kids with 6 candy bars. Anyone can see that will be a problem even if they don’t talk about it.

- SG -

A Highly Skilled Politician, But Not a Centrist

2009-08-31T05:50:00.000-07:00

The Quick & Dirty

Ted Kennedy was a very skillful and accomplished politician who had a unique ability to build bipartisan support for legislation. He was praised by his opponents, but he was most certainly very liberal for the entirety of his political career.

The Details

A question was posted to the blog: “Was Ted Kennedy really a behind the scenes centrist?” This question probably rises out of the fact that numerous conservative Republicans had praise for Ted Kennedy at the time of his death.

Indeed, Kennedy had a good working relationship with numerous Republicans. Orin Hatch (R-UT) considered Kennedy a good friend. House Republican, John Boehner , said: “Ted Kennedy was my friend. While there were few political issues on which he and I agreed, our relationship was never disagreeable, and was always marked by good humor, hard work, and a desire to find common ground.” These types of comments are common of Kennedy.

Kennedy is well known for liberal causes and has consistently voted that way. Kennedy was close to reaching the cause of his life, universal health care, in a deal proposed by Nixon in 1974. However, he rejected the proposal because it didn’t go far enough. This impacted the way Kennedy approached legislation. He started compromising more to achieve incremental movements toward his ultimate agenda. These compromises may give the appearance of being a centrist. However, his far left agenda was unchanged and used the compromises as stepping stones to where he ultimately wanted to be.

Kennedy viewed law as fluid and to be massaged to his benefit. The most recent example regards the Massachusetts law for filling senate seats. In 2004 Kennedy pushed for the state to pass a law requiring an election and outlawing a gubernatorial appointment for the replacement of senators. He pushed for that law thinking John Kerry (D-MA) would win the presidential race resulting in Governor Mitt Romney, a Republican, filling Kerry’s seat with a Republican. However, at the time of his own death, he asked the law be changed to allow the governor, now a democrat, to be able to appoint someone to his senate seat. Kennedy did not push for laws that provided good governance, but rather he pushed for laws that achieved his agenda and would change the laws when his agenda changed.

One lowlight of Kennedy’s career involved a car crash where Kennedy drove a car off a bridge at Chappaquiddick, MA. He left the scene of the accident and his passenger, a lady active in civil rights, drowned to death. There were numerous questions about the incident, but Kennedy was never prosecuted. Later Kennedy was known to joke about the accident and ask others if they had heard any good Chappaquiddick jokes.

Kennedy was admired by many for his legislative abilities. He was highly skilled in building bipartisan support for bills. However, he was never a centrist, but rather he strategically used centrist positions to gradually build leftist agendas.

- SG -

Astroturf Jerry Jones Would Envy

2009-08-30T06:06:00.000-07:00

The Quick & Dirty

I attended my first real rally yesterday. It was peaceful and I had very respectful and engaging conversation with people of opposing views. However, the rally bussed people in, was highly orchestrated, and was tightly controlled by MoveOn.org. It did not promote dialog, but rather pushed an agenda via monolog.

The Details

If you don’t know Jerry Jones, you probably aren’t into egotistical sports club owners. If you don’t know about Astroturf, you probably aren’t into the latest talk about politics. People uniting together to for some cause are called grass roots. At some point they add some structure for their cause and at some point it is accused of not being grass roots, but rather of being Astroturf.

Yesterday’s rally was organized by MoveOn.org and Organizing For America. The organizers bussed people in from 3 hours away. It featured roughly 10 speakers and no opportunity for questions. One lady was escorted out of the rally by police for raising a non-approved sign. The only signs allowed inside the meeting place were those from Organizing For America. The person sitting in front of me waived her sign for the entire event.

People were civil and I was able to talk to some folks with opposing views. One gentleman was particularly engaging. It was interesting that despite being in favor of the proposed reform, he had never heard of the exchange which would be the only place you could buy insurance according to the bill. There were a few things he didn’t believe to be true about the bill until I showed it to him. Talking with these individuals was the highlight of the rally.

The Lyndon LaRouche crowd was making its rounds outside the rally. They are known for comparing health reform to Nazism and carrying posters of Obama with a Hitler-style mustache. Nancy Pelosi and others have tried say the Republicans have been behind the Nazi discussions on health care. However, LaRouche has run 7 times as a Democratic candidate. He is indeed a strange variety of Democrat, but he is certainly a Democrat and not a Republican.

The rally itself was disappointing. It was highly orchestrated and controlled. MoveOn.org used a heavy hand in the rally. Before the doors opened a lady from MoveOn told several of us that there was an invitation list and we had to leave because we weren’t on the list. Several of us told the lady from MoveOn that we were invited by our Congressman who was speaking at the rally. The lady got frustrated and disappeared when someone asked to see the list. MoveOn also controlled the seating in the event to ensure that the most prominent seating was occupied by supporters. This ensured that the camera shots showed people supporting the MoveOne cause.

This rally was not about open dialog and did not allow any questions to clarify matters. It was a series of speakers who were trying to hype the crowd to action. Most of the rhetoric against the opposition was as one would expect. However, the NAACP introduced a tone that was disappointing and I think hurts America. The NAACP speaker said those who opposed reform were driven by hate. He also said that racial discrimination is a part of the current health care system. It is sad when American dialog on important issues is reduced to a statement that “we disagree because the opposition is filled with hate and discrimination.”

I’ve got mixed feelings about the rally. Although I greatly enjoyed the discussions with those of opposing views, I did not get to ask my Congressman any questions which was my primary goal. It is a shame that answering questions and clarifying the legislation was not a part of this rally. The event certainly was not a grass roots effort. MoveOn.org’s tight control and orchestration of the event did not promote dialog and was a textbook example of Astroturf.

- SG -

Tax for Clunkers – Government at its Worst

2009-08-28T13:55:00.000-07:00

The Quick & Dirty

Cash for clunkers seemed like a good concept to stimulate the troubled auto industry and a heightened environmental consciousness. However, it hurt US manufacturers, did not achieve measurable environmental improvement and became so unappealing that dealers rejected a stimulus during a severe recession. This is another example of government at its worst.

The Details

The Car Allowance Rebate System (CARS), popularly known as cash for clunkers has every appearance of being a well intended government initiative. Since the government owns portions of GM and Chrysler, it seems to look out for the interests of tax payers on multiple fronts. It also had an environmental goal that seemed admirable.

Unfortunately, there were numerous problems in the execution of the program. First, is the CARS program favored foreign jobs more than American jobs. Only 2 of the top 10 vehicles bought were American. The top 3 cars sold were Japanese.

To make matters worse, the normal rate of buying domestic cars dropped 11% during this program. So, the structure of the program motivated consumers to move away from American automobiles.

Second, demand for the program was poorly understood and greatly mismanaged. The original plan was supposed to last over 3 months. However, it ended in less than 4 weeks. With demand greater than expected, the government was excessively slow processing reimbursements. After 2 weeks, car dealers started pulling out for fear of not getting paid by the government and inability to sustain the government debt thrust upon them. 425 dealers in the New York metropolitan area rejected stimulus that was bringing customers in their show room during a recession.

Some will argue that the original purpose of the program was to improve the environment. If that was the main purpose, it is hard to understand why cars made before 1984 did not qualify for the program. However, if improving the environment was a genuine goal of the program, it has not resulted in meaningful improvements. The estimated reduction in gasoline is 160M gallons per year which sounds impressive until you realize that consumption is 378M gallons per day. That is a reduction of 0.1% which seems small. Additionally, more than 4M tons of carbon were generated through the production of cars sold in the production and the destruction of the clunkers.

Once the program was complete another surprise came out of the program. States consider the $4500 incentive to be taxable income. This frustrated and surprised a number of buyers. There are certainly buyers that would have reconsidered their choice if they knew about this tax in advance.

The CARS program is an example of the government trying to do good things that benefit the American people. There is no reason to believe any part of this was wrongly motivated. However, it is one of many examples of how the government starts something for the benefit of America and discovers that it does not operate well in the free market. Private industry has marketing teams that tirelessly hone and revises forecasts before launch. The need to make a profit is so overwhelming that they eliminate waste and can more efficiently process simple applications.

The CARS program further hurt US manufacturers, did not achieve measurable environmental improvement and became so unappealing that dealers rejected a stimulus during a severe recession. This is another example of good intentions resulting in government at its worst.

- SG -

Unconscionable Pandering

2009-08-28T07:19:00.000-07:00

The Quick & Dirty

All politicians pander for the sake of votes. However, the Republican party recently introduced a Seniors’ Health Care Bill of Rights that violates their professed opposition to growing deficits and government take over of health care. They are unconscionably pandering for votes from senior citizens who are politically active and powerful.

The Details

The national health care debate can be hard to follow. The Democrats have their costs, statistics and facts that seem to conflict with the Republican’s costs, statistics and facts. Arguments about the contents of the proposed bills sound like sophisticated versions of “yes, you are – no, I’m not” childhood tirades. On August 24th, the Republicans added to the confusion by conflicting themselves on key principles.

The Seniors’ Health Care Bill of Rights presented by Republican National Committee (RNC) Chairman, Michael Steele, includes 4 points:

Protect Medicare and not cut it in the name of “health-insurance reform”
Prohibit the government from getting between seniors and their doctors
Outlaw any effort to ration health care based on age
Prevent government from dictating the terms of end-of-life care

Most people would probably agree with the four points in the proposal. However, the Republican party has been against the president’s efforts because it leads to a government take-over of health care and it is fiscally irresponsible.

Mr. Steele knows that Medicare is run by the government and his proposals increase the government’s role in health care by further regulating what Medicare must do. Additionally, Mr. Steele also knows that Medicare is projected to go bankrupt in the next 9 years and offers no proposal to curb spending. Instead, his bill of rights will increase spending. The call for fiscal responsibility seems to be lost in this proposal.

Perhaps we have misunderstood Mr. Steele’s perspective. However, in July, Mr. Steele sent an email to Republican supporters:

"President Obama and Congressional Democrats think government is the solution to every problem. They're wrong. . . . Republicans believe that the last thing the American people want is government telling them when and where -- or even whether -- they can get medical treatment for their families.

. . . and the Democrats' scheme to take more of your hard-earned income to pay for other people's health care while limiting yours."

Within one month of Mr. Steele sending the above email, he proposed a bill of rights, which is a government solution, that prescribes medical coverage and will continue to take hard earned income from young workers to pay for the health care of seniors.

Instead of providing clarity in the debate, the RNC has added confusion by blatantly violating the fundamental principles in their stance. Of course, one wonders why someone would violate their principles. Senior citizens are one of the strongest and most active group of voters in the country. They have powerful lobbying groups such as the American Association for Retired Persons (AARP) that is playing an active role in health reform. Their re-election hopes and their ability to drive policy depends heavily on support from AARP and other seniors.

Mr. Steele and the RNC have proposed increased government spending and government support of health care in the hopes of avoiding even more government spending and even more government support of health care. This recent move so greatly conflicts with their principles that it strikes me as unconscionable pandering.

- SG -

Simple Government Purpose

2009-08-27T05:48:00.000-07:00

During the debate over health reform I started getting emails from friends asking "what's true." They found the discussions too confusing and didn't trust the extreme views they heard expressed.

This blog is committed to explaining the issues:

In simple and concise language (you don't need to be a political junkie to understand)
That is honest without the spin of the far left or far right
In short blurbs for busy people

Although I will do my best to present the unvarnished facts of the issues, the influence of personal views is inescapable despite the best of intentions. Thus I will tell you my personal views so you don't have to wonder. I believe in Simple Government.

Simple Government is minimal and effective. Simple Government encourages the citizenry to live as free people bearing the costs and enjoying the rewards of freedom. Simple Government is aligned with 70% of Americans who would trade fewer services from the government for lower taxes. This is part of living as a free people.

Simple Government believes it is wrong when the Chairman of the House Judiciary committee says "what use is it reading the bill if it's 1,000 pages and you don't have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you've read it?" Simple Government believes language too complicated for the judiciary committee is too complicated for good governance.

There are no safe political parties in my review. This blog will engage in bipartisan criticism where due and praise where due. My goal is to reveal the truth of matters and remove the spin common in the reporting of news.

Please leave your feedback on how to improve this blog. It is here for your benefit.

Thanks!

- SG -