Trump got elected and had no private backing for funds in the beginning. Plus, he is working for one dollar a year. Not your typical rags to riches story in Congress.
Now take the average politician running for office, Democrat or Republican. People donate money towards your election because of your political views. Once you get into office there is a small change as to how things are run. The politician needs to worry about getting re elected and this amounts to raising about 1 to 3 million in funds to run again. He sits there and lets it be known that he would like to hear “both sides” before he votes. In come the lobbyists and they bend his ear. Some of the lobbyists will donate a fixed amount to a Congressman’s reelection campaign and mention that he may get the same amount next year conditional on how he votes this year. The key word here is “may.”
Now with President Trump in office, he has no group of people he is beholding to. Big money didn’t get him elected and he has ideas where he wants the government to improve. It has nothing to do with "Scratch my back and I scratch yours." His attitude is, “I’m going to kick your ass if you piss me off.”
This is not the standard operating procedures (SOP) that the government has been using in the past. This is probably why so many Congressmen are against President Trump. Their way of raising funds has been trashed. Trump is going to do it for free, and the Congress is used to getting cash for their votes. I’d tend to believe that “yes” and “no” votes costs more to buy, the closer the vote is. This is why most politicians never get anything done. There are enough “don’t care” votes out there to buy at any one time to sway the vote one way or the other.
So, in reality, the dollars spent by private enterprise help to determine who wins an election. While in office, the dollars donated to the Congressmen by special interest groups, determines how many people will vote for or against a certain issue. This is what President Trump might not understand. The lobbyists have the power to influence the final vote of each bill presented in Congress. “How many dollars does it take to change your mind?” And when you think about it, there is always that one little thing in the bill that irks a Congressman enough not to vote for it.
Look at it from a different point of view as a Democrat. Support a Republican bill like “Build the Wall,” puts no money in your election fund, whereas voting against it would keep it on the agenda the next time they run.
Before Trump, it was “Read my lips” or “You can keep your doctor.” We are used to politicians promising the moon and delivering nothing. Trump is different, he is a real horse trader. Pelosi and Schumer have met their match.
Trump is not in this game for money. That’s what makes things peculiar. He’s not acting like a politician. He adds an unknown element into the game. He isn’t afraid to be wrong, because he knows, the winner is always right.
Post Script:
Take this article with a grain of salt. It is pretty much conjecture on my part. Most Congressmen are very responsible to the voters that got them elected. The trouble is, it only takes a few bad apples to ruin a barrel of apples.
Thursday, December 13, 2018
Tuesday, November 13, 2018
Global Warming? Or is it global Climate change?
Admittedly this is off topic a bit, but it may give you some perspective on the liberals’ manipulation of our minds by others in higher education.
The Global warming issue comes up all of the time. The major push on all of this is from the universities. If you want to do research on global warming, there is plenty of money available at the college level for government grants. If you want to pursue a research topic of global cooling, you’ll find, no funds are available. This is a political sponsored event, to project their green earth polices, on the masses unquestioned.
The dire warnings from most of these college research papers suggest that if we do nothing, we are doomed. We will resemble Venus in a few years. They want to panic the masses in order to force us to accept their agenda.
If we go back one billion years, there was no oxygen on the planet to speak of, and the atmosphere contained 20 percent CO2. Another unusual thing at that time, was that there was no oxygen so nothing could burn. It took another 500 million years for the oxygen level to rise to 15 percent which allowed combustion. Notice that 20 percent CO2 in the atmosphere didn’t cook the planet; plant life flourished. It took a half billion years for enough oxygen to collect for life as we know it to evolve.
We appear to be in the midst of a transition of global climate change. In recent history of millions of years, we can see that the sea level has been a lot lower by some 60 feet or more. The African deserts once were very productive fertile growth areas as were other areas in South America. We really can’t state that we are entering a period of global warming; the data of a billion years refute this. We are in the midst of a transition of Global Climate Change.
Once the Ice caps melt, the Gulf Stream will change course. Europe could become too cold for farming. Expect the transition to happen over maybe 50 to 200 years. What it means is this, areas that were farm land will not be productive and other new areas will now have the desirable weather for food cultivation.
What needs to be realized is that food can still be grown, but the weather shift enables areas that are now unhospitable to farming, to become prime agricultural areas once again.
Both camps agree, there appears to be a change in the computer projection modules of our climate. Is it possible that "Global Warming" is really nothing more than "Global Climate Change?" Desert land is very cheap right now. The best deals are when nobody wants it.
The Global warming issue comes up all of the time. The major push on all of this is from the universities. If you want to do research on global warming, there is plenty of money available at the college level for government grants. If you want to pursue a research topic of global cooling, you’ll find, no funds are available. This is a political sponsored event, to project their green earth polices, on the masses unquestioned.
The dire warnings from most of these college research papers suggest that if we do nothing, we are doomed. We will resemble Venus in a few years. They want to panic the masses in order to force us to accept their agenda.
If we go back one billion years, there was no oxygen on the planet to speak of, and the atmosphere contained 20 percent CO2. Another unusual thing at that time, was that there was no oxygen so nothing could burn. It took another 500 million years for the oxygen level to rise to 15 percent which allowed combustion. Notice that 20 percent CO2 in the atmosphere didn’t cook the planet; plant life flourished. It took a half billion years for enough oxygen to collect for life as we know it to evolve.
We appear to be in the midst of a transition of global climate change. In recent history of millions of years, we can see that the sea level has been a lot lower by some 60 feet or more. The African deserts once were very productive fertile growth areas as were other areas in South America. We really can’t state that we are entering a period of global warming; the data of a billion years refute this. We are in the midst of a transition of Global Climate Change.
Once the Ice caps melt, the Gulf Stream will change course. Europe could become too cold for farming. Expect the transition to happen over maybe 50 to 200 years. What it means is this, areas that were farm land will not be productive and other new areas will now have the desirable weather for food cultivation.
What needs to be realized is that food can still be grown, but the weather shift enables areas that are now unhospitable to farming, to become prime agricultural areas once again.
Both camps agree, there appears to be a change in the computer projection modules of our climate. Is it possible that "Global Warming" is really nothing more than "Global Climate Change?" Desert land is very cheap right now. The best deals are when nobody wants it.
Wednesday, October 24, 2018
Invasion of Mexico a Possibility
14,000 people moving in Mexico towards the US border. Question, what happens after their first step on American soil? They have rights (ridiculous as it may seem).
If the Mexican government cannot stop a caravan of 14,000 people, where can they find the means to stop 10,000 US marines from crossing the Mexican border to control the people on the Mexican side?
I have no information to support my suggested scenario, but if you want to address a problem, you do not wait for it to become your problem. You anticipate and react before it becomes a problem with unanticipated consequences.
Plus’s
Mexico could become the 51st state
Drug traffic would stop
People would be more secure
Real law would help our retired senior citizens down there
If the Mexican government cannot stop a caravan of 14,000 people, where can they find the means to stop 10,000 US marines from crossing the Mexican border to control the people on the Mexican side?
I have no information to support my suggested scenario, but if you want to address a problem, you do not wait for it to become your problem. You anticipate and react before it becomes a problem with unanticipated consequences.
Plus’s
Mexico could become the 51st state
Drug traffic would stop
People would be more secure
Real law would help our retired senior citizens down there
Sunday, October 07, 2018
Legislative Budget Tricks
It is getting close to election time and the voters are being bombarded with all sorts of bond measures and other goodies to vote on. The plea for money for roads, infrastructure, and schools sound like a very honest necessity, but hold on for one minute. The logic at work here is just that logic, commonly called smoke and mirrors.
In California they passed the gambling lottery for “Our Kids.” The premise was that the additional money would help the schools. What happened? The funds that the state was previously paying to the schools could now be used somewhere else, the lottery money didn’t appreciable increase the dollars for the schools. The legislature already has money for road repairs, pass the tax measure for new roads, and the money that they budgeted for roads will be spent on the homeless.
We are looking at roads falling apart, that were designed to be replaced after 30 years. Current age is more like 60 years for many of LA’s concrete highways. The water system dates back to 1900, no wonder at why so many pipes are bursting. There is no budgeted scheduled replacement of the infrastructure, repair is the main option. This deterioration took time. The tax dollars were deemed better spent somewhere else by the Legislature. The new bullet train that is to run from LA to San Francisco could probably replace a lot of the infrastructure in LA an San Francisco.
Sales taxes are approaching 10 percent in California. Jerry Brown said the state had a 16 billion dollars budget surplus this year. The fact that CalPERS needs more than twice that to be solvent is probably too insignificant to even mention. See if that surplus carries over to next year—we know where it is going. The state will distribute it to the cities and the cities will send it to CalPERS.
In high school when I was a kid, it was a common joke, if you dad couldn’t get a job, go work for the government. They didn’t pay good, but if you were an outstanding employee the private sector would offer you a real job.
Where is the logic that we can afford to pay public employees more that the same ones in the private sector? And to top that off, offer them 100K yearly retirement.
When we go to the polls this year, don’t let the bleeding-heart liberals bring up our kids, widows and orphans as an excuse for new funds. We need to cut them off completely. They need to do more with what they already have.
I didn't mean this to sound like an editorial, but I get the feeling that politicians are a bunch of con-artists that consider every voter a goodie-two-shoes Samaritan that they can rob blind. The thing that bothers me is that they are probably right in their assumption. The road to hell is paved with good intentions and the politicians want to charge extra for a hand basket. Go Figure!
In California they passed the gambling lottery for “Our Kids.” The premise was that the additional money would help the schools. What happened? The funds that the state was previously paying to the schools could now be used somewhere else, the lottery money didn’t appreciable increase the dollars for the schools. The legislature already has money for road repairs, pass the tax measure for new roads, and the money that they budgeted for roads will be spent on the homeless.
We are looking at roads falling apart, that were designed to be replaced after 30 years. Current age is more like 60 years for many of LA’s concrete highways. The water system dates back to 1900, no wonder at why so many pipes are bursting. There is no budgeted scheduled replacement of the infrastructure, repair is the main option. This deterioration took time. The tax dollars were deemed better spent somewhere else by the Legislature. The new bullet train that is to run from LA to San Francisco could probably replace a lot of the infrastructure in LA an San Francisco.
Sales taxes are approaching 10 percent in California. Jerry Brown said the state had a 16 billion dollars budget surplus this year. The fact that CalPERS needs more than twice that to be solvent is probably too insignificant to even mention. See if that surplus carries over to next year—we know where it is going. The state will distribute it to the cities and the cities will send it to CalPERS.
In high school when I was a kid, it was a common joke, if you dad couldn’t get a job, go work for the government. They didn’t pay good, but if you were an outstanding employee the private sector would offer you a real job.
Where is the logic that we can afford to pay public employees more that the same ones in the private sector? And to top that off, offer them 100K yearly retirement.
When we go to the polls this year, don’t let the bleeding-heart liberals bring up our kids, widows and orphans as an excuse for new funds. We need to cut them off completely. They need to do more with what they already have.
I didn't mean this to sound like an editorial, but I get the feeling that politicians are a bunch of con-artists that consider every voter a goodie-two-shoes Samaritan that they can rob blind. The thing that bothers me is that they are probably right in their assumption. The road to hell is paved with good intentions and the politicians want to charge extra for a hand basket. Go Figure!
Sunday, August 26, 2018
Idealism verses Realism or “Perspective”
There are 2 different classifications of voters in the general election, Idealists and Realists. Their education ranges from the educated to the uneducated.
The idealists are for health care provided by the government and higher education for all. There has to be a minimum wage and open borders for all. Government has a blank check to solve all of our problems
Whereas, the realists, want prisons, walls around the border, no government health care and a balanced budget.
The main thing about health care and higher education, if the individual can’t pay for it, It doesn’t become more affordable if the government pays for it. Anything the government tends to produce or supply is done very inefficiently and becomes increasingly expensive over time. Sometimes the goals set are not even questioned. What good does it do to send everyone to college? Has the question even been asked??? No!!! Everyone should be entitled to a higher education? What makes that a given truth. This is idealism speaking. Trade schools could offer a better life than the promise of a college education. Many never make it through their sophomore year at college and by God, they have the student loans to prove it.
Many mothers want their kids to go to college and become a doctor, lawyer or scientist. A carpenter, plumber, merchant seaman or oilrig worker might not seem like much, many make very good money.
The big problem is the elections. As a Republican, I did not vote for the president that won the election 6 years ago. But I kept quiet and lived with the results. What we need to realize is that there is a fringe element that determines the elections. 43 percent are Democrats and 43 percent are Republicans (guesstimates on my part). Notice that over the two last elections most of you remained faithful to you party. What happened is that the fringe people, the non-committed who were one issue voters, came into play. It was this 14% that elected the president.
Sadly, for the next election, we are again looking at one item voters. Save the whales, abortion, non-abortion, gay rights, black lives matter, border security, immigration etc. So, when you see CNN of MSN deliver the news you have to wonder. Why are they are reaching to absurd levels to stretch the truth? They are working the fringe voters.
It is kind of funny the idealist will protest for a minimum wage and the realist will sell them signs for their protest. You want a college education; a realist will make it happen for you. Want to buy a home you can’t afford; a realist will make it happen.
We have a split of the electorate 43 percent Republican and 43 percent Democrat. It is the 14 percent of the undecided voters that the news media is interested in influencing. This is where the 2020 election will be won or lost. And it could have very interesting results in the coming election in November. The average voter has no idea that the news media is assuming how the majority of the people will vote. The hard-core votes are fixed in stone. What the committed voter doesn’t understand, is that the media is focusing on the 14 percent “one item uncommitted voters.” They may be hoping, to sway these voters, with their rather absurd hate Trump rhetoric. I believe they have a good chance to accomplish their goal.
The line between realism and idealism is fading. The realist has lost the argument that the government has to pay for what it borrows (this camel has a strong back as far as straw is concerned). From here we only have Republicans and Democrats as two distinct classes of voters. But there is one more now, the news media. This is the organization that speaks for the swamp that lost control of the government when Trump got elected.
Imagine how much money could be lost by ethanol suppliers if we got rid of ethanol added to gas? That is swamp money. Less miles per gallon and it costs more. HMMMM.
Lets see if the media can sell the uncommitted voters "a pig in a poke."
The idealists are for health care provided by the government and higher education for all. There has to be a minimum wage and open borders for all. Government has a blank check to solve all of our problems
Whereas, the realists, want prisons, walls around the border, no government health care and a balanced budget.
The main thing about health care and higher education, if the individual can’t pay for it, It doesn’t become more affordable if the government pays for it. Anything the government tends to produce or supply is done very inefficiently and becomes increasingly expensive over time. Sometimes the goals set are not even questioned. What good does it do to send everyone to college? Has the question even been asked??? No!!! Everyone should be entitled to a higher education? What makes that a given truth. This is idealism speaking. Trade schools could offer a better life than the promise of a college education. Many never make it through their sophomore year at college and by God, they have the student loans to prove it.
Many mothers want their kids to go to college and become a doctor, lawyer or scientist. A carpenter, plumber, merchant seaman or oilrig worker might not seem like much, many make very good money.
The big problem is the elections. As a Republican, I did not vote for the president that won the election 6 years ago. But I kept quiet and lived with the results. What we need to realize is that there is a fringe element that determines the elections. 43 percent are Democrats and 43 percent are Republicans (guesstimates on my part). Notice that over the two last elections most of you remained faithful to you party. What happened is that the fringe people, the non-committed who were one issue voters, came into play. It was this 14% that elected the president.
Sadly, for the next election, we are again looking at one item voters. Save the whales, abortion, non-abortion, gay rights, black lives matter, border security, immigration etc. So, when you see CNN of MSN deliver the news you have to wonder. Why are they are reaching to absurd levels to stretch the truth? They are working the fringe voters.
It is kind of funny the idealist will protest for a minimum wage and the realist will sell them signs for their protest. You want a college education; a realist will make it happen for you. Want to buy a home you can’t afford; a realist will make it happen.
We have a split of the electorate 43 percent Republican and 43 percent Democrat. It is the 14 percent of the undecided voters that the news media is interested in influencing. This is where the 2020 election will be won or lost. And it could have very interesting results in the coming election in November. The average voter has no idea that the news media is assuming how the majority of the people will vote. The hard-core votes are fixed in stone. What the committed voter doesn’t understand, is that the media is focusing on the 14 percent “one item uncommitted voters.” They may be hoping, to sway these voters, with their rather absurd hate Trump rhetoric. I believe they have a good chance to accomplish their goal.
The line between realism and idealism is fading. The realist has lost the argument that the government has to pay for what it borrows (this camel has a strong back as far as straw is concerned). From here we only have Republicans and Democrats as two distinct classes of voters. But there is one more now, the news media. This is the organization that speaks for the swamp that lost control of the government when Trump got elected.
Imagine how much money could be lost by ethanol suppliers if we got rid of ethanol added to gas? That is swamp money. Less miles per gallon and it costs more. HMMMM.
Lets see if the media can sell the uncommitted voters "a pig in a poke."
Wednesday, July 11, 2018
The Tariff wars are Good for the US
Many people believe that tariffs are bad for the country. Let’s point out that the first 100 years of our country, those tariffs paid almost all of the revenue needed to run our government. And of course, we stole and abused patents back then, from all over the world, like China is doing now.
We could completely get rid of our steel and aluminum production if we cut our tariffs to zero. The only trouble is that if we got in a war, we might have to purchase the steel and aluminum from the party we are fighting. It’s a little like our civil war. The South lost because they did not have an industrial base.
In today’s modern world, any manufacturer can pick up and move to a cheap labor country for production. Every time I iron my button-down shirts, I tour the world; Singapore, India, Panama, Vietnam, Pakistan, Bangladesh to name a few. I can’t document it, but I would guess that most Ex-American manufacturers that produce product in another country get to avoid a lot of the overhead that was generated from production in the USA. What they would have paid in expenses over here, disappear over there, and surface as extra profit for the entrepreneur.
China thinks by limiting soy beans from the US with a tariff will be retaliatory. Sorry you’re wrong there. Fewer farmers will plant soy beans next year and prices will jump just because of the shortage. The Chinese government might understand tariffs, but they have no idea of what the futures market is all about. Food and raw materials are not really taxable with tariffs. If China wants to import soybeans from another country, go for it.
It cracks me up when Europe says it will put a tariff on Harley Davidson and Jim Beam whisky. Why not put a tariff on the cars we export over there? The reason they don’t is because they already have a tariff in place on our auto exports. Europe will pay for our whisky and our motorcycles whatever the tariff. Luxury items are immune to tariffs. You have to be part of the upper 10% to afford them.
The tariff problem could work out. If we don’t make the item, the tariff would imply that we should. Tariffs protect infant industry just starting up. In the past, letting imports crush our local industry with cheap foreign labor and production, changed our country in a bad way.
It scares me when everything I pick up in my office says “Made in China.” There was a time when you bought American because of the quality. If you are a frog, it has been a very slow boil, 50 years since they turned on the heat.
What we can be certain of is that before Trump, everyone was very comfy with all of the existing trade agreements. In return the US got cheaper goods and lost their industrial base. On top of that, the transition was gradual and everyone got used to it. Or so we thought. Ross Perot ran for president on the "Giant sucking sound in Mexico called the Nafta agreement." Who wanted to believe him? Give the peasants cheaper toys and they will be happy.
What happened over time? American industry moved to Mexico and then from there to China. The consumer got very little benefit. Of course, food stamps and unemployment insurance are benefits. Let’s see how Trump's tariffs work out over the next 3 years. Our industrial production over the last 30 years hasn’t been that great for the country as a whole.
We could completely get rid of our steel and aluminum production if we cut our tariffs to zero. The only trouble is that if we got in a war, we might have to purchase the steel and aluminum from the party we are fighting. It’s a little like our civil war. The South lost because they did not have an industrial base.
In today’s modern world, any manufacturer can pick up and move to a cheap labor country for production. Every time I iron my button-down shirts, I tour the world; Singapore, India, Panama, Vietnam, Pakistan, Bangladesh to name a few. I can’t document it, but I would guess that most Ex-American manufacturers that produce product in another country get to avoid a lot of the overhead that was generated from production in the USA. What they would have paid in expenses over here, disappear over there, and surface as extra profit for the entrepreneur.
China thinks by limiting soy beans from the US with a tariff will be retaliatory. Sorry you’re wrong there. Fewer farmers will plant soy beans next year and prices will jump just because of the shortage. The Chinese government might understand tariffs, but they have no idea of what the futures market is all about. Food and raw materials are not really taxable with tariffs. If China wants to import soybeans from another country, go for it.
It cracks me up when Europe says it will put a tariff on Harley Davidson and Jim Beam whisky. Why not put a tariff on the cars we export over there? The reason they don’t is because they already have a tariff in place on our auto exports. Europe will pay for our whisky and our motorcycles whatever the tariff. Luxury items are immune to tariffs. You have to be part of the upper 10% to afford them.
The tariff problem could work out. If we don’t make the item, the tariff would imply that we should. Tariffs protect infant industry just starting up. In the past, letting imports crush our local industry with cheap foreign labor and production, changed our country in a bad way.
It scares me when everything I pick up in my office says “Made in China.” There was a time when you bought American because of the quality. If you are a frog, it has been a very slow boil, 50 years since they turned on the heat.
What we can be certain of is that before Trump, everyone was very comfy with all of the existing trade agreements. In return the US got cheaper goods and lost their industrial base. On top of that, the transition was gradual and everyone got used to it. Or so we thought. Ross Perot ran for president on the "Giant sucking sound in Mexico called the Nafta agreement." Who wanted to believe him? Give the peasants cheaper toys and they will be happy.
What happened over time? American industry moved to Mexico and then from there to China. The consumer got very little benefit. Of course, food stamps and unemployment insurance are benefits. Let’s see how Trump's tariffs work out over the next 3 years. Our industrial production over the last 30 years hasn’t been that great for the country as a whole.
Sunday, June 10, 2018
The Future Housing Crash In Kalifornia
If you are a veteran and want to live in California or have been living there for years as a homeowner, boy, do we have a deal for you. California veterans are entitled to buy a home up to $649,999 dollars with no money down. At present interest rates, that's about a $3,000 a month payment.
My wife and I bought our home for about 500k and put 50k down for a down payment about 18 months ago. We have been getting 3 to 10 letters a week like the one below to refinance our mortgage and drag out another 100K in cash.
Something is wrong here, this refinancing with nothing down as a veteran is insane. The 10 solicitations a week to refinance our home loan sounds like an exaggeration of what we are receiving in the mail but it isn’t. Back in 2005 I wrote Greenspan a letter about the abuses in the real estate market and got a form letter back and these were published in my blog back in Aug 28, 2009. Here is a Link
You have to wonder why a lender would want to give any VA home owner all of the equity in their home including the appreciation. I am still trying to figure out why they wrote me a thirty year loan at the age of 70 , I'll be a hundred years old when I pay it off.
My wife and I bought our home for about 500k and put 50k down for a down payment about 18 months ago. We have been getting 3 to 10 letters a week like the one below to refinance our mortgage and drag out another 100K in cash.
Something is wrong here, this refinancing with nothing down as a veteran is insane. The 10 solicitations a week to refinance our home loan sounds like an exaggeration of what we are receiving in the mail but it isn’t. Back in 2005 I wrote Greenspan a letter about the abuses in the real estate market and got a form letter back and these were published in my blog back in Aug 28, 2009. Here is a Link
You have to wonder why a lender would want to give any VA home owner all of the equity in their home including the appreciation. I am still trying to figure out why they wrote me a thirty year loan at the age of 70 , I'll be a hundred years old when I pay it off.
Saturday, May 26, 2018
What Happens When Natural Laws of Expectations are Turned Upside Down?
Have you noticed lately that there is a short supply of available housing inventory and a large number of homeless people?
If interest rates were to increase to the level of inflation, say six percent, you’d see a severe drop in the price of housing. This would drop property taxes, and most of the time those future tax dollars have already been spent by the municipality.
In California now, I would guess that the average 4-person home now has 8 people living in it. Basically, when you double the price of housing, over a large area, you double the occupancy rate. The first time we saw that effect was in the 1960’s, it went unnoticed. Dad worked and mom took care of the kids. Later women went to work and the kids took care of themselves. At that point we had two wage earners financing a home. Now in today’s world, we have mom and dad working, and now the kids living at home as adults working to make ends meet.
Politicians don’t really reflect upon the laws passed and see how ineffiective they are. The free needle program might have stopped some disease, but now the casual stroller can be stabbed by a discarded needle while walking. People are “starving” and need to be fed. Human waste on the sidewalks is a big step above dog crap. Now we have hepatitis to worry about also.
At some point California needs to address the problem. Our national parks have a solution; they put up signs that say “Do not feed the wild animals.” We need to move the homeless into a controlled area for about 10 days that restricts their access to drugs and booze with no ability to pan handle for money. The people that just want to get high, would leave the area, confinement is a threat to their way of life. Those left would be the ones for rehabilitation.
California wants to make small homes for the homeless. A noble idea, but why? I pay taxes and expect fire and police protection. Why do these people that contribute nothing to the tax base, get a free home because they are homeless?
The real story about California is the number of people living in each home. Some streets are so packed with cars at night that they look like used car lots and remember each home has a driveway and a two-car garage (in the front of the house no less). So that’s parking for 4 cars.
So, the question in the title “What Happens When Natural Laws of Expectations are Turned Upside Down?” You learn to expect less and pay a lot more for it. And when you run out of money paying taxes, you’ll be entitled to a Gov. Jerry Brown "Free Shopping Cart," and will be inducted into the "Fraternal order of the Homeless." The only bad thing as far as liberals are concerned, is that there are no graduation ceremonies---go figure.
If interest rates were to increase to the level of inflation, say six percent, you’d see a severe drop in the price of housing. This would drop property taxes, and most of the time those future tax dollars have already been spent by the municipality.
In California now, I would guess that the average 4-person home now has 8 people living in it. Basically, when you double the price of housing, over a large area, you double the occupancy rate. The first time we saw that effect was in the 1960’s, it went unnoticed. Dad worked and mom took care of the kids. Later women went to work and the kids took care of themselves. At that point we had two wage earners financing a home. Now in today’s world, we have mom and dad working, and now the kids living at home as adults working to make ends meet.
Politicians don’t really reflect upon the laws passed and see how ineffiective they are. The free needle program might have stopped some disease, but now the casual stroller can be stabbed by a discarded needle while walking. People are “starving” and need to be fed. Human waste on the sidewalks is a big step above dog crap. Now we have hepatitis to worry about also.
At some point California needs to address the problem. Our national parks have a solution; they put up signs that say “Do not feed the wild animals.” We need to move the homeless into a controlled area for about 10 days that restricts their access to drugs and booze with no ability to pan handle for money. The people that just want to get high, would leave the area, confinement is a threat to their way of life. Those left would be the ones for rehabilitation.
California wants to make small homes for the homeless. A noble idea, but why? I pay taxes and expect fire and police protection. Why do these people that contribute nothing to the tax base, get a free home because they are homeless?
The real story about California is the number of people living in each home. Some streets are so packed with cars at night that they look like used car lots and remember each home has a driveway and a two-car garage (in the front of the house no less). So that’s parking for 4 cars.
So, the question in the title “What Happens When Natural Laws of Expectations are Turned Upside Down?” You learn to expect less and pay a lot more for it. And when you run out of money paying taxes, you’ll be entitled to a Gov. Jerry Brown "Free Shopping Cart," and will be inducted into the "Fraternal order of the Homeless." The only bad thing as far as liberals are concerned, is that there are no graduation ceremonies---go figure.
Tuesday, May 01, 2018
Free Trade A Bridge Too Far
Everyone appears upset over the possible tariffs being proposed by Trump. The demand is for free trade. There is one problem with the concept. The minimum wage is not the same worldwide - - $68 dollars a month in Bangladesh or $321 dollars a month in China. How about Mexico at $3.48 a day and a 48-hour work week.
If you are a manufacturer in the US, and something is labor intensive; where will you eventually be forced to relocate? Three things happen when you move off shore; labor costs are lower, lawsuits for product liability drop dramatically and taxes drop to relatively low levels. The manufacture that moves to say, China is no longer a manufacturer paying taxes in this country, he is now an importer that pays taxes on his mark up from the foreign production location.
On an individual level, we examine our location and environment and make decisions as to what is the best monetary return for our family unit. An awful lot of what goes into the decision revolves around government regulations. If you have acquired wealth, you obey government regulations if you have none, government regulations be damned.
To tie this all together, government tariffs can be a leveling force, on an economic level, for trade between countries. Let’s hope this works
If you are a manufacturer in the US, and something is labor intensive; where will you eventually be forced to relocate? Three things happen when you move off shore; labor costs are lower, lawsuits for product liability drop dramatically and taxes drop to relatively low levels. The manufacture that moves to say, China is no longer a manufacturer paying taxes in this country, he is now an importer that pays taxes on his mark up from the foreign production location.
On an individual level, we examine our location and environment and make decisions as to what is the best monetary return for our family unit. An awful lot of what goes into the decision revolves around government regulations. If you have acquired wealth, you obey government regulations if you have none, government regulations be damned.
To tie this all together, government tariffs can be a leveling force, on an economic level, for trade between countries. Let’s hope this works
Tuesday, March 20, 2018
Liberals Verses Limited Resources
If everyone in the world was enabled to live as we do in the advanced world, there would be one problem. Not enough resources to go around.
On the other side, have you noticed that with Liberals, there is a solution to any problem that faces mankind?
We often point to the bottle with a banana inside and a few fruit flies with a cork in it. Lets just take a city like Los Angeles. How many days would it take to evacuate the city if everyone was ordered to leave? Answer, about 8 to 10 days if fuel trucks could continue deliveries. Or how many days could you survive in Los Angeles if it was not being supplied with food? Maybe 20 to 30 days. How far will a tank of gas take you if the roads are jammed with stalled cars? How many people might all of a sudden want to shop at your home for food to eat?
We don’t think about things like this. But it could happen from several different corridors. A massive bank failure could paralyze food deliveries nationwide. Why would a truck driver, drive a load of food from NY to LA, if he had no way to be paid? A massive power outage could limit communications for several years. There is only one company in the US making power transformers and I am told it would take 20 years to replace them all. One good solar flare and we are back in the dark ages again.
We have reached certain limits of supply, that demand things continue in a normal fashion, for our standard of living to continue uninterrupted without glitches. The average liberal has no idea of what logistics is all about. Unlimited Government funding, ready access to fuel, food, water, and housing are assumed as a given, for any area. But what if they aren’t? Reality will set the tone. Three fourths of the world cannot afford political philosophies like Liberalism in their daily life, dreams don’t pay the bills.
We as a nation need to comprehend that our consumption of resources is so intense, that there is no way we can offer this life style to the rest of the world. The reason being, our standard of living must drop to accommodate them.
Liberals don’t realize is that most problems without any help, work themselves out very successfully given time. You still have the flask; the banana is gone and fruit flies are all dead. Funny how global warming was the perceived problem when in reality it has always been overpopulation.
Our national debt just hit 21 trillion dollars. Has anyone bothered to ask, who the government borrowed the money from? The answer is they borrowed it from banks and retirement funds. They borrowed it from people who saved money. If you are worried, talk to a Liberal to calm your nerves. Everything is under control. That last straw to break the camels back is probably years away. Probably while you are retired enjoying the good life.
The Liberals are going to give this country away, and I haven’t figured out who they are going to give it to yet. But I do know, if you if you are approaching retirement, a decent shopping cart to store your belongings in is highly desirable; now might be a good time to start looking for one.
On the other side, have you noticed that with Liberals, there is a solution to any problem that faces mankind?
We often point to the bottle with a banana inside and a few fruit flies with a cork in it. Lets just take a city like Los Angeles. How many days would it take to evacuate the city if everyone was ordered to leave? Answer, about 8 to 10 days if fuel trucks could continue deliveries. Or how many days could you survive in Los Angeles if it was not being supplied with food? Maybe 20 to 30 days. How far will a tank of gas take you if the roads are jammed with stalled cars? How many people might all of a sudden want to shop at your home for food to eat?
We don’t think about things like this. But it could happen from several different corridors. A massive bank failure could paralyze food deliveries nationwide. Why would a truck driver, drive a load of food from NY to LA, if he had no way to be paid? A massive power outage could limit communications for several years. There is only one company in the US making power transformers and I am told it would take 20 years to replace them all. One good solar flare and we are back in the dark ages again.
We have reached certain limits of supply, that demand things continue in a normal fashion, for our standard of living to continue uninterrupted without glitches. The average liberal has no idea of what logistics is all about. Unlimited Government funding, ready access to fuel, food, water, and housing are assumed as a given, for any area. But what if they aren’t? Reality will set the tone. Three fourths of the world cannot afford political philosophies like Liberalism in their daily life, dreams don’t pay the bills.
We as a nation need to comprehend that our consumption of resources is so intense, that there is no way we can offer this life style to the rest of the world. The reason being, our standard of living must drop to accommodate them.
Liberals don’t realize is that most problems without any help, work themselves out very successfully given time. You still have the flask; the banana is gone and fruit flies are all dead. Funny how global warming was the perceived problem when in reality it has always been overpopulation.
Our national debt just hit 21 trillion dollars. Has anyone bothered to ask, who the government borrowed the money from? The answer is they borrowed it from banks and retirement funds. They borrowed it from people who saved money. If you are worried, talk to a Liberal to calm your nerves. Everything is under control. That last straw to break the camels back is probably years away. Probably while you are retired enjoying the good life.
The Liberals are going to give this country away, and I haven’t figured out who they are going to give it to yet. But I do know, if you if you are approaching retirement, a decent shopping cart to store your belongings in is highly desirable; now might be a good time to start looking for one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)