April, 2015, Part 1, Political Class Insanity: Our Golfing Addicted President, Sex Partying DEA Agents, and More

It is the beginning of another month which means it is time to review the latest political class insanity that has cropped up over the past 30 days or so. As regular readers of this blog know, political class insanity comes in many different forms including, but not limited to, the following craziness:

• Spending taxpayer wealth on idiotic programs and projects.
• Wasting taxpayer wealth on their own selfish financial and political needs.
• Implementing legislation to resolve problems that make the original problems worse or which created unintended bad consequences as a result of their legislation.
• Implementing legislation that supports their political donors and financial backers rather than the typical American citizen.
• Issuing idiotic and stupid comments.
• Overseeing government organizations that are incompetent, inefficient, ineffective, and wasteful of taxpayer wealth.

As always, it is highly likely we will identify new forms of insanity over the next few days as we review the past ineptness coming out of Washington and other bastions of American politicians.

1) The current state of the world is not good:

• Yemen has become a lawless country infested with at least three different terrorist groups.
• Egypt and Saudi Arabia are bombing Yemen.
• ISIS is still running wild and growing in northern Iraq and Syria.
• The Obama administration is about to sign off on an agreement that will make Iran able to develop nuclear weapons capability in a relatively short time frame.
• Our relations at the highest levels of government between our traditional ally and only democracy in the Middle East, Israel, and the U.S.Federal government is at an all time low.
• The economic growth situation in the this country and the related employment situation is still stagnant.
• Our borders still leak, our public schools still continue to under educate, we are still losing our war on drugs, and we still do not have a long term energy strategy for the country.

Given this context, according to a recent Washington Examiner report and other news reports:

• President Obama recently jetted down to Florida for a round of golf on the taxpayer tab at an exclusive Florida country club.
• This was the 222nd round of golf he has played since becoming President, by far the most rounds of Presidential golf played since the Eisenhower Presidency six decades ago.
• According to Air Force documents obtained by the Judicial Watch, it costs $210,877 an hour to fly Air Force One, putting the round trip price tag at $843,508 for this one round of Presidential golf.
• According to press reports from members of the media flying with the President, the beer started flowing shortly after takeoff at 9:30 am, leading to the following press pool report: "You can tell this is a non work trip because someone forward of the press cabin ordered 3 beers at 9:26 a.m."
• In order to not photograph or report on the President during his round of golf, all members of the media were shuttered into a shack on the golf course until the round was done.

Certainly another “bad optics” experience for this Presidency, another bad set of priorities, another piece of insanity, given the multitude of crises facing the country that have erupted during his time in office.

2) We are less than three weeks away from filing our Federal income taxes, an act that if not done properly and on time could result in fines and jail time for most Americans. I say for most Americans, since again in 2014, the IRS has found that for many Federal employees, paying only some of none of their Federal income taxes appears to be acceptable:

• More than 100,00 Federal employees did not pay or part of their Federal income taxes employees.
• It represents almost 4% of the Federal workforce who are in violation of IRS rules and laws.
• They are depriving the Federal government and the American taxpayer $1.14 billion in unpaid Federal income taxes.
• Among categories of Americans who receive direct compensation from the Federal government, only retired military veterans have a higher tax evasion rate, 4.04%, likely because many of them are homeless or unemployed as compared to Federal government employees that are employed and making really good money and salaries.
• 500 House of Representative staffers owe a combined $6.7 million to the IRS for unpaid Federal income taxes.last year.
• This 100,000 level establishes a new record high for tax evasion by Federal employees.

Another example of total dysfunction on the part of the Federal government and the politicians who are supposed to be overseeing their operations. The IRS obviously knows who these tax evaders are, they know how much they are evading, so why is it so hard to confiscate their government wages until their tax debt is wiped out? 

Sounds simple but as we have often shown with our insanity posts, even simple is often beyond the reach and capability of today’s politicians. But you can be sure that if you or I did not pay all of our taxes, our fate would be far worse than those who are tax evading Federal employees.

3) Another example of dysfunction of the Federal government and those that oversee its operations cropped up in a Special Security Administration (SSA) Inspector General report and audit. That audit found that the SSA had live, valid Social Security numbers on record for 6.5 million Americans that are over 112 years old.

This is interesting since:

• According to Census records, there are only about 6.0 million living Americans who are over the age of 85, making it impossible to have 6.5 million over the age of 112.
• According to Wikipedia, there are about 16 Americans living in the country today who are over the age of 110.

Which obviously raises some simple questions relative to 6.5 million lived SSA accounts:

• How many of those 6.5 million accounts are being used by relatives of deceased Americans who have kept the account alive and are illegally receiving Social Security benefit payments?
• How many of those 6.5 million accounts are being used by organized crime to skim and scam taxpayer wealth out of the SSA?
• How many of those 6.5 million accounts are being used by illegal immigrants to illegally stay in this country, find work in this country, and get illegal benefits in this country from the SSA?

There is a really simple solution to this problem. Identify the 16 Americans who are actually still alive, put their SSA numbers aside, and then cancel the remaining 6.5 million SSA numbers and see what happens. 

Odds are the criminals will move onto to other endeavors once they realize the jig is up and using deceased Americans’ Social Security numbers, saving billions in taxpayer wealth. Anyone who shows up and complains about losing a valid number is likely a criminal and should be arrested for SSA fraud.

Simple, right? But again, much too hard for the political class to comprehend and to force the Federal government to do. Another pathetic example of wasting taxpayer wealth as a result of government incompetence.

4) More government operations incompetence. According to recent news reports:

• Federal Drug Enforcement (DEA) agents operating in Columbia over the years apparently were treated to sex parties, courtesy of the local drug cartels, the same people and organizations that the agents were supposed to be shutting down.
• Many of the sex parties and prostitutes were hosted at rented DEA facilities and offices where sensitive electronic equipment such as computers and smartphones were available to be compromised.
• The cartels provided security for DEA agents’ weapons during the sex parties.

News reports on the sex parties can be viewed at:

http://www.mrctv.org/videos/nbc-continues-ignore-report-dea-sex-parties-funded-drug-cartels

These sex parties occurred over a number of years but recently came to light. One has to wonder if there are others that have not yet been uncovered. Another example of a dysfunctional government operation and poor or no oversight by the politicians that are supposed to keep these operations efficient, focused, and effective. Touch to be any of those things when the sex is free.

A President that would rather golf and fund raise than lead, 100,000 Federal government employees who seem to think that filing and paying incomes taxes is optional, a Social Security Administration which seems to think the fountain of youth exists at least within their records, and a DEA set of agents who party at drug cartel expense.

That’s enough for today, which turned out to be a focus on the overall incompetence of the Federal government and the political oversight that has failed to make these operations and entities a worthwhile investment for the taxpayer. More and varied insanity to follow in the upcoming days.

Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at:

www.loathemygovernment.com

It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.

Please visit the following sites for freedom:

Term Limits Now: http://www.howmuchworsecoulditget.com
http://www.reason.com
http://www.cato.org
http://www.bankruptingamerica.org
http://www.conventionofstates.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08j0sYUOb5w

March, 2015, Part 2, By The Numbers: Out Of Control Spending By Washington and Its Economic Ignorance

On a semi-regular basis we revisit the theme ”by the numbers” just to check in on the state of the country and political class using actual realities and their underlying numbers, not the spin or lies from our politicians. You see, politicians usually have nothing to gain by looking at reality and the numbers since they are more than likely to have screwed up reality and our lives in the first place.

That is why they would rather lie and deceive than tell the truth. But that approach can be destroyed by looking at the hard numbers behind the mess they have created. I once worked for a boss whose favorite saying was: There is nothing more devastating to an opinion than the right number.” And that is what we try to do with this theme is devastate politicians’ opinions by looking at the right numbers.

So let’s take a look at the numbers that have recently cropped up and again prove that the political class in America continues to be one of the worst set of people to ever hold office, given the state of the country, the many ways they screw up our wealth and government functions, and their inability or non-desire to step up and tell the truth.

Today we finish up our discussion on “by the numbers” today using the latest analysis of government numbers and other numbers as done by the Heritage Foundation:

1) Anyone with a smidgen of math and number analysis abilities already realizes that government entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare are growing much faster than the economy. Simple number analysis show us that as the Baby Boomers retire and start using the promised benefits the political class promised them long ago relative to retirement income and retirement medical care, the cash crunch on the Federal government gets more and more unbearable and unpayable.

Using government data from the Congressional Budget Office and Office of Management and Budget, and assuming that the Federal government’s tax revenue stream will be equal to the long term average of 18%, by 2013, just 16 years from now, government entitlement programs and the interest that has to be paid on our $18 TRILLION national debt (which is growing every day), will be equal to the Federal government’s revenue stream.

This means that before the national defense is funded, before the EPA is funded, before the Departments of Energy, Transportation, Commerce, Education, and dozens of other government entities are funded, the Federal budget is already accounted for. And the situation gets worse after 2031 with government revenue failing to cover the entitlement and interest payments.

Sources: Congressional Budget Office and Office of Management and Budget.

The numbers do not lie: unless radical changes are made to the national debt and the promises embedded within the Federal government’s entitlement programs, there will be an unprecedented budget crisis very soon: the Federal government and the national economy cannot withstand business as usual in Washington.2) As we showed yesterday with Bill Gates wealth, there is no way to overcome the national debt hole that the Washington political class has dug for us. The Federal government spends too much, it does not tax too little. The above number analysis and the impending 2031 doom verifies that reality. But let’s get away from Bill Gates and talk about the debt burden on average Americans. Heritage did another analysis to show what the national debt burden is today and in the future for every American if each one took responsibility for a fair piece of that debt:

• Just for the public part of the country’s debt load, a child born today will have a debt burden at birth of about $41,000.
• By the time that child is 18 years old, their share of the national debt burden will more than double to $91,000.
• Just six years later, their share of the national debt burden will be up over 50% to $142,000.
• And these depressing numbers include only the so-called “public debt.” As non-public debt is converted to public debt, which has to happen at some point in the future, these numbers are much too low to capture the total and real devastating debt effects on future American generations.

Really depressing numbers for today’s youth. They get to pay off the wasteful and fraudulent spending of today’s politicians without any of the benefits from that debt. This is the number legacy we are leaving for our kids and grandkids unless we take immediate and drastic action to get Federal government spending under control.And make no mistake, the current set of Washington politicians are the most culpable. Our total national debt is up about 80%, eight TRILLION dollars just since Obama took office six short years ago. And that will be his numbers legacy to our kids, our grandkids and our history going forward, uncontrolled spending with no societal benefits in return.

PUBLIC DEBT PER CAPITA



Sources: Congressional Budget Office, Office of Management and Budget, and U.S. Census Bureau.

3) We have previously pointed out several examples where state politicians raised tax rates on the highest earning state residents, fully expecting to see those higher tax rates result in higher state government tax revenue.The most classic example was written up in the Wall Street Journal relative to the state of Maryland. That state raised the tax rates on the state’s highest earning residents but ended up getting LESS revenue from the same higher earning residents than prior to the tax rate.What happened with this line of reasoning? In all likelihood those state residents, faced with paying more in taxes, simply moved out of state to avoid the higher Maryland tax rates. Thus, rather than seeing the tax revenue stream increase when tax rates were raised, the state ended up with less overall revenue despite the higher rates. People are not stupid, they will make the decisions that give them the most freedom, economic and political.Which gets us to the final number analysis from the Heritage Foundation. Over the past 50 years, the top Federal government income tax rate has varied from 91% to 28%. However, despite the wide range, Federal income taxes received as a percentage of the nation’s GDP has remained relatively constant. For example, according to IRS data, in 1990, the top Federal income tax rate was 28% which resulted in Federal income tax revenue to be equal to about 79% of the country;s GDP. In 2014, the the top Federal tax rate had jumped up to 39%, about 40% higher than in 1990, but the percentage of GDP was about the same, a smidgen higher at only 8.0%. Thus, despite Obama’s obsession with soaking the rich with higher tax rates, the bottom line is that there were not substantially higher tax revenues generated, as the IRS data below shows.
TOP TAX RATES AND TOTAL RECEIPTS



Source: Internal Revenue Service.

In other words, the top tax rate is inelastic economically compared to tax revenue as a percentage of GDP. Thus, why raise tax rates and reduce the economic freedom of Americans when lower tax rates results in about the same revenue as higher tax rates? Because the political class would rather try and control our lives, despite what the data, numbers, and realities tell us.That will do it for this brief, two post update under our theme, “by the numbers.” What did we learn today from the numbers:

1. Unless Washington changes its spending ways, soon the country will not be able to afford anything but interest payments on the national debt and entitlements.
2. Unless Washington changes is spending ways, a child born today will be faced with a national debt burden of over $140,000 by the time they are 24 years old.
3. Higher tax rates rarely, if ever,at both the state and Federal level, result in higher tax revenues.

The numbers do not lie, the numbers devastate opinions and spin of the political class. And unlike today’s politicians, starting in the White House, the numbers do not lie.Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at:

www.loathemygovernment.com

It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.

Please visit the following sites for freedom:

Term Limits Now: http://www.howmuchworsecoulditget.com
http://www.reason.com
http://www.cato.org
http://www.bankruptingamerica.org
http://www.conventionofstates.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08j0sYUOb5w

March, 2015, By The Numbers, Part 1: Social Security Going Bust, Pentagon Losing Weapons, and More

On a semi-regular basis we revisit the theme ”by the numbers” just to check in on the state of the country and political class using actual realities and their underlying numbers, not the spin or lies from our politicians. You see, politicians usually have nothing to gain by looking at reality and the numbers since they are more than likely to have screwed up reality and our lives in the first place.

That is why they would rather lie and deceive than tell the truth. But that approach can be destroyed by looking at the hard numbers behind the mess they have created. I once worked for a boss whose favorite saying was: "There is nothing more devastating to an opinion than the right number.” And that is what we try to do with this theme, devastate politicians’ opinions by looking at the right numbers.

So let’s take a look at the numbers that have recently cropped up and again prove that the political class in America continues to be one of the worst set of people to ever hold office, given the state of the country, the many ways they screw up our wealth and government functions, and their inability or non-desire to step up and tell the truth.

1) One can really tell how inept our current politicians are by looking at how incompetently they operate government functions. According to a recent Social Security Administration (SSA) inspector general audit report, there are 6.5 million active Social Security numbers on file that indicate the owners of those numbers are over 112 years old but there is no record of their death. Given the reality that the 2013 Census update shows that there are just over 6 million living Americans in the country who are over 85 years old, it is highly doubtful there are 6.5 million Americans who are over 112 years old, the numbers make no sense.

But it does make sense if you consider the very real possibility that these Social Security numbers are still active because they are being used fraudulently to rip off the SSA and the American taxpayer. It could be that the sons and daughters of deceased holders of these SSA numbers are still receiving the SSA checks of their dead relatives. It could be that illegal aliens are using the numbers to get benefits or get jobs using dead folks’ SSA numbers. It could be that organized crime is using the numbers to get disability or retirement checks fraudulently. Whatever the cause, you can be sure that the American taxpayer is being ripped off. 

A couple of comments here:

• Why did it take an auditor’s report to figure this out? 
• Is the SSA so screwed up that they had no idea that millions of people could be ripping off the system?
• Didn’t anyone there think to compare the characteristics of their list to the Census findings?
• According to Wikipedia, there are a grand total of sixteen Americans confirmed to be over 110 years old living in the country today? Didn’t anyone at the SSA think that might be an easy and important number to look up?

Unbelievable incompetence that could be avoided with some simple number analysis. Here is another simple idea: find out who those sixteen Americans are who are over the age of 110, identify what their Social Security numbers are, and then deactivate the remaining 6.5 million numbers that the inspector general identified and then sit back and see who yells? Whoever yells is likely a criminal in some respect who can then be arrested for fraud. 

The others will likely melt away once they know the scam is over, saving the American taxpayer a lot of wealth. But even simple plans like these are too much for the political class to grasp so expect the 6.5 million number to hang around for a long time.

2) According to a recent Washington Post article, the Pentagon also has a numbers problem in that it is unable to account for $500 million worth of military aid given to the Yemeni government. Given that the Yemeni government was recently overthrown it is highly likely that the half a billion worth of taxpayer funded weaponry is now in the hands of one of three terror groups operating in Yemen: ISIS, Al Qaeda, or Iranian supported terrorists. Half a billion dollars, a nice round number used to fund terrorists.

3) The Heritage Foundation recently did some real nice number analyses regarding the Federal budget which should shake up a lot of people who have an opinion but no data to support their opinion. Let’s start with the fallacy that the wealthy in this country do not pay enough in taxes. 

Using Federal government tax data from 2011, the latest data available, Heritage’s analysis found that:

• The top 10% earners in this country pay a whopping 68% of all Federal income taxes. 
• The top 1% of earners pay more than a third of all Federal income taxes (35%).
• Another way to look at the numbers is that the top 10% of earners earn 46% of the earnings in this country but pay 68% of all Federal income taxes, a tax to earnings ratio of almost 1.5, i.e. their share of taxes paid is 50% more than their share of earnings earned.
• The top 1% of earners earn 19% of all earnings but pay 35% of all Federal income taxes, a tax to earnings ratio of 1.84, i.e. their share of taxes is 84% higher than their share of earnings earned.
• The bottom 50% of earners earn 12% of earnings but pay only 3% of all Federal income taxes so their tax to earnings ratio is .25, i.e. their share of taxes is 75% lower than their share of earnings and their tax to earnings ratio is more than seven times lower than the ratio for the top 1% earners.

Given these numbers and results, it is pretty hard to make the case that the wealthy, higher earners do not pay their fair share of Federal income taxes. These numbers just reaffirm that we do not have an under taxation problem in this country, we have a Federal government over spending problem.

Another set of numbers to prove that there is not an under taxation problem in this country is to look at the wealth of Bill Gates, the wealthiest American, and the Federal government’s budget. The Federal government is spending money at the rate of about $10.4 billions per DAY. According to Forbes latest analysis, Bill Gates is worth about $78 billion. 

Rather than tax Bill Gates at a higher rate, let’s get crazy and say that somehow the Federal government confiscated everything he owned, about $78 billion worth of wealth. If we divide his wealth by the run rate of Federal spending we see that Gates’ entire wealth could operate the Federal government for just over seven days. His entire wealth, seven days, eight days tops of government operations.

If you just raise his tax rate, the increase in taxes collected would not even operate the Federal government for a few hours. We have a government that spends too much, we do not have a government that does not tax enough, the numbers do not lie.



4) Let’s dive deeper in the Heritage analysis, starting with Social Security numbers. The following numbers show the annual Social Security Administration cash flows over the years, adjusted for inflation, where a surplus means that in that year they collected more in Social Security taxes than what was paid out and deficit years means more was paid out than what was collected in Social Security taxes:

INFLATION-ADJUSTED DOLLARS (2014)



Source: Social Security Administration.

The numbers are pretty clear:

• Up until 2009, the cash flow of the SSA was positive, i.e. it collected more in Social Security taxes than what it paid out in Social Security benefits, a good thing. 
• But starting in 2010, that surplus turned negative with the deficit quickly growing to a whopping $79.7 billion in just five short years in 2014.
• While the SSA forecasts a slight reduction in that deficit.negative cash flow in the next few years, given the current set of rules, numbers and realities of the Social Security system, deficits will soon skyrocket, reaching an annual deficit of $337 billion by 2032, four times higher than it is today.

This is just more proof that the Social Security “trust” is an accounting and numbers trick foisted on us by the political class. There is no trust fund. There is no pile of cash or stack of gold bars and sheets of Google stock that can be used to offset the growing negative cash flow. The trust fund is an accounting trick that the politicians used to get access to Social Security wealth long ago, leaving us with growing Social Security deficit numbers that will very soon be unpayable under the current benefit scheme. The numbers do not lie even if the politicians do when it comes to Social Security.That will do it for political numbers today, more to follow tomorrow. Today we learned that dead people still get Social Security benefits, the Pentagon lost half a billion dollars worth of military gear, the wealthy already pay most of our taxes, and Social Security is quickly becoming insolvent. The numbers do not lie.

Economically Ignorant In Seattle....And Washington

Step 36 from our book, “Love My Country, Loathe My Government” makes the case that no newly elected politician should be able to make any decisions or vote on any legislation until they pass a basic, fundamental course on economics and economic theory. Current Washington politicians have recently been quoted in publicly stating that the island of Guam could tip over in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, that the Constitution is over 400 years old, whether a NASA mission to the surface of Mars would be driving by the place where Neil Armstrong walked, and other idiotic things. They are the last people you would want making economic decisions for you, never mind making any kind of decisions for you.

But let’s stay with economic matters today. We are currently living through the worst, the weakest and the lamest economic recovery from a recession in at least the past hundred years. And it was the weakest despite the following positive conditions that should have made it a boom time for the country’s economy:

• The Federal government borrowed and spent over $800 billion on a so-called economic stimulus program that stimulated very little and which ended up wasting untold billions of dollars on idiotic programs and projects.
• The Federal Reserve Board pumped TRILLIONS of dollars into the economy based on no underlying wealth to justify the printing of this money.
• We are living through an energy revolution in this country that is resulting in reduced energy costs, a reduction that should be spurring spending and economic growth throughout the country.

Despite these tail winds, the politicians still botched the recovery. We still have a record number of Americans who have been now classified long term unemployed, we still have over 45 million Americans who need Federal food assistance every month, more than at the beginning of the recession which ended five years ago, median household income has declined steadily since AFTER the recession ended, and a myriad of other economic distress. 

It is obvious that most American politicians have no idea how an economy works and how to implement programs and policies that facilitate economic growth. Most have never operated a business of any kind and are aware of the challenges such an endeavor poses from a profitability perspective and customer behavior viewpoint.

Which gets us to today’s main topic, a pending substantial hike in the minimum wage in the Seattle metro area. Local politicians there decided that it would be a good idea to hike the minimum wage in that area to $15 an hour, creating what they branded as a “living wage.” Noble sentiment, terrible thought since they really had no clue of how their local economy worked and what this wage increase would do to local businesses of all types.

Randy Desoto, writing for the Western Journalism website on March 16, 2015, highlighted what their ignorance of life and business reality is resulting in:

• Even though the minimum wage hike is not in effect yet, Seattle Magazine asked the question, Why are so many Seattle restaurants closing lately: Last month—and particularly last week— Seattle foodies were downcast as the blows kept coming: Queen Anne’s Grub closed February 15. Pioneer Square’s Little Uncle shut down February 25. Shanik’s Meeru Dhalwala announced that it will close March 21. Renée Erickson’s Boat Street Café will shutter May 30 after 17 years with her at the helm…What the #*%&$* is going on? A variety of things, probably—and a good chance there is more change to come.
• The obviously and simple correct answer is that these popular and long term viable businesses are no longer viable because their increase in the wage line of their business overwhelmed their ability to make a profit.
• Anthony Anton, president and CEO of Washington Restaurant Association, gave the Seattle Magazine a short lesson in restaurant economics: “It’s not a political problem; it’s a math problem.” He says that restaurants typically have a budget breakdown of about 36 percent for labor, 30 percent for food costs, and 30 percent to cover operational costs, all of which leaves leaves a meager 4 percent for a profit margin. When labor costs shoot up to say 42 percent as a result of the minimum wage hike, something has to give in order for the business to stay in business.
• Now, restaurants could cut food costs which would likely result in a decrease in product/meal quality which would eventually reduce customer demand which would eventually force the restaurant to close, simple economics.
• Restaurants could cut staff but that would likely result in poorer customer service which would eventually reduce customer demand which would eventually force the restaurant to close, simple economics.
• Restaurants could raise prices but that would likely push some of its customer demand to other less expensive options, including eating at home, further reducing revenue and profits,simple economics, in this case price elasticity.
• Or restaurants could simply close because they could nolonger make a profit, destroying jobs and economic growth in the process.
• In economic language, the Washington Policy Center explains the theory: When prices rise consumers seek alternatives, a behavior economists call the “substitution effect,” which results in lower demand for the higher-priced product. In the case of restaurants, consumers have access to the ultimate substitution – they can stay home.
• Rather than growing their business and focusing on customer service, the $15 minimum wage change, according to a spokesman for the Washington Restaurant Association told the Washington Policy Center, “Every [restaurant] operator I’m talking to is in panic mode, trying to figure out what the new world will look like.”
• This should come as no surprise since earlier this year Prop 1 made a $15 minimum wage mandatory for those working in parking garages and hotels near Seattle-Tacoma International Airport (SEATAC). 
• A NW Asian Newspaper reporter asked a local cleaning woman who also did part-time work as a banquet server in a hotel near SEATAC, what she thought of the new law: “It sounds good, but it’s not good. I lost my 401k, health insurance, paid holiday, and vacation. No more free food [from the hotel]. No more overtime and I have to pay for parking.”
• Thus, the good idea of raising the minimum wage required those employers, including non-restaurant employers, to cut other expenses to stay in business and stay profitable, which in turn found its way down to cutting the benefits and expense savings of those that got a wage hike, possibly leaving them no better off than before and possibly worse off from an overall compensation perspective.
• The same reporter also interviewed a part time waitress at the hotel of what the higher minimum wage meant to her life: “Yes, I’ve got $15 an hour, but all my tips are now much less,” likely because the meals are more expensive and customers have a set budget to spend on eating out, that pesky price elasticity curve and reality again.
• Before the new wage law was implemented, her hourly wage was $7. But her tips added to more than $15 an hour. And she used to receive free food and parking. Now, she has to bring her own food and pay for parking.
• The Seattle Times reported that a Clarion Hotel recently decided to close its full service restaurant (laying off 15 people) and also axed a night desk clerk and a maintenance worker. It also plans to raise its rates by 10 percent to offset increased labor costs.

Thus, through their economic ignorance, the local Seattle politicians’ solution to a perceived problem in their minds actually made the perceived problem worse:

• Fewer jobs for employees.
• Less overtime for employees.
• Loss of non-wage benefits and compensation for employees.
• Stress on both business owners and employees.
• Loss of traditional and profitable local businesses.
• Distraction of business owners from operating and growing their businesses.

These are simple economic principles to grasp but their simplicity is obviously beyond the comprehension of local Seattle politicians. Look, I wish everyone had a great wage and income. But mandating it from above via the political process never works for any problem including economic ones.

Ways to get wages growing again is to fix our failing public education system to get the high paying skills embedded into our kids today and tomorrow, substantially reduce unneeded over-regulation of businesses which would free up business resources now required for government compliance vs. customer service, reduce unnecessary government spending to reduce the tax burden on both employees and employers, and generally get out of the way of the job producers and the risk takers that grow the economy.

This is just Seattle. Imagine how destructive the same type of people can be in Washington. These are the same people that brought us the following costly economic disasters with no societal benefits in return:

• Cash for Clunkers.
• Cash for Appliances.
• Non-existent “shovel ready” jobs.
• Dozens of failed alternative energy investments that cost taxpayers tens of billions of dollars.
• The real estate bubble fostered by and financed by the two Federal government mortgage giants, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

The same idiotic economic strategies and mentality failing in Seattle are also failing in Washington. Thus, two steps are needed to avoid future disasters:

• First, make sure the political class truthfully shows us up front what the entire economic picture looks like for any government economic endeavor so that it can get a good public airing, review, thrashing, and vetting before it is ever launched.
• Second, in order to get a good program and strategy put together, implement Step 36 discussed at the beginning of this post requiring all Washington politicians to pass an economics proficiency test before being allowed to voted on any legislation.

Stupid is as stupid does, whether it is in Seattle or Washington when it comes to economic ignorance.

Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at:

www.loathemygovernment.com

It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.

Please visit the following sites for freedom:

Term Limits Now: http://www.howmuchworsecoulditget.com
http://www.reason.com
http://www.cato.org
http://www.bankruptingamerica.org
http://www.conventionofstates.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08j0sYUOb5w

March, 2015, Part 2, I Am A Global Warming Doubter and A Believer In Science: Attacking Those Scientists That Dare To Disagree

For the past few years we have run a semi-regular series under the theme, “I am a global warming doubter and a believer in science.” The underlying drivers of this theme were twofold. First, I had gotten tired of people like Al Gore ranting at the top of their lungs that if someone did not believe what they believed then you were an idiotic, a denier, a racists, a homophobe, and a non-believer in science. Second, I wanted to take a look at ALL of the global warming science out in the world, suspecting that Gore et al were using only science and research that supported their apparently skewed view of the world.

What have found over the years in dozens of posts and dozens of scientific research, studies, facts, and realities is that if anything, there are more evidence to dispute the Al Gore point of view than there is supporting it. To view those past discussions and findings, just enter “global warming doubter” or believer in science” in the search box above. The fact that people like Al Gore had to rebrand the whole “global warming” theme to “man made climate change” tells you that their original thinking is starting to collapse and they needed to jump to another point of view.

Yesterday and today we will prove again that it is possible to be a global warming doubter AND a believer in science.

1)Al Gore likes to talk about how just about every scientist in the world supports the man made global warming theory originally and the rebranded effort, climate change. We have shown many times that lots and lots of reputable scientists do not hold those views. One of those in opposition is a gentleman named Patrick Moore, Ph.D.

Moore was an early and important member of the ecological activist group Greenpeace. Greenpeace co-founder Bob Hunter wrote of Moore, as reported by Wikipedia: “Moore was quickly accepted into the inner circle on the basis of his scientific background, his reputation [as an environmental activist], and his ability to inject practical, no-nonsense insights into the discussions.” 

Moore has been active in environmentalism for more than four decades, he currently serves as chair of Allow Golden Rice, and he received the 2014 Speaks Truth to Power Award at the Ninth International Conference on Climate Change, July 8, in Las Vegas.

Listen to what Dr. Moore, a scientist, has to say about global warming and the forces that need it to continue:

**********************
I am skeptical humans are the main cause of climate change and that it will be catastrophic in the near future. There is no scientific proof of this hypothesis, yet we are told “the debate is over” and “the science is settled.”

My skepticism begins with the believers’ certainty they can predict the global climate with a computer model. The entire basis for the doomsday climate change scenario is the hypothesis increased atmospheric carbon dioxide due to fossil fuel emissions will heat the Earth to unlivable temperatures.

In fact, the Earth has been warming very gradually for 300 years, since the Little Ice Age ended, long before heavy use of fossil fuels. Prior to the Little Ice Age, during the Medieval Warm Period, Vikings colonized Greenland and Newfoundland, when it was warmer there than today. And during Roman times, it was warmer, long before fossil fuels revolutionized civilization.

The idea it would be catastrophic if carbon dioxide were to increase and average global temperature were to rise a few degrees is preposterous.

Recently, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) announced for the umpteenth time we are doomed unless we reduce carbon-dioxide emissions to zero. Effectively this means either reducing the population to zero, or going back 10,000 years before humans began clearing forests for agriculture. This proposed cure is far worse than adapting to a warmer world, if it actually comes about.

IPCC Conflict of Interest

By its constitution, the IPCC has a hopeless conflict of interest. Its mandate is to consider only the human causes of global warming, not the many natural causes changing the climate for billions of years. We don’t understand the natural causes of climate change any more than we know if humans are part of the cause at present. If the IPCC did not find humans were the cause of warming, or if it found warming would be more positive than negative, there would be no need for the IPCC under its present mandate. To survive, it must find on the side of the apocalypse. [my emphasis]

The IPCC should either have its mandate expanded to include all causes of climate change, or it should be dismantled.

Political Powerhouse

Climate change has become a powerful political force for many reasons. First, it is universal; we are told everything on Earth is threatened. Second, it invokes the two most powerful human motivators: fear and guilt. We fear driving our car will kill our grandchildren, and we feel guilty for doing it.

Third, there is a powerful convergence of interests among key elites that support the climate “narrative.” Environmentalists spread fear and raise donations; politicians appear to be saving the Earth from doom; the media has a field day with sensation and conflict; science institutions raise billions in grants, create whole new departments, and stoke a feeding frenzy of scary scenarios; business wants to look green, and get huge public subsidies for projects that would otherwise be economic losers, such as wind farms and solar arrays. Fourth, the Left sees climate change as a perfect means to redistribute wealth from industrial countries to the developing world and the UN bureaucracy.

********************

Now, who should we believe? Ex-politician and lawyer Al Gore or Ph.D. holder Patrick Moore who is a trained scientist who has actively support environmental efforts for over forty years? Looks like at least one famous scientist is a global warming doubter also.

2) But to be a scientist and a global warming doubter like Mr. Moore can have some serious career implications. Consider the plight and long fight back for UCLA professor James Enstrom. Dr. Enstrom’s research exposed climate change fraud, got his research funding cut, was eventually fired, sued the school, and eventually won an out of court legal settlement.

Details of his battle include the following facts:

• He had worked at the university for 34 years so he was obviously not a fly by night, weak researcher and professor.
• After he analyzed data and findings of a shoddy piece of work used to support California diesel regulations, exposing the weak credentials of the person who did the analysis, the professor was fired.
• He was fired even though he exposed fraudulent behavior in the analyses on which the board relied, including that of the lead author of a 2008 report. 
• His actions also led Hien Tran, primary analyst and author of the research, to admit he purchased a magna cum laude Ph.D. for $1,000 from a “diploma mill associated with a fugitive pedophile,” according to CalWatchdog.
• After a two and a half year battle, the school relented and settled the case, reinstating the professor, paying him $140,000, giving him full access to UCLA resources again, and rescinding his termination.

Good for him, he had the guts and fortitude to battle for science based on reality even though it was contrary to what global warming and climate change types want to believe. But that is the tactic that people like Al Gore like to take: dare to disagree with them and they attack and make it personal rather than sitting down, having an adult conversation, and discussing science and the facts, preferring the hysteria and mud slinging approach.

3) Let’s stay at the university level and consider the case of a Harvard University physicist who dared to show that computer forecast models used by the United Nations almost always overstate the impacts of global warming and why that was happening.

Details include:

• The Harvard professor is named Dr. Wei-Hock “Willie” Soon who is a solar physicist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.
• He was the co-author of a peer reviewed and approved research paper which explains the “widening discrepancy between prediction and observation” in climate change and global warming forecasting models.
• This is not a newly known fact since we have shown many times the discrepancy between what global warming forecasters predicted and the failure of those models to predict the eventual reality:

• Dr. Soon found that: "The impact of anthropogenic global warming over the next century... may be no more than one-third to one-half of IPCC's current projections."
• Lord Christoher Monckton, a co-author of the paper also concluded: “The billion-dollar climate models that have so profitably predicted Thermageddon are hopelessly wrong. We said the models were wrong because they were using a rogue equation borrowed from electronic circuitry and bolted on to the climate, where it does not fit. That equation, and that alone, leads the modelers erroneously to triple the small and harmless 1 Cº global warming we should expect from a doubling of CO2 in the air. Our irreducibly simple climate model does not replace more complex models, but it does expose major errors and exaggeration in those models, such as the over-emphasis on positive or amplifying temperature feedbacks. Take away the erroneous assumption that strongly net-positive feedback triples the rate of man made global warming and the imagined climate crisis vanishes.”

(Science Bulletin)Sounds like good solid research by solid scientists that come down on the right side of reality as time has shown: original global warming forecast models were grossly wrong, which we know from the eventual real data, and this study provides a reasoned and plausible explanation of why they were wrong. But now the hysteria gets started. Apparently, one of the financial contributors to the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory is ExxonMobil a company that obviously has a stake in any global warming/climate change government sanctions. Thus, rather than discuss the finding of the research based on its scientific merits, the Al Gore types are getting all revved up to discredit the research simply because an oil company made a general donation to the organization with no strings attached. They are getting crazy even though Smithsonian advance and external affairs officer Amanda Preston, signed an affidavit on April 2, 2009 stating that no “goods and/or services [were] provided to ExxonMobil in return for this contribution.”

So let's review:

- The research disputes the view of Al Gore types and global warming with what appears to be solid research by multiple scientists working together.

   - The funding organization, the Smithsonian, has avowed that no benefit was given or corners cut to benefit ExxonMobil.
   - Rather than discussing the research and its merits and whether it is right or wrong, global warming advocates immediately go into attack mode to attack the person, not the findings.
    - Thus, those doing the attacking are doing the exact same thing they accuse global warming deniers of doing, ignoring scientific research and findings, so hypocritical. When in doubt attack credibility not credentials and merit, so pitiful. 

A few further points to be made:A) In 2014, Dr. Soon won the Courage of Defense of Science Award at the Tenth International Conference on Climate Change for challenging “computer modelers and advocates who consistently underestimate solar influences on cloud formation, ocean currents, and wind that cause climate to change.”B) Dr. Soon defended the integrity of his work as follows: “[the attacks on him are] a shameless attempt to silence my scientific research and writings, and to make an example out of me as a warning to any other researcher who may dare question in the slightest their fervently held orthodoxy of anthropogenic global warming….Let me be clear. I have never been motivated by financial gain to write any scientific paper, nor have I ever hidden grants or any other alleged conflict of interest. I have been a solar and stellar physicist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics for a quarter of a century, during which time I have published numerous peer-reviewed, scholarly articles.The fact that my research has been supported in part by donations to the Smithsonian Institution from many sources, including some energy producers, has long been a matter of public record. In submitting my academic writings, I have always complied with what I understood to be disclosure practices in my field generally, consistent with the level of disclosure made by many of my Smithsonian colleagues.If the standards for disclosure are to change, then let them change evenly. If a journal that has peer-reviewed and published my work concludes that additional disclosures are appropriate, I am happy to comply. I would ask only that other authors - on all sides of the debate - are also required to make similar disclosures.And I call on the media outlets that have so quickly repeated my attackers’ accusations to similarly look into the motivations of and disclosures that may or may not have been made by their preferred, IPCC-linked scientists.”If a global warming scientist had been similarly attacked for receiving money from Greenpeace, the Sierra Club, or Al Gore himself, those doing the attacking would be branded as scientifically ignorant. When the shoe is on the other foot, the personal attacks are viewed as justified for a potential, unproven connection to the oil industry without looking at the merits of the research.That will do it for this update of being a global warming doubter and a believer in science. It is sad that scientists like the ones we discussed today are criticized and attacked professionally and verbally for doing what they do best: science. The fact that their findings and results do not line up with someone's political agenda should scare all of us who believe in science since no political stunts or agenda should overrule the quest for scientific knowledge and reality.

www.loathemygovernment.com

. 

March, 2015, Part 1 I Am A Global Warming Doubter and A Believer In Science: Ice Ages That Never Come and Ineptness at The EPA

For the past few years we have run a semi-regular series under the theme, “I am a global warming doubter and a believer in science.” The underlying drivers of this theme were twofold. First, I had gotten tired of people like Al Gore ranting at the top of their lungs that if someone did not believe what they believed then you were an idiotic, a denier, a racists, a homophobe, and a non-believer in science. Second, I wanted to take a look at ALL of the global warming science out in the world, suspecting that Gore et al were using only science and research that supported their apparently skewed view of the world.

What have found over the years in dozens of posts and dozens of scientific research, studies, facts, and realities is that if anything, there are more evidence to dispute the Al Gore point of view than there is supporting it. To view those past discussions and findings, just enter “global warming doubter” or believer in science” in the search box above. The fact that people like Al Gore had to rebrand the whole “global warming” theme to “man made climate change” tells you that their original thinking is starting to collapse and they needed to jump to another point of view.

We will continue this theme probably today and tomorrow where we prove again that it is possible to be a global warming doubter AND a believer in science.

1) On Sept. 11, 1972, Walter Cronkite, one of the most trusted names in broadcast journalism ever, discussed current scientists’ predictions that a “new ice age is creeping over the Northern Hemisphere.” He cited that the research and prediction of British scientist Hubert Lamb in his reporting.

He called the prediction of a new ice age “a bit of bad news” but followed it up with the following quote and scientific prediction: “But then there is some good news. That while the weather may be just a little colder in the immediate years to come, the full extent of the new ice age won’t be reached for 10,000 years. And if you can stand any more good news, even then it won’t be as bad as the last ice age 60,000 years ago. Then New York, Cincinnati, St. Louis, were under 5,000 feet of ice. Presumably no traffic moved and school was let out for the day. And that’s the way it is, Monday September 11, 1972.”

Obviously, Mr.Lamb and others of his ilk back the 1970s were incorrect in their climate predictions. We have not yet stepped into a new ice age since the earth’s temperatures warmed for a period of time after that broadcast. (But stopped warming about 19 years ago). 

But I would bet that Lamb and other scientists had the same passion and belief in their work that those predicting global warming have today. But they were wrong, they incorrectly predicted climate changes. Given the track record of climate forecasting, who is to say today’s passionate global warming advocates are any better at what they do? Especially when there is so much scientifics evidence that says they are not right, with just their grossly incorrect climate models’ predictions being just one component of how off they have been.

2) For another look at what the climate scientists were predicting back in the 1970s with so much certainty, consider the following YouTube video from back then which also predicted a new ice age, narrated by none other than Leonard Nimoy:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kGB5MMIAVA

Again, those scientists were sure of their predictions of a new ice age, nowhere was global warming anywhere to be found as a possibility.

3) Speaking of global cooling, consider some more recent trends in weather and climate, a taste of which was captured by a recent Washington Post article by Angelas Fritz last month. At that time, she wrote:

• Temperatures were so cold that record lows were being set across the entire country.
• Temperatures 30-40 degrees below normal were expected from Ohio through the Middle Atlantic states.
• The cold temps were not just up north but also throughout the south, with record lows expected from Tennessee to Virginia.
• Washington D.C. had the potential to dip below zero for the first time since 1994, twenty one years ago.
• A related article in the same edition of her article went onto to predict that the D.C. cold surge could break a 119 year record for cold temps.

This will be the second winter in a row where the temperatures were well below normal. None of this weather or climate was ever predicted by Al Gore and his supporters. Thus, one cannot make the argument, as a few have tried, that this record cold is also because of manmade global warming and climate change. 

If you do not call your shot ahead of time, in this case predict the cold ahead of time, you cannot claim credit for yourself in your climate change argument. If is like in golf when you hit a shot into the woods where it bounces off of a tree back onto the green. Unless you called the tree shot ahead of time, you cannot take credit for it. The failure to predict the cold trends by global warming advocates is further proof that they really do not have a handle on climate forecasting.

4) If colder than expected weather and climate changes, failed global warming models, and no-show ice ages do not make you leery of people like Al Gore, then consider the inane testimony that the head of the EPA, Gina McCarthy recently gave in front of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee hearing, regarding her budget request for her department in 2016. She boldly claims that climate change is a "real" threat and “a science fact,” “not a religion” or "belief system." 

But she then proceeds to have little data or research available to answer even the simplest question from Senator Jeff Sessions regarding her assertions on climate change. And what “data” she does have is wrong, as proven in past posts in this blog which used official U.S. government data and research. 

Total and severe hurricane incidences are down, not up as predicted by global warming advocates and claimed by Ms. McCarthy. Wildfire incidences are down, not up as predicted by global warming advocates and claimed by Ms.McCarthy. Drought incidents are down, not up as predicted by global warming advocates and claimed by Ms. McCarthy.

Anyway, read the text from the exchange and then view the video and then ask yourself: “Given the lack of data, information, and incorrectness of her assertions, do we really want to put our future in the hands of a so-called expert who utterly fails to defend her positions and views, who is so totally unprepared to go in front of a Senate committee?

“Climate change is real. It is happening. It is a threat," McCarthy said. "Climate change is not a religion. It is not a belief system. It’s a science fact.”

When questioned by Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) regarding the EPA’s predictions on global warming, however, McCarthy was unable to use the “facts” to her advantage.

The exchange went as follows:

SESSIONS: “When we go to our states, the group we have the most complaints about from our constituents—whether it’s highway people, whether it’s farmers, whether it’s energy people—is the Environmental Protection Agency. It’s an [agency of] extraordinary overreach. And you apparently aren't unaware of the pushback that’s occurring in the real world…

"I'm not inclined to increase your funding 6 percent above. So now you say that we’ve got a crisis and there are dangers out there. Let me ask you this: There was an article from Mr. [Bjorn] Lomborg… from the Copenhagen Institute. He says,along with Dr. Pielke from Colorado, that 'we’ve had fewer droughts in recent years.' Do you dispute that?”

MCCARTHY: “I don’t know in what context he’s making statements like that but I certainly can tell you about the droughts that are happening today.” ...

SESSIONS: “I'm not arguing to you today that you are wrong about global warming because we have a cold spell. I'm asking you, don't you know worldwide data about whether or not we are having fewer or less droughts? ...

"What about hurricanes? Have we had more or less hurricanes in the last decade?” …

MCCARTHY: “There have been more frequent hurricanes and more intense in terms of landing those hurricanes on land. I cannot answer that question. It’s a very complicated issue.”









SESSIONS: “It’s not complicated on how many have landed. We’ve had a dramatic reduction in the number. We’ve gone a decade without a hurricane [Category] 3 or above…

"Would you acknowledge that over the last 18 years, that the increase in temperature has been very little, and that it is well below, matter of fact, 90 percent below most of the environmental models that showed how fast temperature would increase?”

MCCARTHY: "I do not know what the models actually are predicting that you are referring to. There are many models.”

SESSIONS: "So let me ask you one more time... Are you asserting — Just give me this answer... If you take the average of the models predicting how fast the temperature would increase, is the temperature in fact increasing less than that or more than that?"

MCCARTHY: "I cannot answer that question specifically."

SESSIONS: “This is a stunning development, that the head of the Environmental Protection Agency—who should know more than anybody else in the world, who is imposing hundreds of billions of dollars in cost to prevent this climate temperature increase—doesn’t know whether their projections have been right or wrong.”

http://www.mrctv.org/blog/epa-chief-calls-climate-change-science-fact-can-t-verify-predictions-accurate#wZgcdR:rwyU

That will do it for today, more doubting material tomorrow. Look, I am not a scientist in this area. But I am smart enough to realize that there is a lot of doubt and contrary proof to the whole man made global warming and climate change theories. All many of us are asking for is an adult,mature discussion on ALL of the science.

However, given the belligerency of people like Al Gore and Barack Obama and others, that conversation is not possible and those of us that are global warming doubters and believers in science are not going to roll over because a couple of politicians and an inept head of the EPA yell at us for disagreeing with them.

Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at:

www.loathemygovernment.com

It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.

Please visit the following sites for freedom:

Term Limits Now: http://www.howmuchworsecoulditget.com
http://www.reason.com
http://www.cato.org
http://www.bankruptingamerica.org
http://www.conventionofstates.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08j0sYUOb5w