Hateful and Vile Political Dialog Courtesy of MSNBC

I always try to respect the opinons of others in the political arena, even if I believe they are operating under bad assumptions or data, or have arrived at a difference conclusion based on the same data and assumptions I used. It is their right to disagree with me, in fact, I insist they use that right as protected by the Bill of Rights and the right of free speech to express their views and opinions, one of the foundations of our democracy. I will argue my point strongly and passionately, but not emotionally or personally.

However, I could not sit back and accept that a recent MSNBC video production was either in the spirit of free speech or freedom of the press, I just found it despicable. The production, aired on MSNBC and hosted by one of their so-called jorunalists, Martin Bashier, fantasized that Mitt Romney's tour bus blew up in a violent and harrowing explosion. The production interspersed clips of the Romney bus with exploding buses from movies, implying that the Romney campaign bus blew up with those aboard obviously all dying a horrible death, given the magnitude of the explosions.

Despiciable hatred. Makes you wonder how and why we allowed our political class, and the main stream media outlets that support them, to subvert our political dialog and election processes so badly that a major media corporation, Comcast, the owners of MSNBC, would go to the trouble of devloping such a hateful piece of work that glorified the fiery death of any person, any American, never mind a political opponent. Vile, disgusting, despicable, no words can describe a news organziation who encourages such hate.

Despite the freedom of speech and the freedom of the press, there is no place for wishing death on a human being in a democracy for simply having a different political view. Comcast and MSNBC are disgraces to America and disgraces to the profession of journalism.

The clip can be viewed at the following link:

http://frontporchpolitics.com/2012/06/romneys-campaign-bus-explodes-on-msnbc/

If you agree with my views on this gruesome matter, and I respect your opinion if you are not as outraged as I am, please read the following letter I have sent to Mr. Brian Roberts, the chairman of Comcast, and the actions I plan to take unless Mr. Bashier is fired and Comcast offers a sincere apology to the Romney family and to America. Anything less is acceptable.



I would encourage you to take similar actions in the name of mature, nonviolent, and productive political conversations in this country.

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

June 16, 2012

Mr. Brian Roberts

Comcast
One Comcast Center
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-2838

Mr. Roberts:

Before I begin let me give you a bit of background. I am 59 years old. Up until the November, 2010 midterm elections I had never voted for a Republican for national office in my life. Thus, I am not a Republican Party member, a Tea Party member, or a die hard conservative.

With that said, let me express my outrage and disgust with a short news clip that recently appeared on your MSNBC network. Martin Bashier ran a fantasy video clip where he and your network showed the Romney campaign bus blowing up while on tour in the Midwest. It interspersed clips of Romney’s bus with movie clips of exploding buses, inferring that it would be a good idea for the Romney bus to explode and kill anyone who was in it when it blew.

This is so despicable and contemptible on so many levels. First, wanting, fantasizing, and rooting for other innocent human beings to die is just plain sick. Second, this type of vile and hateful expression of speech does nothing to heal the country and just adds to the deep divisions within the country. You provide no public service, you provide no news value, and you provide no education enhancement to the political discourse in this country with these types of actions.

Your parents must be so proud that you grew up, inherited the family business, and now use it to wish death on fellow Americans rather than provide a public service of honest and compassionate journalism. Airing such a disgraceful piece and trying to pass it off as journalism is an insult to the journalism profession and shows the deep lack of integrity your company possesses.

I am sure that if Fox News ran the same clip and just inserted an Obama bus that you and your network would be besides themselves in horror and self-righteousness. This would add the adjective of hypocritical to the ones I listed above: sick, vile, hateful, despicable.

Thus, unless Mr. Bashier is fired immediately and an apology is offered to the Romney family and to America for such tawdry, disgusting reporting, I will take several actions. First, I will call my local cable company and request that they no longer carry MSNBC, or at the very least, ensure that this network is blocked from ever coming into my home. Second, I will contact your major sponsors with a copy of this letter and request that they withdrawal their advertising support of your company or risk losing my business.

While my actions may make little difference, similar actions of millions of other Americans who find your network’s disgusting broadcast of such tripe also despicable, taking those same actions may make a difference in making political discourse more civil in this country, something that you and your so-called journalists are unable or unwilling to do, to the detriment of our democracy and our society. Your choice, Bashier is out and you apologize, or live with the consequences of the hatred you have spread.


We invite all readers of this blog to visit our new website, "The United States Of Purple," at:

http://www.unitedstatesofpurple.com/

The United States of Purple is a new grass roots approach to filling the office of President of The United States by focusing on the restoration of freedom in the United States, focusing on problem solving skills and results vs. personal political enrichment, and imposing term limits on all future Federal politicians. No more red states, no more blue states, just one United States Of America under the banner of Purple.

The United States Of Purple's website also provides you the formal opportunity to sign a petition to begin the process of implementing a Constitutional amendment to impose fixed term limits on all Federally elected politicians. Only by turning out the existing political class can we have a chance of addressing and finally resolving the major issues of or times.

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:

http://www.cato.org/
http://www.robertringer.com/
http://realpolichick.blogspot.com/
http://www.flipcongress2010.com/
http://www.reason.com/
http://www.repealamendment/

Alternative Energy Projects - A Teenager Accomplishes More With $200 Than The Obama Administration Does With Billions Of Dollars

Despite claiming that he was going to be the most green President of all time, bringing alternative energy technologies to the world, the record in alternative energy of the Obama administration is pretty abysmal and definitely very expensive.

The following list of failed ventures/lost "bets" that this administration placed with our tax money includes companies and Obama's political cronies that received Federal government loans, Federal government loan guarantees, and Federal government outright (free) grants of taxpayer money:

• Solyndra - $535,000,000
• Ecotality - $141,400,000
• Beacon Power - $43,000,000
• Spectrawatt - $500,000
• Evergreen Solar - $5,300,000
• A123 - $250,000,000
• Fisker - $529,000,000
• Tesla - $465,000,000
• Chevy Volt - $1,500,000,000
• Total taxpayer wealth lost from just this partial list of alternative energy efforts - $3,469,200,000

In addition to the above wasted uses of taxpayer money, the annual Department Of Energy budget of $39 billion a year should also be considered a waste in its totality. Since its founding more than three decades ago, the Department has not developed and deployed a coherent and effective national energy program and has not developed or financed the development of any technology or energy source that would justify tens of billions of dollars a year in its budget.

Hundreds of billions of dollars spent, and wasted, through the years with nothing to show for it.

Gas prices that have doubled since January, 2009 with no long term energy strategy or plan in place that is either environmentally friendly and/or economically friendly.

No new energy technologies for the housing, automotive, or commercial sectors of the economy that have proven worthwhile as a result of Energy Department funding or Energy Department initiatives.

No new auto technologies that will miraculously get unheard of mileage from a new generation of cars as a result of Energy Department funding or Energy Department initiatives.

What a colossal waste of time, energy, money, and government resources, both historically and over the past couple of years, relative to the energy situation in this country.

However, what the entire Federal energy bureaucracy, the entire Federal political class, and hundreds of billions of dollars could not do, change the energy paradigm in this country, a high school senior in Grant City, Missouri may be doing for a few hundred dollars.

Consider the amazing story of high school senior Don Gibson, age 18, as described in the May 18, 2012 issue of The Week magazine and in other credible journalistic channels:

• Mr. Gibson purchased a 1995 Geo Metro auto and ripped out the engine.
• He went on Ebay and purchased a used fork lift for $200.
• He stripped out the fork lift's electric motor and installed it into the now motorless Geo Metro.
• The retrofitted car is street legal and deemed safe to operate on the street in the eyes of the Missouri state government's department of motor vehicles.
• He has been driving the car his entire senior year of high school without any problems.
• He can attain a top speed of about 62 miles per hour.
• He can recharge the electrical batteries in the fork lift engine in about six hours, which he does overnight every day.
• A complete charge costs about $.25 which means he gets the equivalent of about 200 miles per gallon, based on the current cost of a gallon of gas.
• His range is about 30 miles before he needs to recharge the batteries.
• The Chevrolet website estimates that its electric car, the Volt, has a range of 35 miles from its electric engine, only about 17% longer than Mr. Gibson's Geo Metro.
• However, recall that the Chevy Volt received over $1 billion form the Federal government to help attain that 35 mile range while Mr. Gibson received $0 to attain his 30 mile range.
• He feels he could get the range substantially higher with newer battery technology as opposed to the current fork lift battery technology he used.
• The 18 year old is quoted in the article as saying: "If you live in a small community and you just need to drive around town, this is the most ideal vehicle you could drive." This sounds an awfully like the initial Volt advertising I saw where it hyped the fact that if you drive around town, you would never need to use gas.

Incredible, this young man is doing with hundreds of dollars what the Federal government and General Motors could not do with billions of dollars, probably hundreds of engineers, and the latest knowledge on materials, batteries, aerodynamics, etc. He is making an absolutely positive impact on the environment and our dependence on foreign oil sources in his garage using existing technology without the waste and cronyism of the political class. 

What a great advancement and what a great embarrassment to those who think we need the Federal government to oversee and overspend our tax wealth to cure the environmental and dependence problems inherent in our current energy paradigm.

But wait, the story gets even better. According to news reports, Mr. Gibson is working on the development of his own personal windmill-powered charger station so that he can charge his high mileage, low pollution converted Geo Metro with wind power. Unbelievable. A true tribute to American innovation and a true indictment of America's politicians.



We invite all readers of this blog to visit our new website, "The United States Of Purple," at:

http://www.unitedstatesofpurple.com/

The United States of Purple is a new grass roots approach to filling the office of President of The United States by focusing on the restoration of freedom in the United States, focusing on problem solving skills and results vs. personal political enrichment, and imposing term limits on all future Federal politicians. No more red states, no more blue states, just one United States Of America under the banner of Purple.

The United States Of Purple's website also provides you the formal opportunity to sign a petition to begin the process of implementing a Constitutional amendment to impose fixed term limits on all Federally elected politicians. Only by turning out the existing political class can we have a chance of addressing and finally resolving the major issues of or times.

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:

http://www.cato.org/
http://www.robertringer.com/
http://realpolichick.blogspot.com/
http://www.flipcongress2010.com/
http://www.reason.com/
http://www.repealamendment/

If You Thought Social Security's Finances Were A Myth, You Won't Believe Medicare's Financial Future

Yesterday we reviewed the fact that some politicians and journalists still believe that the Social Security Trust Fund is a reality and not a myth, as outlined in a recent Associated Press article. They still believe that the trust fund actually has real wealth in it, wealth that can be used to dispense Social Security payments for at least another twenty years without raising taxes or incurring more national debt to finance the monthly Social Security payments.

However, we pretty much proved that to be a myth by pointing out the following simple facts:

• Social Security has been in a negative cash flow situation since 2010, i.e. they are paying out more money in taxes than they are collecting in taxes.
• In the 1960s, during the Johnson administration, the political class voted to allow Social Security funds to be intermingled with general tax revenue funds, giving the political class access to our retirement wealth for their own political use, and waste, in the ensuing decades.
• Thus, the excess wealth that had been flowing into the Social Security system no longer exists. There is no pile of money sitting in a vault that can be used to pay out Social Security checks. There are no piles of gold bars that can be converted into Social Security checks. There are no portfolios of Apple stock that can be cashed to fund Social Security checks.
• All that exists in this mythical trust fund is a bunch of government accounting IOUs that the Treasury Department sent over to the Social Security administration, saying that at some point in the future, one wing of the Federal government (Treasury) would go out and collect more taxes, print more money, and/or issue more national debt to pay off another wing of the same Federal government (the Social Security Administration).

That is what is happening today with Social Security's negative cash flow, Treasury is issuing more debt or diverting more taxes to the Social Security program to pay off the plunder of past Social Security surpluses by the political class. There is no trust fund. The crisis is not in 2033, as the article writes about. The crisis is today.

A very bad and depressing situation. But at least with Social Security there is a five step program that could be instituted to fix the situation fairly quickly, and in a financially wise manner, a program that we outlined in yesterday's post. The problem is that it would require courage, leadership, and a complete change of attitude by the Washington political class, a risky proposition given our politicians' past selfish and ineffective behavior. But at least there is a plan to get to resolution.

I am not sure the same can be said for Medicare. Consider some Medicare facts from the same Associated Press article:

• Medicare's hospital insurance fund is expected to run out of funds in 2024, just twelve years from now under current operating and economic assumptions.
• The fund could run out sooner if medical costs escalate at higher rates than assumed or the retiring Baby Boomers require more care than expected, as stated by Medicare's trustees in their report: "Medicare's actual future costs are highly uncertain and are likely to exceed those shown ...in this report."
• As with Social Security's cash flow, Medicare's cash flow is substantially impacted  by high unemployment since with fewer workers working, less Medicare taxes are collected.
• Once the insurance fund is exhausted, Medicare would only pay up to 87% of hospital costs, if that.
• The nation has become so addicted to government funding that even if the government cut Medicare reimbursement levels just a little, the Associated Press article reports: "Alternative cost projections prepared by the trustees' technical experts suggest the Medicare cuts in the health care law would be unsustainable, driving payment rates so low that 15 percent of hospitals, nursing homes and home health providers would be in the red by 2019." Fewer hospitals and nursing homes means less competition which means even higher costs.
• If the trustees' analysis is right and Medicare costs would devastate many hospitals and nursing homes, than Obama Care will be a further failure if allowed to go forward since it assumes that the Federal government will reduce Medicare reimbursement expense by $500 billion.

And what does President Obama want to do to fix this dire situation? According to the article, "Obama says he wants to preserve the existing program and its federally guaranteed benefits." Great strategy, Mr. President. The program is out of control today, will get worse and worse going forward, and you want to keep the status quo with the possible exception of raising the age of eligibility to 67.

Nickel/dime changes like moving the eligibility age two years will not solve the problem. Major public health steps need to be taken in this area, the same areas that need to be addressed as a replacement to the doomed Obama Care effort:

1. Americans need to stop eating as much as they do.
2. Americans need to stop eating the type of foods they eat today.
3. Americans need to exercise more.
4. Americans need to stop smoking.

If these changes can be implemented via a public health crisis control effort, rather than a taxation/bureaucracy/government bungling approach, than Americans could live longer but healthier lives, requiring less health care resources, relieving the pressure on medical costs in this country.

Other Medicare changes must include the following:

• The eligibility age needs to be raised to at least 67, with a hardship exception, to account for the longer expected life spans.
• There needs to be a wealth means test so that those who can afford to carry private health care insurance in their elder years (Warren Buffet, Donald Trump, Bill Gates, etc.) would not be able to enroll in the Medicare program or partake of its benefits.
• Longer term, as with Social Security, the entire process needs to be privatized so that the efficiency of the private market can be used to replace the bloat and waste of the government.
• Experts estimate that Medicare and Medicaid lose about $100 billion a year to fraud and waste. A full court press needs to be implemented today to clean up these government programs and free up resources for those that need the help in old age, not those that defraud today.

Albert Einstein once said: "We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Given that these Social Security and Medicare problems are not new and have been evident to most smart Americans for decades, how likely is it that the current crop of politicians in Washington will take the necessary steps to actually make the courageous decisions that are so evidently needed?

Big problems requiring big decisions and big leadership. Unfortunately, we are stuck with small people making small decisions in Washington with infinitesimal leadership skills. To think our political class is not small is truly dealing in a mythical world.


We invite all readers of this blog to visit our new website, "The United States Of Purple," at:

http://www.unitedstatesofpurple.com/

The United States of Purple is a new grass roots approach to filling the office of President of The United States by focusing on the restoration of freedom in the United States, focusing on problem solving skills and results vs. personal political enrichment, and imposing term limits on all future Federal politicians. No more red states, no more blue states, just one United States Of America under the banner of Purple.

The United States Of Purple's website also provides you the formal opportunity to sign a petition to begin the process of implementing a Constitutional amendment to impose fixed term limits on all Federally elected politicians. Only by turning out the existing political class can we have a chance of addressing and finally resolving the major issues of or times

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:

http://www.cato.org/
http://www.robertringer.com/
http://realpolichick.blogspot.com/
http://www.flipcongress2010.com/
http://www.reason.com/
http://www.repealamendment/

The United States of Purple Presidency - Solving Both Our Energy and Global Warming Issues With One Plan

This is the fourth in our series of posts on how the United States of Purple drive for the Presidency would address and resolve the major issues facing the country, issues that have been around for decades. The political class has occasionally attempted to solve some of these issues but their half-hearted attempts have always failed, either because they did not understand the root causes of the problems or because actually solving a problem might alienate a few voters and endanger their much cherished reelection chances.

Without understanding the root causes of our problems, the odds of resolving these issues are minimal. As a result, when the political class actually tries to address the problem, their solutions fall flat on their face. Recent political class attempts to fix our energy dependence problem is a case in point:

- The current administration has given out Federal taxpayer grants, loans, and loan guarantees to various companies in what appears to be a a random manner. Solyndra, the California solar panel manufacturer is the purest example of failure. Shortly after getting a Federal government loan worth well over half a billion dollars, the company went bankrupt and lost the taxpayer wealth with no discernible benefit.

The shallow reason for the failure is that the company and the political class did not anticipate the changing short term market conditions, driven by the drop in foreign manufactured solar panels. The real reason for losing over half a billion dollars is that the political class did not understand the root causes and underlying dynamics of market conditions which led to the failed company.

- This deeper reason carries over to the many other failed alternative energy companies that the political class has thrown money at in a willy-nilly manner such as Beacon Power, Spectra Watt, and Evergreen Solar, all of which went out of business. They do not understand how to solve the energy problem from a root cause understanding perspective and their inability to think strategically. They have no idea how to use leverage to exponentially grow their opportunity for success.

As a result, we end up with very shallow, tactical thinking that just ends up wasting taxpayer wealth on bad investments.

- Every couple of years or so, the political class puts together a show about how they want to raise the average miles per gallon the cars in the country should achieve. These so-called CAFE standards are used for political debate and at the end of the bluster, the average miles per gallon performance standards are raised for some time in the distant, distant future. Then the politicians congratulate themselves for delaying, but  not solving, the problem of energy dependence.

Their charade brings to mind an old saying that I believe is attributed to Abraham Lincoln:

Question: If you called a tail a leg, how many legs would a dog have?

Answer: It would still have four legs, just because you called a tail a leg does not make it a leg.

Just because you raised the CAFE standards doesn't mean it will happen, especially if you do not have a strategic plan behind it.

- Speaking of shallow tactical thinking vs. long term strategic thinking, let's talk about Obama's Cash For Clunkers program. Recall that the President gave away thousands of dollars of taxpayer wealth to anyone who bought a new car within a specified period of time. The failed rationale for the program was to increase sales of autos in tough economic times in order to help jump start the economy and replace older, lower mileage cars with newer, higher mileage cars.

We now all know that this tactical thinking approach was a failure. We have previously reviewed a Federal government report and analysis that proved there were no incremental auto sales as a result of this program and thus, no incremental spurring of the economy or substantial increase in national gas mileage. The timing of the sales may have changed, people delayed or moved up their purchase of a car to get the free Federal tax money, but in total, no incremental sales occurred. Bad tactical thinking, small minded energy programs that do no good.

We could go on about the failure of the Federal Energy Department and the Federal political class for a long time relative to their inability to create a strategic, coherent, and effective energy policy and strategy for the country, despite having over thirty years to do so. However, the above examples get the message across, allowing the same people to do the same type of short term and tactical thinking and get the same type of bad results is not the way forward.

Complicating the matter today is the rift over global warming. Some citizens and scientists say it is an issue, some citizens and scientists say it is not an issue. As usual, we end up with the typical political gridlock, name calling and inaction, that we get on all other issues in today's political climate.

I, myself, am a global warming doubter. I laid out my reasons in the following post from last week: 

http://www.loathemygovernment.blogspot.com/2012/02/i-am-global-warming-doubter-and.html 

However, what if I am wrong? What if we really do need to do something about man made emissions? Do we really think that building a massive government bureaucracy called "Cap And Trade" would actually work?

We know now that the massive government bureaucracy known as Obama Care is not working nor will it ever work. With the collapse of MF Global, the 8th largest American bankruptcy ever, and the likely criminal misuse of over a billion dollars of client assets, that the massive government bureaucracy established by the Dodd-Frank financial industry reform legislation is also not working.

Other massive government bureaucracies also are dysfunctional, from Social Security To Medicare to food stamps. There is no reason to believe that a massive government global warming cap and trade program would not be a disaster.

But what if you did not need a massive bureaucracy to address both global warming and our energy crisis? What if there was a long term strategic approach to both problems together rather than the failed tactical approaches to either problem? What if you could leverage the force of the market place to solve both problems, real or imagined, and not rely on the limited ability and knowledge of the 600 or so people in the White House and Congress? What if you could solve both problems with a minimal impact on freedom and citizens' wealth?

The following approach would be our best chance to do all of the above, migrating us to energy independence while cleaning up our energy foot print. This approach would involve some very simple principles:

• The approach to co-solving the global warming/energy crisis would be revenue neutral to the Federal political class, i.e. it would not put more of our wealth within the power of the politicians in this country.
• Once the approach was set, it would be hardwired for at least ten years in order to remove market uncertainty and allow businesses and citizens to compute their short term and long term personal energy plans based on a firm belief that the rules would not change midstream. As we have stated earlier this week in this series, the Obama administration has an ugly tendency to inject major uncertainty into all of the major issues of our times (tax codes, tax breaks, health care, energy policy, etc.). Uncertainty breeds fear and we do not need any fear on an endeavor such as this.
• Market forces and the personal choices of Americans would drive/leverage this process, not another massive government bureaucracy. The massive bureaucracy known as the Energy Department has been a bust for over thirty years, there is no reason to believe it or another government bureaucracy will do better going forward the next ten, twenty, or thirty years.
• The plan will be strategic and long term, no more short term failures like Cash For Clunkers, Cash For Appliances, and Cash For Caulkers, all of which not only were non-strategic but also were not successful.
• There will minimal and hopefully no failed government subsides. There should never be another Solyndra, Beacon, or Evergreen. The market, operating under a long term strategy and set of rules, should pick the winners and losers, not politicians and their cronies who have shown a propensity for only rewarding themselves and operating ill fated companies into bankruptcy. For a good review of these failures, track down a New York Times August 18, 2011 article entitled: "Number Of Green Jobs Fails To Live Up To Promises."

So what would this dual solution look like? It would have the following, long term (ten years) components:

- A five dollar per barrel of oil tax/fee would be implemented and added onto to previous year's $5 tax every year for ten years, and that cost would be allowed to filter down into the production of heating oil and gasoline. Thus, ten years from now, a barrel of oil would carry an incremental $50 per barrel tax.

If everyone knew that this tax was coming and it was going to increase $5.00 every year, would would happen? People would adapt, the entire market would adapt, creating leverage for less consumption of oil and less creation of emissions that may be causing global warming.

How would they adapt? The next time the bought a car, they would likely give serious consideration to a vehicle that got great gas mileage, considering that in ten years the cost of a gallon of gas might be as much as 50% more expensive. They would likely look to better insulate their homes if the cost of heating oil was likely to be 50% higher within ten years.

They might also consider implementing active or passive solar energy equipment to avoid or minimize the higher cost of electricity and heating. All of these actions would crate more demand for energy efficient products and services, driving the down the costs of such products and services, getting more people and small businesses interested in managing their energy future if costs came down.

Auto manufacturers and heating equipment manufacturers would invest in research and technology that is more energy efficient, knowing that their customers will become more efficient and smarter shoppers in the future. That would further reduce costs and emissions. All of these actions occur because the true costs of energy, loss of freedom due to the dependency on foreign energy sources and environmental impacts, are now fully part of the end price, i.e. the $5 per gallon per year increase represents these environmental and freedom costs.

Innovators would seek out, invent, or refine better energy sources, be it natural gas, wind, solar, tidal, or other energy technologies that do not exist yet. The competitiveness of new energy sources would be enhanced by the $5 tax approach on oil, creating new domestic industries competing on a more equal basis against oil and coal (see below).

But won't that destroy the economy and give our politicians more access to our wealth. Here is the beauty of this plan: the $5 a barrel tax never makes it in the hands of the Treasury or the political class. That money is rebated back to tax payers every year to do with as they see fit. They could use it to go on vacation. They could use it for a new TV.

But many of them would use it for a better gas mileage car, a better heating system, more home insulation, etc. Thus, we have not reduced the amount of wealth in the market, we have not given it to politicians to waste, we have just reallocated it for the good of the country and the environment.

This plan has leverage, it has certainty, and it will affect far more people than anything else the political class has passed off as an energy program. Cash For Clunkers affected about 300,000 people. I would bet Cash For Appliances and Cash For Caulkers affected for fewer. Their results were pitiful. Practically everyone in the country would be affected be this program. The key is not allowing the political class to get their hands on this additional money.

How much money might this get each of the 140,000,000 U.S. personal taxpayers every year? The U.S. uses about 19 million of oil a day. If you go through the math of 19 million, 365 days, $5 a barrel, you would end up sending each of the 140 million taxpayers a check for just under $250 the first year. It doesn't seem like much but the next year that might get twice that much since the tax would be raised another $5, resulting in more money coming in for distribution.

However, if the plan works, there should be less oil consumption the following year. Thus, rather than $250, assume that consumption goes down 10%, resulting in a second year payback/rebate of $250 and $225 (10% less) or $475. If you continue this model for ten years, an additional $5 tax and an additional 10% decrease in consumption, by the tenth year, each American taxpayer is getting over an annual $1,600 credit that they can use for weatherizing their homes, putting in solar equipment, etc.

A simple but elegant solution: less consumption, less emissions, certainty in the market, a leveraging of the entire market structure, no massive and doomed to failure cap and trade bureaucracy, no energy technologies, and our politicians get no more of our money in the process.

However, I cannot take credit for the plan and its elegance. Many of the details and philosophy of such an approach are well laid out in a September 6, 2010 article in Fortune magazine, that was written by Nina Easton and which covered the above plan proposed by two Republican Congressman, Jeff Flake and Bob Inglis.

- But oil is not the only "bad" environmental fuel. What about coal? Different fuel, same approach. All you have to do is come up with a similar tax that is equivalent to the $5 per barrel oil tax discussed in detail above and apply that to every ton of coal that is mined or refined.

By imposing such a tax or fee, utilities and coal companies would be falling all over themselves to improve coal's performance and environmental impacts. One additional facet that could be included in coal is to reduce that fee as the industry meets tighter environmental standards, i.e. clean up your act, reduce your tax. But the coal tax also never makes into the hands of the political class. It is rebated back to utilities and their users in an annual coal tax rebate.

- Two steps from "Love My Country, Loathe my Government," would also go a long way to fixing our energy and environmental problems. Step 24 would establish a national research program to facilitate the cleaning up of coal and its by products. In this country we have a lot of coal. If we could clean it up, it would go a long way to reducing our emissions, reducing our overall energy costs, and make us much more energy independent.

- Step 25 would implement a serious discussion and initiative with China and India, two countries whose use of coal and the dirty after effects it produces is growing very, very quickly. What global warming enthusiasts always fail to appreciate is that even if the U.S. cleans up its act in emissions, it will have no impact on the global environment and global warming if China and India, big and growing coal users and polluters, do not do the same thing.

We would end up knee capping our own economy for no reason if China and India do not clean up their coal act and continue to increase the emissions they throw up into the atmosphere every day. That is why Step 24, cleaning up the bad after effects of coal, needs to be a world community effort, not just a U.S. effort. And the political class needs to start talking to China and India, to name just a few of the emerging economies, to clean up their coal act also and in cooperation with each other.

- But this is a ten year plan, what could be done prior to seeing the benefits of this simple, yet elegant approach to two problems?  Two things come to mind. An Associated Press report on January 11, 2012 reported that the EPA had put together its first database of U.S. locations that emit harmful pollutants into the atmosphere.

According to the database, 72% of all U.S. emissions come from U.S. power plants, many of which burn coal to produce the electricity we need everyday to get through life. If one assumes this database is correct, why wouldn't we as a nation look at the top 30 or so plants and work to clean them up, if they are the leading polluters of the 72%.

You probably do not want to shut them down since they are probably also the larger creators of electricity. The local and national and national economies would be hard hit if these facilities were shut down and stopped creating electricity But it does not mean that the best and brightest people we have should not attack these 30 locations and do all they can to fix their emission volumes. This would one short term way of addressing the potential of global warming.

- A second short term way ties into the $5 a barrel tax on oil. If we are really series about weaning ourselves off of foreign energy sources, then one approach is to start taxing those people that insist on buying oversized/low mileage vehicles for no business reason whatsoever. This is a personal prejudice, but I see no reason why anyone needs to own a Hummer. I see no reason why someone needs to buy a large, low mileage pick up truck to go buy milk.
These vehicles serve no personal purpose at all.

Now, I hate to act like a politician here and restrict anyone's right of choice. If the political class is not serious about energy independence and global warming than this should not even be a discussion since it is intrusive into freedom of choice, an act I usually find repulsive.

But if we are serious, than I would start putting a purchase tax on all vehicles, like large Hummers, that do not meet a reasonable gas and emission target. Next year, I would increase that target, the following year I would increase it again. And again and and again.

Americans could still use their freedom of choice to buy a Hummer or a large low mileage pick up truck for personal use (if these vehicles are being used in legitimate business operations, they purchase tax would be waived). This plan would not take that options away from them. They would just have to pay more for this sales choice.

Two things would happen under this plan. First, auto companies would get really serious about improving emissions and gas mileage performance on these types of vehicles. If they did not, their vehicles would become less and less financially attractive over time, given the increase in the purchaser tax.

Second, some customers would start to ask if they really do need a large Hummer to take their kid to the soccer game, a family sedan with better mileage and no purchase tax would be just fine. In both cases, you get leveraged behavior across a large swath of the marketplace that reduces consumption of foreign energy sources and cleaner air.

This would not be a small tax. I would start it at $1000 and increase by $1000 every year for ten years. Within three years you have added $3,000 the cost of the car and should see results. If you do not, increase the amount until you do see positive behavior change.

And the best, most brilliant part of this approach: none of the purchase tax money goes to the political class. It goes into the rebate pot of money we discussed above, back to the 140,000,000 American tax filers each year and back into the economy, not the black hole of waste in Washington.

- While this is a simpler, more leveragable, and more elegant approach than anything our political class could come up with, it is no small task. That is why Step 23 in "Love My Country, Loathe My Government" is so important. Step 23 would put together a panel of smart Americans to operationalize this plan. They would use their vast knowledge and expertise to refine the Hummer purchase tax amount and increase, develop the coal tax we discussed above, determine if $5 dollars a barrel of oil tax increase very year is enough to change behavior, propose ways to fix the emissions on those top 30 emitters of global warming gases, etc.

They would develop and present the plan to Congress and the President, all of whom would vote thumbs up or thumbs down on the plan's entirety. They would not be able to adjust anything since 1) they are politicians, not experts, 2) they would adjust things based on personal political needs and campaign supporters and not the good of the country, and 3) if they start to nit pick the details then nothing would ever get finalized.

Let the expert panel do the hard work, trust their expertise, and let's get on with things. Establish some long term certainty in the market so that businesses, providers, and consumers of power know the ramifications of their own actions and plans, actions and plans that are not held hostage by the whims and uncertainty of the political class.

If the political class votes negative on the overall plan, then it would be pretty obvious that they really do not want to solve the problems of energy independence or global warming. Or they want to solve the problem where they control everything, restricting freedom of choice, building large, ineffective bureaucracies, and collecting and wasting more of our individual wealth.

We know that this approach never works, that is how we got stuck with the Federal Energy Department, Solyndra, and Cash For Clunkers, all of which were clunkers of ill repute and wasters of taxpayer wealth of large disrepute. In the United States of Purple, simple, elegant, long term, leveragable, and strategic is the only efficient and effective way to solve problems.

Political class bureaucracies like their proposed cap and trade lunacy is not the way to go. The political class way leaves us right where we were when we stood in long gas lines in the 1970s, stranded and helpless in the middle of nowhere.

“We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.” Albert Einstein



We invite all readers of this blog to visit our new website, "The United States Of Purple," at

http://www.unitedstatesofpurple.com/

The United States of Purple is a new grass roots approach to filling the office of President of The United States by focusing on the restoration of freedom in the United States, focusing on problem solving skills and results vs. personal political enrichment, and imposing term limits on all future Federal politicians. No more red states, no more blue states, just one United States Of America under the banner of Purple.

The United States Of Purple's website also provides you the formal opportunity to sign a petition to begin the process of implementing a Constitutional amendment to impose fixed term limits on all Federally elected politicians. Only by turning out the existing political class can we have a chance of addressing and finally resolving the major issues of or times.

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:

http://www.cato.org/
http://www.robertringer.com/
http://realpolichick.blogspot.com/
http://www.flipcongress2010.com/
http://www.reason.com/
http://www.repealamendment/

Political Class Insanity - December, 2011, Part 2

Yesterday we reviewed the latest insanity, idiocy and wastefulness recently perpetrated on us by the American political class. Unfortunately, so much of their antics have occurred recently that we could not complete the list yesterday. Thus, part 2 of December political class insanity:

- A recent USA Today article by Julie Schmit reported on the Federal government's failed attempt to help out American home owners who were facing the threat of foreclosure. The name of the program was called the Emergency Homeowner Loan Program and it was terminated in September after helping less than half of its projected number of households.

Also, according to the article, almost half of the taxpayer funds that were spend aside for the program went to just three states: Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Connecticut. This fact is another indication of failure and how inefficient this government program (and most others) was when you consider the state by state foreclosure rates (as reported by Realty Track for the Month of June, 2011):

• Nevada - one foreclosed home for every 114 homes in the state - rank = 1
• Arizona - one foreclosed home for every 205 homes in the state - rank =2
• California - one foreclosed home for every 244 homes in the state - rank = 3
• Maryland - one foreclosed home for every 1,358 homes in the state - rank = 31
• Pennsylvania - one foreclosed home for every 1,509 homes in the state - rank = 37
• Connecticut - one foreclosed home for every 1,525 homes in the state - rank = 1,525

How inefficient can you get. Half of the set aside  money went to homeowners in states that were in much less distress than the housing industries in Nevada, California, and Connecticut. Since I am assuming that one of the main objectives of the program was to help the local economies recover from the recession, the local economies in Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Connecticut were much better off from a housing perspective, orders of magnitude better off, than the top three home foreclosure states of Nevada, California, and Arizona.

Even worse, according to the article, only 12,000 applicants were approved for the program, at a cost of about half a billion dollars. This was 60% short of the objective and works out to about about $42,000 per applicant. Given that there are millions and millions of homes in the country that are in foreclosure or that are likely to shortly be in foreclosure, saving 12,000 homes will make nary a dent in the problem. And at $42,000 per successful applicant, even if the program reached millions of foreclosed homeowners, the country never would have been able to afford the cost.

Typical political class insanity. Pitiful results at a high cost of a program that never would have made a dent in the problem even it it reached its objective. So, just like Solyndra, another half a billion dollars worth of taxpayer wealth down the drain of waste.

- In 2007, the political class made it illegal for Americans to own regular, good old fashioned incandescent light bulbs. I remember being so disgusted with the politicians at that time, wasting time and resources on what should be a consumer choice issue, not a government issue, when so many other major issues needed to be addressed.

Now, that same political class, according to an article in the November 14, 2011 issue of Business Week, is hotly debating the same issue again and whether or not that 2007 ban should be lifted. Now, I thought the original legislation was ridiculous and unneeded but it is now being propagated again with politicians wanting to undo what they never should have done in 2007.

What a waste of time and energy when the same issues that went unaddressed in 2007, (failing schools, lack of a national energy policy, escalating national debt, etc.) are still not being addressed today, replaced by idiotic light bulb efforts. 

- According to an article by Matt Welch in the November, 2011 issue of Reason magazine, according to Environmental Protection Agency statistics cited in an article in the August, 2011 issue of Investor's Business Daily, the Obama's economic stimulus program set aside $7.2 billion to invest in green/clean technologies. These billions were set aside to create a broad new category of "green jobs," five million new jobs in the next ten years according to President Obama himself.

According to the EPA numbers, those billions of dollars have created or retained a grand total of 7,140 green jobs at a cost of about $1,000,000 per job. Not quite an efficient way to create jobs or expand the economy. Billions of taxpayer dollars wasted with no discernible and long term positive effect.

- The New York Times ran an article on August 2, 2011 that described the activities of artist Erika Nelson from Lucas, Kansas. For ten years, Ms. Nelson has made miniature models of giant pieces of Americana (e.g. models of the World's Largest Ball of Twine and the World's Largest Can of Fruit Cocktail) as part of her mobile miniature museum and has toured around the state with her pieces.

Nice hobby until you realize that this hobby has been subsidized by the Kansas taxpayers to the tune of $2,000 a year. Talk about non-essential government spending. Finally, however, budget constraints are forcing the state to get out this ridiculous subsidy this year, about ten years and $20,000 too late.

- According to an article the Miami Herald that was summarized in the November 25, 2011 issue of The Week magazine, taxpayers spend $800,000 a year to house each prisoner at Guantanamo Bay. This is 30 times more expensive what it costs to keep a prisoner on U.S. soil.

Thus, is you believe that about 172 prisoners are still at the prison camp, based on various news reports, then the Federal government could save about $130,000,000 a year if only Obama had executed his major campaign promise to shut down the facility if he was elected President. His failure to do so and the political class failure to make/allow him to fulfill that promise will unnecessarily cost the American taxpayer over $1 billion of the next ten years.

Waste, insanity, idiocy, and more, your American political class.





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:
http://www.cato.org/
http://www.robertringer.com/
http://realpolichick.blogspot.com/
http://www.flipcongress2010.com/
http://www.reason.com/
http://www.repealamendment/

More Pirceless Insanity From The American Political Class - Small Minds Working On Small Objectives

- Annual amount of taxpayer money lost to fraud and criminal activity in the Social Security Program - $70 billion a year

- Annual amount of taxpayer money lost to fraud and criminal activity in the Medicare Program - $60 to $90 billion a year

- Annual amount of taxpayer money lost to fraud and criminal activity in the Medicaid Program - $30 to $40 billion a year

- Annual amount of taxpayer money lost to unnecessary and obsolete deployment of about 140,000 U.S. troops in South Korea, Japan, and Europe - $35 billion a year

- Annual amount of Congressional member earmarks that politicians wastefully dole out in exchange for re-election financial support - $16 billion a year

- Annual amount of savings by eliminating the dysfunctional, ill performing, and unneeded Federal government's Department of Education - $107 billion a year (Source: Cato Institute - Downsizing Government Project)

- Annual amount of savings by reducing the Federal government's civilian headcount by 200,000 people, back to the civilian employee level prior to Obama's inauguration - $20 billion a year

- President Obama's latest effort to trim excessive government expenses via reduction in government coffee cup purchases - Priceless

As always, you cannot make this stuff up. The above list of REAL expenses cuts via fraud and criminal activity reduction and unnecessary military and government bureaucracy spending comes out to at least $338 billion a year.

In the face of these pre-identified savings and a fast approaching $15 TRILLION national debt level, the President signed an executive order on November 9, 2011 that instructed the government bureaucracy to take the following steps:

• Reduced the amount of money Federal agencies can spend on promotional (T-shirts,coffee cups, pens, etc.) items to promote the work of their agencies. 
• Reduced the amount of government cell phones and computers to be purchased and issued to employees.
• Encouraged Federal agencies and employees to use video conferencing as a replacement for traveling.
• Reduced the size of the government executive vehicle fleet.

The President's objective is to eventually reduce government spending by $4 billion in these areas of government expense. $4 billion, pathetic. While a reduction in any unnecessary government spending is always a worthy goal, consider the $4 billion in light of the big picture:

• $4 billion is only 1.2% of the amount we identified above in potential savings.
• $4 billion is only .002% of October, 2011's monthly Federal government deficit.
• $4 billion is only .0003% of the expected 2011 Federal budget deficit.
• $4 billion is only .0001% of the expected 2011 Federal budget.
• $4 billion is only .0003% of the soon to be $15 TRILLION national debt.

As you can see, this executive order from the President can only be categorized as feeble. Again, I applaud all government spending savings but these meager levels should be attained by middle level management government employees. I certainly would hope the most powerful man in the world would be involved in more global areas of government efficiency, well beyond cutting back on coffee cup purchases.

How meager are these potential expense savings? Consider the impact if we scaled the above math calculations to an average American household's budget (about $50,000 a year):

• If the Federal government's 2011 budget deficit was equivalent to the average income of a typical American household, then Obama's $4 billion expense reduction would be equivalent to $1.54.
• If the Federal government's 2011 total budget was equivalent to the average income of a typical American household, then Obama's $4 billion in expense reduction would be equivalent to $.55.
• If the Federal government's national debt was equivalent to the average income of a typical American household, then Obama's $4 billion in expense reduction would be equivalent to $.13.

In other words, these proposed savings by the most powerful person in the world is equivalent, at most, to the cost of one Sunday newspaper per year.

Unbelievable insanity. And this passes for leadership in Washington. Two steps from "Love My Country, Loathe my Government" come to mind:

1. Step 1 would reduce Federal government spending by 10% a year for five years. This is the only way we can make any kind of substantial dent into Federal government spending and our national debt. This is the kind of bold leadership and initiative the President would be taking if he was a real leader. Worrying about coffee cups is neither leadership or effective.
2. Step 39 would impose term limits on all Federal politicians. It is becoming pretty obvious that the current set of Washington politicians do not know how or are unwilling to make the deep and necessary cuts to spending that are needed to save the country. The saddest part of this observation is that many of these expense reductions can be done without alienating voters, only the criminals that defraud government programs and expense contractors that would see their business decrease as we reduce unnecessary military spending.

As today's title says, these are small political class minds working on small objectives. Unfortunately, given the issues facing the country today, we need broad imaginative minds working on large, strategic, and imaginative solutions. This dichotomy is what causes the insanity.


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 http://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:
 http://www.loathemygovernment.com/
http://www.cato.org/
http://www.robertringer.com/
http://realpolichick.blogspot.com/
http://www.flipcongress2010.com/
http://www.reason.com/
http://www.repealamendment.com/