Time for Statesmen? Sound Bite Version

Looking for a job these days?

A tax supported enterprise needs to create abouit200 job vacancies. These would be filled by 200 people applying for jobs in the Congress as Statesman/Philosophers to replace career politicians.

Before you hasten to apply, please consider the job specs.

First, a true Statesman must somehow get elected without any contributions from advocacy groups such as unions, businesses, lobbyists or fundraising groups that have high sounding names, but lower ethics.

GOOD LUCK with even getting nominated.

Second, you have to agree in advance to serve only two terms so that politics can’t become a career.

Is anyone still a job applicant?

Third, you will have to agree that statesmen (as opposed to politicians) don’t expect to add to their personal wealth while in office or afterward. That obviously means no jobs as lobbyist, etc.

Any statesman/officeholder who violates The Statesman Code would and should expect double or triple fines and/or prison terms as should any outsider who seeks to tempt the statesman to violate his public trust.

Hello, anyone still here???

And would YOU, as a voter really recognize a Political Statesman if you actually ever saw one?

Time for Statesmen? Full Version

July 4th, Philadelphia Pa.

Looking for a job these days?

A tax supported enterprise needs to create abouit200 job vacancies. These vacancies in the congress would be then filled by 200 people applying for jobs as Statesman versus politicians.

Before you hasten to apply, please consider the job specifications. Here they are.

First, a true Statesman must somehow get elected without any contributions from advocacy groups such as unions, businesses, lobbyists or fundraising groups that have high sounding names, but lower ethics. All your campaign funds must come from individuals and may not exceed $ 1,000 per person, which would include you and your family – no doubling up.

GOOD LUCK with even getting nominated.

Second, you have to agree in advance to serve only two terms so that politics can’t become a career (although the terms may be longer).

Third, you must swear that your every vote will be solely in the national interest regardless of how it affects you personally or the district that sent you to Washington, your temporary address where all your claimed expenses are audited, published and exposed to the public light (So long to those cute little thing on your office payroll)

Is anyone still a job applicant?

Fourth, you will have to agree that statesmen (as opposed to politicians) don’t expect to add to their personal wealth while in office or AFTERWARDS. That obviously means no jobs as lobbyist, etc.

Any statesman/officeholder who violates The Statesman Code would and should expect double or triple fines and/or prison terms as should any outsider who seeks to tempt the statesman to violate his public trust.

Hello, anyone still here???

There needs to be (somehow) enough statesmen in the house and senate, to represent an effective swing vote or a balance wheel – always, always putting the country FIRST. Hopefully the statesmen group would/should attract the attention of the bewildered and disillusioned voters (particularly the young) and become role models for children who would not otherwise be considering elected public service in ADDITION to other more lucrative careers. There is also the chance that the statesmen group in the congress could become the ‘sheriff’ of the congress.

Finally, there is a possibility that this small group of statesmen could spearhead the next evolutionary step in the natural development and modernization of the whole democratic idea and take it to a higher level. And don’t forget that the basic idea has been modernized before – lots of times and at least half the voters (women) think the changes have been OK. Two hundred years ago the only legal voters were white MALES who owned land. This modernization, in a way, might preserve the revolutionary idea that had done so much already to improve the world, but which still has much, much more to do.

=========================================

P.S. Here is a post July 4^th thought. If enough people apply and get elected as Statesmen, their names eventually might be somehow grouped by future generations with people like Mr. Jefferson, Hamilton, Thomas Paine, etc. – that bunch that fed the basic democratic idea 235 years ago.

Sleepless in Seattle and Everywhere

Are you sleeping poorly these days because of worry about the national economy, its security and its economic longevity? 

 

Well, here is a harmless sleeping pill with no side effects or fear of addiction.  It promises to get you a coupla good nights sleep, maybe three or four, if you can accept three axioms which are:

 

Axiom 1:  The Islamic threat to U.S. Security would moderate, evaporate or least become less of a threat if world revenue for oil decreased dramatically.  (Or even threatened to decrease)  Who knows what just the threat of Reagan’s Star Wars had on the decline of Russia’s communism, for example?

 

Axiom 2:  The biggest threat to America’s continued economic dominance in the world appears to be (a.) inability to compete on high labor- intensive and low- tech items like clothes, shoes, parts and (b) a rise in the dollar’s value which hampers exports.

 

Axiom 3:  One of the principal reasons the country has not been able to curb its appetite for Arab oil is that we have been partially encumbered by Detroit’s existing infrastructure, culture and mindset and our government’s hesitation to upset that status quo.

 

Now if you buy, even partially, into these three axioms you can begin to sleep better because the virtual collapse of Detroit culture (and infrastructure) provides America with a clean sheet of paper from which to build an alternative to gasoline driven transportation.  It is an opportunity that has and will cost us deeply/ heavily, but it could also be THE opportunity to solve the problems of (a) Islam’s threat to economic security and (b) our economic malaise.

 

If America can invent an alternative engine (be it natural gas, hydrogen, battery, nuclear, whatever), ahead of the very clever world competitors, we can cash in on that advance handsomely for years.  And by decreasing the world’s need for oil, we, not only would be selling our technical skills, but we would be cutting off a big source of Islam’s income.

 

The improved U.S. economic outlook should make the dollar more desirable worldwide thereby reducing our need to raise interest rates domestically, which not only should stimulate our domestic economy but restore the dollar to its former standards.

So everybody wins except for the people who hate us the most and we are their best customers, if you can believe that.  (Also, we should be able to reduce military expenses---freeing up tax money for the social problems that also keep us awake at night)

  

Think about it and sleep peacefully, but don’t phone me at 4 in the morning because I’ll be thinking about how America’s political system went SO wrong to let us get into this situation in the first place.   But that’s another blog.

 

Three Questions

My name is Mark.  Question Mark.

 

I have three questions for you today.  I do not know the answers.  I will tell you what I suspect are the answers.   And I will be interested in whether you agree or don’t and why. Who knows where your opinions might count!!

 

Question one:  Are the established European nations in the early stages of decline a-la Greece, Rome, the Ottoman Empire, etc.?   If true, is it because the PERCENTAGE of increase in the standard of living of these countries is increasing less than the standard of living in the so called emerging countries such as India, China, South Korea, Taiwan, etc.?  Even Russia?   The argument has to acknowledges that the standard of living in the emerging countries is increasing from a much lower base therefore making it easier to show a higherpercentage of increase. 

 

Question two:  If the above is true, what is the base cause?  Is it, as some argue, that while productivity per person in Europe is increasing, it is increasing at a slower lower rate per person than the rate per person in the so-called emerging countries.   And again, is that productive decrease a result of (a) more government entitlements (b) higher personal taxes per capita or (c) government programs that undermine and dilute feelings of personal responsibility and personal pride?  Or, as some say, that government encourages more holidays, shorter work weeks, all of which sets the wrong example. 

 

Question three:  If the answers to questions one and two are YES, then question three is this:

   Are United States policies and actions leading us on the same downward curve some twenty to thirty or forty years behind Europe?  If the answer is yes, the final questions are?  (a) Is that what we really want?  (b) If not, how do we stop the deterioration before it goes too far?  And (c) Or has it already gone too far to stop?

 

The writer, honestly, does not know the answers but is concerned enough to ask.  The answers could be life changing for millions of Americans and also for those countries affected by America’s ability to consume and in some cases provide honest and enlightened leadership. 

 LOOKING FOR SOMETHING

YOU CAN DO PERSONALLY

TO HELP THE ECONOMY

 IN A BIG WAY NOW?

Here is a new idea for dramatically helping to ease the current economic pain. 

 

Before expounding on this “silver bullet” for helping fix the economy, you may appreciate a background review:

 

First, The Background:

 

If a tax payer sold a house, or stock or almost any capitol asset in 2008, he can only deduct the loss against any gains (which were few and far between in 2008).  However, the IRS allows the taxpayer to deduct $3000 of the excess loss in 2008 and permits him to carry forward the leftover loss into future years for future deductions.

 

Now, The Idea:

For the tax year of 2008, alone, why not instruct the IRS to permit the taxpayer to deduct from income tax up to, say, 10 times the $3000 now allowed if his capital gain losses so entitle him to do so.  He then,  can carry the remainder over and the government can decide later on how much of the carry- over he can deduct, (and the government needs him to deduct) in 2009 or future years. 

The Expected Results:

What people would do with the tax savings of up to $30,000 per person is conjecture.  First, it would probably be used to reduce debt, which in its own way would stimulate spending in short order.  Or, secondly, it might be used to increase savings which would stimulate future investments in perhaps, real estate, stocks and bonds or expansion of local businesses.  Some of  this would help stimulate employment.

 

The biggest virtue would be that it would be almost instant stimulation which the government urgently seeks.  It would start with the initial announcement and be felt by the filing date of April 15 and certainly by the time people would receive a rebate from their funds deposited with the IRS in anticipation of higher tax payments in 2008. 

 

The carry over would be beneficial also for 2009 because it would reduce the estimated payments and perhaps withholding because those payments only have to match or exceed by 10% the tax paid in 2008.

 

What Taxpayers Need To Do:

 

If you as a taxpayer and concerned American think that this idea has merit, I hope you will join me in increasing the visibility  with people who can and will advocate the thought.  I do not know why it has not been advanced before, or if it has, why it has not received more circulation and discussion.

 

One reason might be that it could be perceived as helping the rich.  The exact opposite is the truth.  It helps the poor and middle class more than the rich—a maximum $27,000 tax credit is of no substantial value to the very rich, but is of enormous value to someone who is forced to sell his home because he lost his job or had to pay big medical expenses.   If he lost $50,000 on the sale of his home (which he bought for $250,000 and had to sell for distress at  $200,000) the IRS would be benefiting him and the economy instantly a lot more than it is benefiting the rich.  Also, by setting a ceiling on what can be deducted, the IRS is penalizing the rich because their losses have been in the hundreds of thousands and even in the millions, and a $30,000 ceiling against those numbers is a pittance.

 

Therefore, the argument that it favors the rich over the poor is without validity just by the mathematics alone. 

 

What You Can Do:

 

Suggested actions include the obvious: communications to President Obama, Secretary of the Treasury Geither, your congressman and senators, letters to the editors, e-mails to friends with suggestions and anything else that comes to creative minds.  Unfortunately, the idea is late in coming, so the urgency is twice what it ought to b

Finding Humor in Economic Distress

During the great depression, I’m told Hollywood produced happy movies and musicals.  The purpose was to provide temporary relief from grimness.

Judging from today’s mix of heavy drama and high action, Hollywood’s current movies must have been conceived and financed when the market was in the highest period of optimism. Shortly, we might expect some lighter fare musicals and comedy to lighten our current grief. 

In the meanwhile, economic jokes are spreading wild.  

Example: 

Man walks into bar and says to his male friends:  “This market turn down is worse than a divorce.”  “How come?” his buddies ask.  “Well, I’ve only got half of my money…and I still have my wife.”

….

A man calls his bank to ask about the overdraft notice he received in the morning mail.  This was his question: 

Does this mean I over-drafted my account at your bank, or that your bank over-drafted other banks or the government?

….

An 80 year-old man wrote this to his close friend:

It used to be that the second thing I looked at in the paper was the obituary column and I was always elated if none of my friends were LISTED.   Now the second thing I look at is the financial page and I’m equally elated if none of my stocks were DELISTED.

….

It use to be a claim that most of the contemporary jokes came from either jail prisoners or people who worked for brokerage firms.  The way things look now there could be a lot of crossovers.  Here’s hoping Hollywood can find a higher class of humor for its light escapist movies we can expect in the immediate future.  

WHEN WILL THE ECONOMY TURN UP?

Here is an intriguing prediction about when the economy will stabilize and rise again. 

 

It doesn’t come from an Ivy League p.h.d trained to read the economic signs.   Nor does it come from a government economist skilled in reading  statistics.

 

Instead, it comes from a very successful businessman who faces potential buyers and concerned employees all day long most every business day.  This is his prediction and his reasons why: 

THE PREDICTION

The economy will start to turn up once homeowners are convinced that the value of their houses have declined as far as they will likely to go.  Simple as that! 

 

Here are the businessman’s reasons:  The largest single asset most people have is their home.  Two or three years ago it was valued at,  say, $400,000 in the homeowners mind. When he added that together with his 401k’s, his savings and social security, he figured he could downsize and retire comfortably.

 

But now, he has seen similar houses in the neighborhood listed for $349,000 and not selling.   Then he sees the prices cut to $319,000 or $298,000 and still not selling.  The homeowner wonders where the bottom is, especially since he knows of more homes likely to come on the market in the next block and he knows of several people in the area who have real financial problems keeping up their home mortgages and home equity loans.

 

So-----he and his wife have cut back on their expenditures.  They are trying to save a little, by not buying the refrigerator they wanted, the new suit or taking the vacation they had planned. 

 

This businessman’s theory is that once the homeowner realizes his home price has reached the bottom and has stabilized, he will become more secure in his thinking .  He then will begin making his spending and retirement plans based on the reduced “expected” price that his house will bring when he does want to sell it.  Once he has that secure feeling, he will then reconsider spending for the refrigerator, the suit or the vacation. Meanwhile, if he hasn’t become unemployed, he will pay down credit cards and may be able to increase his savings. 

 

 Where will he invest his savings?  Who knows? 

 

How safe is this homeowner’s job?  This same businessman who has his “boots on the sales floor” has an insightful look at what is really causing a lot of the unemployment, and what will bring unemployment to a realistic fix-- not based solely on bailout monies.

The result eventually could be more business efficiency and greater business expenditures and growth.

But ---that is a subject for a separate blog.