I like simple things. And the simplest, most comprehensive article on this year’s budget appeared today in The Motley Fool.

“It’s only mandatory until Congress says it’s not mandatory.” If rules are preventing vital change, why not change the rules?”

I don’t always agree with The Fools’ financial advice: When they weigh in on politics (rarely, if ever), I have to pay MAJOR attention.

The Fools’ article is devoid of partisan rhetoric. It is “Just the Facts.” Please read it. Oh, that our Congress could deal with facts instead of partisan posturing. Perhaps We People can understand; every re-elected incumbent is unable to do the same.

“In the end, the most honest thing one can say about Obama’s spending proposal is not how radical it is — but how ordinary it is. Today’s federal spending is simply following a track it’s been on for the past decade. And that’s the problem.”

When Congress was barely doing its job, I suggested that 2006 expenditures would be covered by actual 2008 or projected 2011 income. Today, I have to ask according to an old meme: “Are you better off in 2011 than you were in 2000? Have Government expenditures of Taxpayers’ payments IMPROVED life over the past decade? I would say NO: and our Congress (avaricious tho they may be) ought to take a holiday from the whims of lobbyists who write their legislation and the corporations and organizations who fund their campaigns, and actually represent The People who elected them.

The “government” of Iraq recently requested another $billion in damages from the US! Of course, the Iraqi Parliament couldn’t even get it’s act together to MEET for about a year (and OUR Congress thinks it has the corner on “vacation time”). But now, they’ve got their hands out.

There is no end to the greed of politicians. But they only follow our own lead.

$billions in aid to Iraq have “gone missing” and the Iraqi people still don’t have the electrical power or water resources that we once promised them, after eliminating Saddam.

Media to the contrary, it took but 26 days to end Saddam’s reign. It est.  Years of subsequent “occupation” have yielded few results, and we are officially “outa there!” Much as we retain some military presence.

For those who understand, there is an Economic Analysis philosophy promoted by the Federal Government about “projects:” the crux is that “sunk costs” are irrelevant to future cost/benefits analysis. We have given the politicians and lackies of Iraq $billions of dollars; they have not spent them wisely; we have no need to continue spending American taxpayers’ dollars to fund another corrupt (if sorta democratic) regime. Cut them loose: as once proposed, they can fund their own danged government with oil revenues!

An attempt at extortion should be replied with by cutting off ALL funds. We have needs, as well.

Sunday’s CNN and BBC and FOX are all reporting on the revolution in Egypt. It is just that, and so far pretty peaceful.

Early on, police reacted violently. For that matter, so did a few pockets of dissidents, burning some police stations. It is uncertain how prisoners took over and escaped from prison, but the fact that they raided the prison armory and started a battle is as unsettling to the Egyptian populace as it is to the authorities.

Media will try to blow it all out of proportion, but the handful of folks that raided the Cairo Museum were caught by citizens (and three police who remained on duty) … no “antiquities” were stolen, but the gift shop was pretty well cleaned out. Students and Citizens formed lines around the museum to prevent further incursions.

The thing to understand is that Egyptians really do NOT trust their own corrupt police. Never have. And they have been Mubarak’s primary tool in suppressing freedoms. On the other hand, the Army rolled in, were greeted by general protests (because they represent the Government), but rocks weren’t being thrown at tanks; neither army nor citizens escalated any tensions; and one officer (who probably agreed with his people) was actually carried around on the shoulders of protestors. Many folks have relatives in the army … many have already (or will) serve.

When I watch media videos, I watch what is happening in the background. The answer is, not much. Folks are walking not running, marching not rioting, and just PROTESTING! And yes, in any such situation, a few idiots will raid a store or throw rocks, but I do not see much of this happening in a variety of civilian and media videos that have made it through the Net or the airwaves.

A few weeks ago, the word on the street in Morocco (The U.S.’ oldest ally) was that “Mubarak is an ***hole.” Their Government supports the US, but with regard to Mubarak, even people on the other side of Africa said Mubarak has to go.

Over the weekend, the Egyptian leadership was shaken up (and changed) … with caution, Mubarak may step down and Baradei take over as an interim leader. Elections will be called (although this may take a year or two). The Muslim Brotherhood is not all that popular, but they will pick up a minority of seats in Parliament.  The Egyptian People will continue to hate Israel (being defeated in a few wars still sticks in their craw), but they’ll still get along with Jews and Christians. The Government will retain its Peace Treaty, but will object more often when things go awry.

If their were a time for laissez faire, this would be it. When Fatah won a democratic election, the US intervened and still denies it ever happened. Had we applauded, we might have avoided on-going conflict. Support for democracy includes supporting its results and The People that create it.

I have many disagreements with our President, but he was elected. In International Relations, he deserves support. As long as he stays out of Other Peoples’ elections.

So, our Republicans are once again attacking entitlements … but this is a good thing.

House GOP considers privatizing Medicare

I’m not sure how this works, but I might be eligible in a few years, and my “private medical insurance” is reaching $20,000/year (for the family) … I’d like to get some relief from Medicare; I’ve paid into it long enough.

Obama’s “Health Care” Bill had nothing to do with health care, but everything to do with Insurance … despite the promises, my insurance bill went up another 10% this year … and would have been more, had I not long since adopted a “healthy life style.”

Conservatives now have a number of Doctors in Congress … only one retains his Practice, and Congressional “ethics” (as if they had any) are now challenging his right to deliver babies.

Here are the Docs who think Congress is a better place to practice medicine than their offices:

Senate Incumbents

1. Tom Coburn (R, Republican), Oklahoma, family physician and ob-gyn
2. John Barasso (R, Wyoming), orthopedic surgeon New Senator
3. Rand Paul, (R, Kentucky), ophthalmologist

House Incumbents

1. John Boustany ( R, Louisiana), cardiovascular surgeon
2. John Fleming (R, Louisiana), family physician
3. Bill Cassidy (R, Louisiana), gastroenterologist
4. Tom Price, (R, Georgia), orthopedic surgeon
5. Paul Brown (R, Georgia), family physician
6. Phil Gingrey(R,Georgia), Ob-Gyn
7. Ron Paul (R, Texas), Ob-Gyn
8. Michael Burgess(R, Texas), Ob-Gyn
9. David “Phil” Roe (R, Tennessee), Ob-Gyn
10. Jim McDermott (D, Washington), psychiatrist

New House members

1. Larry Bucshon (R, Indiana), thoracic surgeon
2. Andy Harris (R, Maryland), anesthesiologist
3. Dan Benishek (R, Michigan), general surgeon
4. Nan Hayworth (R, New York), ophthalmologist
5. Scott DesJaris (R, Tennessee), family physician
6. Joe Heck (R., Nevada). emergency room physician

I helped elect Michael Burgess for his first term , but have since been redistricted. Prior to election, he had delivered more than 4,000 kids. Not a bad record. I also credit a Democrat Heart Surgeon (since retired) … he’d go to Africa for free surgeries during Recesses, but was never “ethically” challenged.

On the other hand, ever since LBJ (D, TX) invented Medicare and Medicaide, the Federal Government (not the public) has dictated what fees could be paid for medicine. With “insurance,” (be it from the Feds or Company insurance), individuals no longer challenge fees … they don’t have to pay them!

The key is what the docs and hospitals (many owned by Docs) can get away with. Some of my Docs hire “consultants” … I was one once, in a different industry … I agree with the consultants: raise your rates 10% per year, and no one will notice … despite the fact that Inflation has been below 3% per year for a decade. None of the Docs I have asked have increased their staff salaries anywhere near what they have increased their fees.

This all results in $455 for a litre of distilled water (actual charge) from a hospital, when Walmart charges 88 CENTS A GALLON for the same stuff.

It varies year-to-year, but the big money to Congress comes from Lawyers, Financiers, and Doctors … after all, that’s where the money is! People don’t count, because they don’t so much contribute.

By all means, cut Medicare reimbursements (but make them prompt) back to the levels of 2000. Maybe increase them by “inflation” (the CPI) since then. Just to be fair, require all doctors and hospitals to accept Medicare patients and Medicare rates.

“Privatizing” Medicare just introduces ANOTHER opportunity for insurance companies (another BIG contributor to campaigns) to add their 30% or more overhead to the costs of providing medical care.

I’m sure it is in Partisan best interests to investigate other political Parties … but if Congress really gave a darn about The People it represents, they would investigate the SOURCES (ie, Doctors, Hospitals, Clinics, and even the Public employees who can’t resist committing fraud) of high costs, and reduce some of their contributors’ income.

My sympathies go out to the families of those wounded or killed in Arizona by a mad man.

Investigations are already attempting to tie the murderer (Jared Loughner) to “right-wing” politics, but everybody misses the point:

A federal judge, a congressional aide and a young girl were among the six people killed, while Giffords and 13 others were injured in the bursts of gunfire outside a Tucson supermarket …

The six killed included U.S. District Judge John Roll, 63, and 9-year-old Christina Taylor Green, who was born on Sept. 11, 2001, …

Others killed were Giffords aide Gabe Zimmerman, 30; Dorothy Morris, 76; Dorwin Stoddard, 76; and Phyllis Scheck, 79.

These are the acts of a mad man.

Sunday’s (January 9, 2011) “Meet the Depressed” offered up the most egregious theory:

MR. GREGORY:  Lester, any questions about anti-Semitism as a motive? Apparently one of his favorite books, “Mein Kampf” by Hitler.  We know Congresswoman Giffords is Jewish.  Is that a factor at all that investigators are looking at?

Only a passing reference to Republican Judge John Roll, a Bush I appointee who had gone to the meeting to thank the Congresswoman:

REP. GRIJALVA [D-AZ]:  Yeah.  John, the, the chief justice there of the district court, fair man, great reputation, been a litigator and a prosecutor for 30-plus years in our community, was appointed by first George Bush to that bench, has nothing but a good reputation.  And for, for him to show up to thank Gabby for her work in terms of getting additional resources for that overburdened court and to find himself, and his family to find him, now dead is, is the same commentary that Debbie just made.  I mean, how, how do you explain this?

And danged little for The People that showed up for a Representative’s public meeting:

[NBC's Reporter Lester] HOLT:  Well, of course there was a federal judge, John Roll, U.S. District Court, a judge who was killed here.  There were there elderly people, constituents.  It was a small crowd that had actually gathered for this event. Also, a 30-year-old aide of the congressman–congresswoman among those killed. There were at least–including Congresswoman Giffords–at least 13 people, or perhaps more, who were wounded.  Five of those, we’re told, are critical condition.  Some were treated and released.

Please read the transcript:  most of it appropriately applauds Representative Giffords; the rest is devoted to political animosity.

NOTHING mentions further the Citizens who were murdered, or SEIU’s portrayal of Bush II and other Republicans as Nazis, or the general Democrat populace who advocate killing off Republicans.

Congress (who in their campaigns often breach rules of polite public discourse) and the Media (who amplify every disagreement or protest) are driving America Insane.

I commented on this almost a year ago.

In all fairness, I would encourage the Media to devote as much time to Christina Green, Dorothy Morris, Dorwin Stoddard, and Phyllis Scheck as they are devoting to the severely wounded Representative Gifford. When did CongressCritters begin to matter more than The People?

PS:

You know, whether it is a young nephew killed by a drug dealer, or elderly relatives dying of natural causes, I can take up to three days of leave to attend to Final Resolution.  Our Republican House thinks different:

REP. JOHN BOEHNER (R-OH):  An attack on one who serves is an attack on all who serves.  No act, no matter how heinous, must be allowed to stop us from our duty.

But The House won’t do ANYthing this week, and the Senate decided to take another break before this all happened. Some “duty.”

PPS: A Google search on the phrase “kill republicans” yields approximately 8 million results. The similar phrase “kill democrats” yields but 5.4 million. To be fair, the phrase “dump congress” yields 7.78 million entries.

Here it is.

Consider the words of Gov. Bobby Jindal writing on political leadership: “All people — regardless of their job or role in society — have the responsibility to notice when they are viewed as a role model and live up to that responsibility. No excuses. That admiring kid of today could be a political leader, athlete, parent or teacher of tomorrow.”

Many thanks to the A&M student who found this … I have hope for our youngsters.

I have dropped a drunken DNC member off at a DC whorehouse, after he “hit on” my wife. I have had my Republican Congressman go down in flames after “diddling” male pages. Our politicians of all political affiliations are not all “paragons of virtue.” Let us hope that all the “newbies” elected on promises of virtue and “listening to the people” vote their consciouses and the promises they have made. And that they serve as models of personal behaviour.

… is a line from a much-cited song. I know that this is a diversion from the sport of elections, but it may be important to remember that the “elected” have some responsibilities. USS Constitution (sitting in Boston Harbor, and still commissioned) once fought the Barbary Pirates, along with ships named Enterprise and Constellation. Pirates remain active today:

Piracy is thriving off the coast of Somalia because the country has not had an effective government for two decades. They currently hold at least 28 vessels and 654 hostages.

President George H. W. Bush paid little attention to Somalia at the end of his term, and President Clinton made an effort, but pulled out after the disaster in Mogadishu. Neither was much supported by Congress, who haven’t declared a War since 1942.  (Incidentally, that declaration was against Hungary … the Japanese and German Declarations occurred at the end of 1941!)

Current interests lie appropriately in Domestic policies, but our politicians (including the Executive and those who aspire to it) would be well-served to consider International interests, as well.

“Wake up,” as it were.

While Texas will be gaining four Congressional seats, and remains pretty much Red, it would be wise to note that most of our population increase came from Hispanics … and many can and will vote.

Hispanics composed about 70 percent of the 3.9 million people added to the Texas population in the past decade … About 25 percent of eligible Texas voters are Latino …

Oh yeah … we have an immigration problem, and plenty of “illegals.” But A LOT of Hispanics are here legally and many have achieved citizenship. Like the pater familias (El Abuelo) I talked with a while ago, who slogged through Inchon with his Marines to achieve his citizenship. Or the Coca-Cola executive I know, who was born in Monterrey (Nuevo Leon, Mexico).

Everybody counts towards apportionment; legal voters vote; and it behooves the Republican Party to recognize and respect those who have come to this country to work and create families … as did mine, from Germany, Ireland, Wales, and elsewhere … since at least 1776 (and Mexicans came to Texas 200 years before).

As an aside, I am really amused by the “Government” of Dallas: after years of control by the “Black” minority (~25%), the “Hispanic” minority (~35%) is making its presence felt, and the “White” majority is actually a minority! When does a purported “majority” become a protected “minority?”

Many naturalized citizens with whom I have been acquainted resent those who have come over and declined to participate in the lengthy process of becoming citizens; NONE (legal or illegal immigrants) like our Unions (they just want to work); MOST have “family values” that would put our politicians to shame. In short, they could be Republicans (at least, according to the alleged basis of the Party platforms).

Tom DeLay  (bless his larcenous and convicted heart) wrote off the Hispanic vote, and put many of its members in three Texas Districts.  THIS coming year, our (Republican) Lege is going to redistrict again, whether or not our Texas Democrats vacation in Oklahoma. (To be fair, one should note that our Republicans once abdicated to a garage poker-party in Austin, when in the minority.)

In Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, California, and even Colorado (and others), the Republican Party had better recognize that the “Hispanic” vote is going to sway elections. As has been said elsewhere, President Bush II received ~50% of the Hispanic vote … Sen. McCain didn’t do as well.

I despair that the political parties have long since abandoned advocating for The People, in preference for splitting off one group for another. The Party of Lincoln, who once emancipated “Negroe” slaves, is now depicted as a cause of injustice … even though a hundred years later, it was Republicans who supported and passed LBJ’s (Democrat) Voters’ Rights Act.

THIS Century, Republicans are understandably opposed to illegal immigration (although the waves of Irish, Italians, and Poles [for instance] were not worthy of Congressional consideration) … In an atmosphere that might depend on 5% of the vote, I would encourage Republicans, Tea Partiers, and others to reduce the rhetoric and MAKE THE CASE that Hispanics should join with Republicans.

PS:  Marco Rubio is Cuban, by origin! Puerto Rican voters have been US citizens for a hundred years. Despite our brief years as Independent Republics (before joining the United State of America), Texas and California were once territories of Mexico: The Alamo was founded in 1716. San Diego was documented in 1542 as a discovery, and San Diego was settled as a mission in 1769.

Democrats would probably LOVE to make Hispanics another “minority voting bloc” … and they have made some headway … but their Union and other traditional supporters (read__NorthEastern states that can’t cope with change) contrast greatly with the aspirations of many Hispanics

Republicans have an opportunity. If we believe in what we say, sane Hispanic voters will come to our side.

Putting aside the Federal crisis for the moment, 15 States face budget shortfalls, this year. UNLIKE Congress, MOST States have to balance their budgets each year, and many are complaining or asking for bailouts.

They, and we, have an opportunity: Census figures will be out soon, and both the States and Congress can measure how well they have done for The People, the past ten years.

AD 2000 was a wonderful year: Democrat Bill Clinton was still President, Republicans controlled BOTH Houses of Congress, Dot Coms had not gone bust, most wars had been concluded, and the Federal Budget was balanced (at least, if you included Social Security receipts in the General Fund … The Debt went up, albeit modestly). [put the Treasury tables together]

Estimates of the US population have increased by 10% over the past decade; inflation has increased by almost 30% from January of 2000 to October of 2010.

Roughly, government expenditures should have increased 40% since 2000 (10% population growth and 30% inflation), to continue to ensure the wonderful “quality of life” we all enjoyed at the beginning of the Millenium.

To be more arcane, the simple formula for ensuring prosperity should be 2011 budgets=2000 budgets*((2010 CPI-2000 CPI)/2000 CPI)*((2010 population-2000 population)/2000 population)/2000 population to get government expenditures equal to the (inflation-adjusted) per-person expenditures that made us all happy in 2000.

California’s 2000 budget was $24 billion. Its 2010 budget was $86.6 billion. With little increase in population, the State increased spending by 260%!

The Federal expenditures in 2000 were $1.798 Trillion. For Fiscal 2010, they are currently estimated at $3.591 Trillion, a 100% increase.

Every State Legislator and every Congress Critter should be asking him- or her- self: “What can I do that is best for The People of my State and my Nation?”

Every citizen should be asking:  “Was I better off in 2000, or now?”

As State Legislatures and a new Federal Congress meet next month, they will need to balance their budgets. MANY People have voiced their opinions on this. Many States are Constitutionally required to do this. The Federal Government is not (yet).

The People (including members of prison unions) are going to have to accept reductions in the amount of State or Federal largesse.

The Legislatures and Congress are going to have to accept reductions in the amounts of money “given” to their contributors.

States pass “real budgets” generally by July … The President suggests a budget generally declared “dead on arrival” … and Congress may or may not pass a budget in the Spring for which they cannot pass Appropriations until the Winter, after their Fall deadline has passed (most current appropriations have NOT been passed, even into December … they were due October 1).

State Legislators:  as you meet this coming year, remember that in 2000 your People were happy and they are unhappy now. Please do not go begging to the rest of the Nation for your salvation: you and your predecessors (politicians all) spent more than the State earned … your People may have been pleased by pandering, but they are really worried, now. Balance your budgets as you have to.

Congress: ten years ago, you had a Democratic President and a Republican Congress … both sides were happy, and The People had benefited. Yet you have continued a political wrestling match and your ratings are below that of the WWE.

In 2006 , Republicans took a shellacking: 14,000 earmarks did not go over well with your Public.

In 2010, Democrats took a shellacking: paying off Wall Street and passing an Insurance-Care Bill did not do much for your popularity.

Congress:  you had a job to do by October 1 and you have not yet finished it. Many of you were fired because of your incompetence … DO IT! before you leave your cubicles.

The difference in expenditures/citizen since the happy days of 2000 is significant, but the benefits/citizen are minimal. Ask any voter. The difference may have been pocketed by politicians or their contributors.

State Legislators and Congress:  please put the interests of your voters (The People) above those of parties or finances or yourself.

Like Jonathan Swift’s essay of the same name, I don’t think this proposal will fly, but I hope it is worthy of consideration.

Afghanistan costs billion$$$ in dollars and hundreds in American lives (AND Canadians, AND Brits, AND Aussies, AND others). Our young kids are dying out there to protect a corrupt regime. Karzai says all the right things, we support his well-coiffed Pashtun robes and provide money that probably ends up in Swiss (or other) bank accounts.

For thousands of years , Afghans have made their living off of the trade that passes through the country, because they produce little except opium.

Why bother to interfere?  The Brits tried it and failed more than a hundred years ago. The Soviets failed thirty years ago.  We’ve had a modicum of success in the past nine years. Alexander of Macedonia had little more success.

The fact is, Afghans are happy to take money from whomever is passing through this decade or century. They are good at it, and have been for thousands of years.

We have long since eliminated the Al Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan that effectively trained folk to blow themselves up over New York. From an Afghan viewpoint, they were simply foreigners that helped them (with US support) to defeat the Soviets. That part is over.

Regarding Afghanistan, we have done our job and we should simply pull out, with no further bribes for an increasingly antagonistic (or self-serving) government. If the Taliban takes over, we can consider whether or not to declare our own Jihad against the most traditional branches of Islam. Make no mistake: stoning of adulterers and homosexuals is quite Old Testament, and the destruction of “graven images” (the beautiful Buddhist images) by artillery is, as well.

Regarding Al Qaeda, it would be nice to find Osama bin Ladin and kill/prosecute him publically.  Unfortunately both sides benefit from his continued existence: his followers would like a leader and our government needs an enemy to justify just about everything.

Al Qaeda espouses many things, but even their most vitriolic rhetoric is loosely based on Al Q’ran (The Koran).

I would suggest that the United States of America abandon our more “liberal” precepts and adopt the same precepts as our enemies. Who could object? When an idiot blows himself up, or causes the death of innocents, his family and tribe should be held accountable. Israel understands this (having some acquaintence with the Old Testament), and limits its response to making the family’s home inhabitable. If the US simply swore to eliminate a terrorist’s home and village (most of a tribe), “peer pressure” might dissuade folks from doing stupid things. Of course, we would have to enure ourselves against killing civilians, the natural result of such a policy. This does not seem to be a problem for terrorists. By Koranic standards, this does not seem to be a problem for us, either.

It sounds like there’s going to be some bi-partisan compromise. But in exchange for keeping lower taxes on “the rich,” Congress will extend unemployment benefits (again), use the Tax Code as Welfare, and throw in a few other sweeteners.

I’m sure today’s Congress wants to extend tax breaks for “the rich.” Aside from many small family businesses that get taxed as if they were individuals, it is the folks like bankers with million-dollar bonuses, lawyers (like those in Texas) who take home $billion-dollar paychecks for class action lawsuits, and doctors (whose fees have increased at over three times the inflation rate for at least recent decade I have been tracking) that are breaking Medicare and MedicAide that contribute LOADS of money to our politicians. They deserve a break (tongue firmly in cheek).

I am wary of the “tax the rich” meme. Back when Reagan eliminated many deductions and vowed to “tax the rich,” I was all for it. Until I found out that, with a $35,000 a year salary, I was rich!

Admittedly, $250,000 a year in Sen. Chuck Schumer’s Manhattan is not a lot of money. Twenty years ago, post-it notes in my Booz, Allen, Hamilton offices on Park Avenue advertised “roommate wanted … $1,200/month!” … to share a two- or three- bedroom apartment. But west of the Hudson, $250k a year is some real money.

Much as I am wary of “tax the rich,” small businesses that can’t figure out how to keep their profits below $1 million, bankers and hedge-fund managers that kept their $millions in salaries and bonuses because of $billions in bailouts from less well-off taxpayers, and a hospital that charges over $400 for a liter of distilled water that costs 88 cents a gallon at Walmart DON’T deserve a break! Those who benefit from the public largess in bad times should pay for it in good (or even better) times.

As to Unemployment Insurance, I am all for it. I’ve been unemployed a few times … only once did I file for benefits, and the unemployment checks that were paid for by the taxes (insurance fees) my company paid during all the years they paid me kept: my mortgage paid, my family whole, and me in beans, rice, and stir-fry for several months. In return, I had to document the resumes I sent out and the interviews to which I was invited every week, for several (3-7) months.

But today’s Federal unemployment extensions do nothing to keep workers looking for work. Quite the contrary, I cite two examples from people I know well:

A 25-, 27- year old girl graduated from college after many years of “study” … she got her first full-time job from a County government, paying roughly $50,000/year. After only a year of salaried work, she was laid off. Since then, she has been on Unemployment for over a year (thanks to Congress). She’s traveled to New England, visited Florida and California, and has generally done things a lot of us would like to do if we had the time or money. She has few expenses, and receives ~$500 per week in Unemployment. She’s physically qualified, but has no interest in taking a part-time (and well-paying) job with UPS or the Post Office over the holiday season. Why work when you don’t have to?

A 40+ year-old man got laid off from his job as a computer operator/network manager, in which he performed well for over a decade. Despite the Recession, his technical job skills are in high demand. Not until the last extension of unemployment was in question did he actively look for a job (after almost a year), and got one within weeks.

Short-term Unemployment assistance is a Godsend for many, but 99 weeks of it is ridiculous! It is Welfare, and even President Clinton realized that Welfare keeps people from working!

There is talk of giving people or families another $400 or $800 “tax credit.” This is not a “tax break;” it is a blatant “stimulus” give-away. Whether you owe taxes or not, the tax-payers get a credit and the non-taxpayers get a check!

I was unhappy when Bush (R) gave me a bonus (but I took it, as did everybody else). I thought that perhaps I and my neighbors had paid for it over the previous boom years. But that wasn’t true … it was pandering. THESE DAYS, I and my neighbors can’t afford to cover the expense … the money will be borrowed from China (if they buy more Treasuries), and our children will have to pay it off.  If we don’t borrow it, the Fed will print it, and a wheelbarrow full of dollars will be required to buy a loaf of bread (look up “Weimar Republic”).

Sadly, the IRS is supposed to TAKE money (which we dutifully give, because we tend to be honest and think our politicians are as well). Give-aways (and the Earned Income Credit) have NO place in the IRS … otherwise, it would have been called The Bureau of Benevolence!

In the last eight years, my Senator Cornyn (R) has taken over $2 million from lawyers and and almost $1 1/2 million from the health care professions. Since 1993, my Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R) has taken almost $1.9 million from lawyers and more than $900 thousand from health professionals. I’m a simple voter … I can’t match that. I somehow thought that only Democrats were in the pocket of the lawyers and doctors. Obviously, not true.

After years of political animosity, it would be nice if our politicians decided to compromise. Better, it would be nice if politicians actually believed in some of the things on which they once campaigned. The Tea Party Movement promoted some new faces, retired others, and sometimes failed to overcome The Establishment (be it Republican or Democrat). Media would like to say that “Tea Parties” reflect only Conservative (Republican) views, but Politicians (of any ilk) should take note that The People (adhering to both major political parties) no longer believe that Congress is doing The People’s work.

The facade of “compromise” would be a good thing if Republicans said “we’ll increase taxes to pay for all the things we’ve voted for (like 14,000 earmarks)” and Democrats said “we’ll reduce spending on all the things we’ve voted for (like $billions on health insurance [not Care, INSURANCE]).” But this is not going to happen: be it Capitalists or Unions, the Republicans will spend money on the first, and the Democrats will spend on the second; The People (who have to foot the bill) are pawns (or serfs) in a political chess game.

I recently pointed out to someone that there is no such word as “analyzation*,” but if there were, it would apply to Monday’s US Senate as they ran around with their heads firmly placed out of the sunshine.

Not one but TWO Amendments were defeated that would repeal 1099s for purchases. In case you didn’t know, Section 9002 of the health care act (see page 737) amended TITLE 26 > Subtitle F > CHAPTER 61 > Subchapter A > PART III > Subpart B > § 6041 of the US Code. Section 9002 says you have to send 1099s not only to your contractors and maids, but also to anybody you from whom you BOUGHT $600 in goods over a year.

The rationale for defeat? “It wasn’t paid for!”

Here’s the problem:  somebody pulled a number out of the place they usually keep their head, and ESTIMATED that 38 million businesses filing who-knows-how-many 1099s for goods would “discover” enough under-reported income to somehow generate $19 billion in new income taxes over ten years.

SO … there may or may not be unreported income … the government doesn’t know if it exists, but the imaginary number that they came up with has to be PAID FOR by reducing REAL budgets … and nobody wants to cut REAL expenditures. Hence, no repeal.

Meanwhile, even the tiniest businesses would have to track down the name, address, phone number, and EIN of everybody from whom they buy $600 worth of stuff. Preparing 1099s and sending copies to both vendors and the Feds.

In a good year, I make (and file Schedule C) a little over $1,000/year coaching. If I ever have to replace the $900 in athletic equipment I originally needed to provide my students, I’d also have to file a 1099.

My wife used to write for a living. Four out of five years, she barely made a profit (and filed a Schedule C every year). Her only big expense was a computer … in those days, she made so little that she had to depreciate it over three or five years … but the $1,200 expense would have required a 1099.

I know rural farmers with small “spreads.” I’m sure they file Schedule F, but now they’ll have to prepare 1099s for the feedstore, the gas station, the lumber yard, and probably the dealer from whom they bought that little four-wheeler ATV to check the fences or the tractor-mower to cut the grass.

Set up a one-person law office, and you will probably need to send 1099s for your desk, your computer, your law books, and your Lexis-Nexis subscription.

If I could afford a maid, I’d currently have to file a 1099 (like CongressCritters oft fail to do). But as a “person” under the law, do I have to file 1099s for Costco, Walmart, and Best Buy? Probably not, for the moment, if those expenses aren’t related to business.

This is a STUPID law. Both Democrats (Sen. Max Baucus) and Republicans (Sen. Mike Johanns) oppose it. Amazingly, the Democrat didn’t think it needed to be paid for, but the Republican did.

PLEASE, Senators:  see the light and remove this provision. It does not of itself generate any taxes, it is a burden to small business (and large, as well), and will bury the IRS in 1099s.

* Actually, I’m wrong:  it is a misformed construct that first appeared in 1742. The phrase “…began with the analyzation of …” can easily be replaced by “…began with analyzing…” for instance.

After I gained my first few hundred thousand “frequent flyer” miles, I started worrying about those “deaths per million passenger miles” statistics. But I never thought (decades ago) that I’d have to be concerned with “gropes per trip.”

Now I can understand why I was pulled aside in the early ’70s for a “strip search,” because I probably fit the profile of “long-haired hippy,” much as I was not quite “shoulder-length.” I got a “business-cut” upon graduation, and have told my barbers “regular” ever since.

But that was done with “normal” airport security in those days … long before the Federal Government hired another 30,000 people (to start) in establishing the TSA.

I can understand why my mother-in-law (age ~60 at the time), was pulled aside because her carry-on contained two plastic quarts of frozen shrimp with all the wires of a hair-dryer thrown on top her package. Again, before TSA.

I first got ticked off when my (almost-80) Mother was pulled aside as she travelled to bury my Father.

I wasn’t happy when my toothpaste got confiscated, but heck, I had not read the latest rules.

More recently, when my dutiful wife reported a tiny water-filled dolphin souvenir from Florida (I told her not to mention it … it would have passed both x-ray and nitrate-swab), it was confiscated and my wife still laments the Christmas present she couldn’t give.

Meanwhile, cigarette lighters are back on the “ok” list … tho (back when it was legal to smoke on airplanes) I once had to help a fellow passenger put out the fire that spilled on his tray from one of those clear lighters … I watched him pull it out, knew what would happen, dealt with it, and assured the flight attendant (after the fact) that we were “under control.”  (She and I shared a knowing glance, and few even noticed the flames.)

ANYway:  I understand that there are evil people out there, and inconveniencing millions to save a few hundred LIVES is not a bad thing. I just wish the TSA were trained to use common sense, but this is anethema to bureaucracies.

SOLUTION:  we have enough folks to x-ray baggage, purses, and computers. My belt (with buckle) goes through x-ray just as well, and my alternative braces (suspenders) generally don’t set off alarms if I hold the metal parts away from my chest. My shoes go through with my computer (separated from its carrying case, for reasons I don’t understand).

We can save the public the cost of scanners with a very simple solution: when you next go through airport security, after you throw your shoes in the bin, take off your socks/stockings, your trousers/skirt, your shirt/blouse, and any other potentially bomb-laden underwear, toss ‘em in the x-ray bin then walk through the magnetometer. If you don’t have any C4 stuck up your behind, you’ll pass. Please get dressed after going through security; it’s chilly on airplanes.

It has been remarked elsewhere on Redstate that earmarks spend money, or earmarks are already paid for, or earmarks are a bad thing (the last of with which, I agree).

I don’t recall Congress actually VOTING on a budget, this past year, but one was proposed. What amazes ME is that most folks think the budget process STARTS sometime in February, and that earmarks are somehow part of it. [the last link is a worthwhile read]

Which comes first? The chicken or the egg? AGENCIES determine their needs, THE PRESIDENT uses their figures to come up with a budget in the first place, this is generally declared “dead on arrival,” and then the chickens in CONGRESS start substituting their own ideas for whatever line items were once proposed … these are called “earmarks,” and sometimes “pork.”

Beginning sometime in September, Agencies begin developing their budget requests. Their baseline (because bureaucrats aren’t very imaginative) is “how much did we spend LAST year?” Then they add a few things, like increases in salaries, more staffing (because many “worker-bees” served their time and were promoted to Supervisors but don’t have enough staff to supervise), and a few new projects that might help correct mistakes or inefficiencies that were created in previous years.

Along the way, CongressCritters may suggest to Directors or Assistant Directors that their second-cousin-one-removed has an idea for a great new project … Agencies themselves invite Contractors to big meetings to propose possible projects … Generals and Admirals battle behind the scenes to fund air-wings or artillery battalions or battle groups that may increase their responsibilities (and uniformly say “no more aircraft carriers” because the cost of ONE would fund all sorts of more practical endeavors).

By December, thousands of accountants and procurement officers tell the President what they really need.

By February, The Budget is proposed, and declared “dead on arrival.” Then Congress adds a new aircraft carrier (and the ships and submarines needed to support it), a politically-correct subsidy to pay for houses that people can’t afford (generating a fiscal crisis to be paid for later), “stimulus” payments to old folks, young folks, rich folks, poor folks, and anyone else that didn’t ask for a “Getting America Back to Work Credit.”

If Appropriations are nice fat broilers, earmarks are eggs that were laid long before. The only chickens here are the politicians who have not gotten the message that The People finally understand that THERE IS NO MONEY … but they will continue running around after their heads have been cut off.

If Congress can’t use a cleaver, we have two years to sharpen our axes.

It may be too much for Congress (still Democrat) to pass a budget, or the dozen Appropriations bills that they failed to complete by the Due Date of October 1. No wonder many have been fired.

Unable to perform their jobs, Congress will undoubtedly attempt to pass yet another Omnibus Resolution to keep the Government going. So far, a Continuing Resolution keeps us going, as it sets spending at the levels of last year:

President Obama has signed the continuing resolution, H.R. 3081, into law. The CR will keep the federal government operating through Friday, December 3, 2010.

There is talk of continuing to continue at FY2010 levels, but 2006 might make a better target for our incompetents to reach. Because 2008 Revenues were more than 2006 Expenditures!

Despite political horse-puckey to the contrary, Federal revenues have increased every year from 1995 to 2008, excepting a drop in 2002 after the tech bubble and a minor 9/11/01 incident. FY2001, $3.834 Trillion … FY 2008, $4.767 Trillion! And a high of $5.237 Trillion in FY2007, after “Bush Tax Cuts” and before the Democrats regained control of Congress. REVENUES!

CONGRESS: I know you hate to actually work for a living, so I offer a simple proposition: the 2006 budget funded the entire US government for a year, and FY2011 revenues ($4.916 Trillion) are expected to be greater than 2006 expenditures;  take the 2006 appropriations, strip out earmarks (just because they were put there by Republicans for the most part and are no longer necessary anyway), and pass an Omnibus Spending Bill identical to that of 2006 ($4.397 Trillion)!

It is a terrible thing to ask Congress to do anything original, so I think my modest proposition might get them off the hook because it’s already been done.

Reference: http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/downchart_gr.php#usgs101

Germany has a conflict about immigration. Like us, they need skilled workers and can’t seem to find them other than from Turkey or other States outside of Germany.

The Germans don’t like Turks, because the Turks eat funny foods and worship in a non-Lutheran fashion.  But then, they are the largest voting minority in Germany, and some elections hang upon the minority.

In Germany, the Turks immigrate because they have more technical talents than the Germans seem able to produce. Ist schalle, because the Germans are known world-wide for their technical skills.

In America, the debate is over H-1 visas for technically-qualified foreigners … mostly Indians, some Pakistanis. Real Americans can’t seem to stand the rigors of a technical university education.

I think this all cow-poop!  During the Y2K scare, my company needed hundreds of programmers … a skill most often associated with ITT Technical College or other institutions of the same ilk. Government-funded though they may have been, they couldn’t meet the demand.

MY company chose to hire the best liberal arts majors we could find, and turn them into programmers. English Majors (who could look forward to making as much as some poets), History Majors who might have given their souls to politics, Artists and Writers with few prospects, but an aptitude and a willingness to learn a new talent.

We hired young Americans, trained them well, and paid them well.  We made money off of them, but they made families, bought houses, and became productive members of society. I should particularly note that no Government funds were involved … we did this out of pure greed.

Meanwhile, I watched a competitor attempt to hire “experienced” Americans who were not so good and had priced themselves out of the market.  THAT company ended up hiring about fifty Indians (as my astute Indian immigrant friend joked, “we are bringing in half of New Delhi!”); they lived six to an apartment, and went back to India before the century turned.

There are Americans that want technical jobs and would like technical pay. I am sure that there are Germans who want the same. But as long as Government supports welfare (or unemployment) payments for citizens, immigrants will rise up to take the jobs that exist. And they should!

Americans need to wake up and re-learn the lessons of The Great Depression:  there is work to be had; it isn’t always glorious; but it can support your family (and your Government).

I’ve re-structured corporations, I’ve programmed computers, and I’ve built a brick wall that stands forty years later (the weeds I picked may have come back). I am an American and I will do whatever work I need to to support my family. Government never trained me, but it’s welcome to … I am waiting, waiting, waiting for young Americans to do what I have done … if I can’t find any to cut back the bushes in front of my house, I may do it myself (I’ve started) … otherwise, I’ll hire immigrants.

Like my ancestors … the one who fought in the Continental Army, those who lay siege to Vicksburg (after getting off the boat from Europe) … who became Americans, fought in many wars, and either grew crops or ran machinery … I will welcome immigrants.

It’s arcane: just because I have a daughter in Europe, I have to follow the Euro … and few appear to have noticed that the European currency has risen from about $US 1.30 a month ago to a $US 1.41 today. When I first sent her over to Europe (September 1), Euros were a buck twenty-eight ($US 1.28)!

DURING AN ELECTION YEAR, Congress, the Treasury, and The President have devalued the US Dollar by 10% in little over a month! (Please stay with me.)

In contrast, the “obviously liberal” Europeans (I have to say … Conservatives have been winning elections all over Europe, but a Conservative European would be classified “left of center” by most Americans) are showing guts and fortitude and dealing with their economic crisis (which we may have helped cause).

LUXEMBOURG – Ending months of intense debate, EU governments on Monday agreed on tougher budget rules for euro-zone nations that can trigger fines for countries racking up big deficits and debts like the ones that have eroded confidence in the euro.

…

Meeting in Luxembourg, the 16 eurozone finance ministers backed an agreement under which countries deemed to be violating the euro’s public deficit and debt ceilings — of 3 percent and 60 percent of GDP, respectively — risk big fines.

Sadly, America could not join the European Union:  our deficit as a percentage of GDP is around 10%, and our DEBT is 94% of GDP.

Greece['s] … deficit more than four times what it’s supposed to be, or 12.7 percent of GDP in 2009 (by comparison, the US deficit is about 10 percent of the economy).

Other signs suggest the Irish may be next [this is a good read; some of my ancestors were potato-famine Irish]:

March 17 [2008 ... GEE, Two Years Ago!] is St. Patrick’s Day, when people of all national origins raise a glass and declare, “Today we’re all a bit Irish!” This may be truer than we know. The Irish were driven to America by debt, and they are leading the Western world in household debt today. The London Daily Telegraph reported on March 13, 2008 that household debt in Ireland has reached 190 percent of disposable income, the highest in the developed world; and that the Irish banking system is suffering such acute strains from the downturn in the housing market that it may have to nationalize its banks.

Note: that happened, and is still going on. In Ireland, and America.

Despite the leadership evident in Europe … and not a one of them (Sarkosy, Merkel, Cameron, etc) say anything but “this is difficult” … the “leadership” in America just tries to cruise on.

Obama wants another stimulus, the Democrats want “better work rules” and more pork, even Republicans vere toward “some industries might need help, and some people shouldn’t pay taxes”  SPEND MORE!

Spend, Spend, Spend … and The People will vote you back into/into office.

I lived through the seventies … as inflation approached 20%, and a “deal” of a mortgage cost only 13%. THAT resulted from a war (Vietnam) we couldn’t pay for, Social Security increases we couldn’t pay for, Medicare and Supplemental Security Income (welfare) that we couldn’t pay for, and a Congress that knew how to spend, spend, spend.

Congress is even better at it, these days … and six years of Republicans did the same and got voted out for it. Perhaps the Democrats are worse.

I am doing my best to change Congress, this year. I hope our candidates understand why America wants a real change … and it is because Congress prefers perks over production, gerrymandering over jobs, and Parties over The Public. We voters don’t like this.

Spend, Spend, Spend, mes candidats, la guillotine attend.

Going into Sunday’s legislative elections, President Hugo Chavez pitched his candidates like a salesman, promising Venezuelans  he will give them low-interest credit cards and discounted appliances from washing machines to TV sets. … If Chavez’s allies manage to retain a two-thirds majority, it would give them the power to keep rewriting laws unopposed and to appoint officials including Supreme Court justices and members of the electoral council. [Note: the opposition won ~30%, having participated this time.)

OOPS ... wrong election.  In America, three-fifths seems to matter more than two-thirds, for most things; and the election is Tuesday November 2 ... we really ought to vote on Sundays.

SOooo ... incumbents are intent on retaining power, even though they can't even do their jobs.

I'm not so worried about the Democrats who are about to be retired, it's the Christs, the Murkowskis, possibly the Castles ...  our own Republicans who do not understand that THE PEOPLE SPOKE, and THEY DON'T WANT YOU ANYMORE!

OK ... so Charlie Christ is running for the Senate, not his Governorship ... but he is an incumbent politician ... a career politician ... and even Repubicans said they don't want him in the Senate. His solution? "I am a career politician and I just can't bear the thought of not running for office" ... so he might split the vote as an "Independent" and get a Democrat elected.

Murkowski:  appointed by her Daddy, and elected ONCE!  Apparently, she is more concerned with her position of privilege than her Party ... defeated in the Republican Primary, when The People get to voice their opinions, she just can't stand to give up the perks and kickbacks of office. Republican Senator Stevens honourably ended his career in a plane crash (under many charges, amongst them, the "bridge to nowhere") ... ex-Governor Palin was fairly successful in eliminating some of the corruption in Alaska; candidate Miller might eliminate some more. Lisa should pull out and find an honest profession, lest she help elect a Democrat.

Representative Castle may be considering an independent effort against Christine O'Donnell. I can understand if the incumbent Representative wants to promote himself to incumbent Senator, but The People said NO!

I can understand why incumbents (even Representatives [or Governors] aspiring to be Senators) might want to keep their political jobs, but they ought to hang it up and find honest work.

Incumbents have a fervor to keep or expand their power and privileges … few continue to represent The People (because $10 billion in contributions by Wall Street over the past ten years bought two $trillion dollars in taxpayer-paid bail-outs and “stimulus”).

Incumbents (all career politicians, including both those trying to keep their current jobs and those vying for a better job) have the delusional fever that they can party, travel on private jets, take months-long vacations, and not even have to read (let alone write) the legislation that they vote for or against.

The institutional GOP has yet to “get” this.  Boehner wants to revive earmarks “maybe in a year or two” … does The Party not understand that this is the MAJOR cause of disaffection amongst Republican voters … and, yes, many Democrats? NObody in Congress seems to understand that THE PEOPLE foot the bill for their extravagances. When did the term “STAY IN OFFICE” take precedence over the term “REPRESENT?”

21 pages of GOP “Pledge to America” … nothing specific … it might be challenged.  ONE PAGE might suffice: it worked almost two decades go: 90% of the “contract” was fulfilled, and six years later, it started getting dismantled (by Republicans).

Like Diogenes, I continue to search for an “honest man” (or woman) in Congress. I fail. Suggestions are welcome. The fervor of the GOP institution and the demented fever of candidates that have left the Party but pretend to adhere to some of its policies is just stupid! If you lost, you deserve it; if the Party lost a favorite candidate to The People’s WILL … deal with it!!

Under Brazilian law, voting is mandatory for citizens between the ages of 18 and 70. Not voting could result in a small fine and make it impossible to obtain a passport or a government job, among other penalties.__ AP, October 4, 2010

Ah, but that WE could have such a law. Perhaps extend it to receiving State or Federal benefits:  no vote, no cash … and illegals can’t (we should hope, excepting “motor-voter) vote anyway.

Comments?

Next week, (Friday, to be specific) the Congress is due to pass appropriations for next year (a fiscal year that begins October 1). They have had a year to prepare a budget (never completed), argue over it (still going on, and little of it public), and actually PASS appropriations for the next Fiscal Year.

No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time. __ Article I, Section 9, US Constitution

To be clear about the history of the Fiscal Year, here’s an outtake:

The fiscal year is the accounting period of the federal government. It begins on
October 1 and ends on September 30 of the next calendar year. Each fiscal year is
identified by the calendar year in which it ends and commonly is referred to as “FY.” For
example, FY2003 began October 1, 2002, and ends September 30, 2003. For more
information on budget process, see http://www.crs.gov/products/guides/guidehome.shtml.
Initially, the federal fiscal year coincided with the calendar year. In 1842, President
John Tyler signed legislation changing the fiscal year to a July 1 to June 30 cycle.
Beginning with FY1977, the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (Section 501 of P.L. 93-
344, currently codified at 31 U.S.C. 1102) changed the fiscal year to its current cycle. In
both instances, the intent was to provide Congress with more time to process
appropriations legislation, particularly to avoid continuing resolutions. Establishing the
most appropriate budget cycle continues to be the subject of some legislative proposals
that would change the current fiscal year to a biennial (two-year) period. __ House Rules.

I lived through the last change to the Fiscal Year … when Congress had a “free” quarter (from July 1 to September 30, 1976), they packed ALL SORTS of spending into a few months.

But now … Congress’ most pressing duty is to appropriate funds so that it’s Government can continue October 1.  Within every corporation of America, workers are reviewed as to what they produced during the year. Under Sarbanes-Oxley (really confusing), CEOs and CFOs have to certify the accuracy of their annual statements and

All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the issuer’s auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the issuer’s internal controls …

But Congress is not subject to its own rules.

I suppose that Congress could be judged by the number of Post Offices named after citizens, by the number of ball teams commended for their contribution to American society, or the number of studies funded to review sexual behavior among chimpanzees or bees. But the overwhelming responsibility of a Congresscritter is to create and pass about a dozen appropriations to fund everything that the government does. Meanwhile … some detail might be necessary … “a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of ALL public Money shall be published … ” [emphasis added].

New appropriations are due in a week. It is very simple: if your Congresscritter has passed (or even voted against) all the appropriations bills by Friday, he/she has done his/her job … if not, he/she deserves to be fired.

Fortunately, November 2nd provides a wonderful opportunity for The People … YOU ARE THE BOSS OF CONGRESS! … judge your well-payed employees on their performance. If there is nothing but a “continuing resolution” by Friday … or even thirty days later … Congresscritters have not done the job they are elected and paid (at more than twice what an average American earns) to do. Vote against ANY incumbent.

We Americans everywhere work hard. If we do our jobs, we generally stay employed. If we can’t get a year-long project (that used to take six months) done on time, we’ll probably get fired. If our company’s Board (read__Congress) spends too much money, borrows too much money, or just makes really poor decisions, we’ll get laid off.

If you think your Congresscritter just a wonderful person, vote ‘em back in.  If he or she cannot do his or her job … or cost you yours … fire ‘em! It’s just a performance review.