Ethics and Leadership

What is ethics? What is morally right? Many years ago in non revisionist history, America fought a long war in Vietnam. This war was on the news every night (when you only had three stations with news not 500), in the daily paper and in the weekly news magazines. Liberals at that time thought it was cool to demean and deface our soldiers fighting there. They asked for them to surrender, join the enemy and other assorted misguided views. The war was mismanaged by a Democratic President who had great concerns about his legacy, he also had poor military advisers which helped lose the war for America.
In this time many United States soldiers died and many became POWs. One of the most noted POWs is very close to becoming our next President. He sacrificed six+ years of his life being tortured and gaining permanent physical disabilities from his capture. He endured six+ years that many of us would not have the ability to deal with. During this time he proved his mental toughness and proved his love for our country beyond a doubt.
Thus in a few days we will vote for a new President. Do we want a President who has an ethical and moral character, a man who stood by his fellow soldiers, a man who placed his country above his own well being physically? Or do we want a liberal Senator who has basically never worked a day in his life who is worried about his ego and self glorification? I know I don't and I know John McCain and Sarah Palin are what are country needs in leadership today. I know my vote goes to McCain - Palin.

Why America Can't Afford Another New Deal

America can't afford another New Deal. I can't see how the first one worked since it was blurred by World War II. I can't see how another Great Society will work as the first one from the 1960's still has done little if anything for our economy.
I would like to see a new freedom deal for our society and our economy especially for those who work. This could be done by making the Bush tax cuts permanent. It would not penalize those who work hard, choose to take risks and create jobs and wealth for our economy. It would allow for the free market movement to continue to exist in our economy and allow for economic growth to continue to take place. A redistribution of wealth already occurs in our economy (although Congress by exempting itself from most laws, social security and the like allows its wealth to grow)through the current income tax system. A large proportion of citizens pay no taxes at all and are supported by those like us who work for a living. Thus if we work in our economy we are penalized by the same federal government trying to continue to change our wealth status and give it to those who supposedly need it. Rather than empowering those who need more skills and education it is much easier for government to create the mindless bureaucracy of entrapping these same people in a welfare mentality and welfare cycle. Government owes them. The New Deal and the Great Society were utopian measures which failed our economy and created the great dependency that is visible especially in the Democratic party, a party void of ideas and ethics. But in my economic opinion it was a failure, is a failure and will continue to be a failure for the future. We as a voters need to understand that we can ill afford more of this endless quest for mediocrity that the Democrats embrace at all levels of government. Real change in November comes only with a vote and a victory for John McCain and Sarah Palin.

Why Pickens Plan Is Blowing In The Wind and Will Not Work

It is blowing in the wind and money from your wallet will follow. And if you are T. Boone Pickens your profit is blowing in the wind. And you as energy consumers will help make Pickens wealth grow even more if his misguided plan works. Do not get me wrong I am all in favor of creating wealth and I have been consistently in favor of alternative energy sources. However I am not in favor of this plan which can only rely upon eminent domain to take over properties starting in Texas and position incredibly expensive electrical lines along state lines to transport this electricity throughout America. And at a time when the price of a barrel of oil has gone down $70+ a barrel. I have a strong feeling that taxpayers like you and I will help support Pickens in his semi-retirement through this master liberal plan of nothingness for energy.
We do have problems with energy independence which can be traced to the 1970's and a Democratic Congress who has basically done nothing for 35+ years with regards to this. Obviously since Congress is removed from the everyday economy nor does it have to worry about anything financially, it could care less if gas went to $6 a gallon and heating oil to $7. It solution is simplistic, tax these supposed "excessive profits" that we always hear about. Are the profits there today at $2.50 a gallon?
Thus the real nature of eminent domain is at stake here. Solar installations on buildings do not require eminent domain, nor do windmills privately owned on private property. New building construction with geothermal energy does not require eminent domain nor does nuclear power. In my economic opinion I do not feel taxpayers need to support nor endorse this poor Pickens plan. And by the way I favor the energy proposals of McCain/Palin, let us control our own oil supply in our country. They have my vote.

Why Is Wealth Bad In Our Economy?

Why is wealth bad in our economy? Why is it fine to have millionaire liberal Democrats in Congress dictating to those individuals in our economy who are productive what they can and can not have? I have studied formally Economics and Business since high school, 37+ years now. Over all the classes I have taken, the degrees that I have, all the classes I have taught, all of the thousands of articles I have read, all of the magazines and books that I have read, I still wish to know why is it bad to work hard and gain wealth and why is it government's inherent right to take as much as it can away from those same people.
That is what this Presidential election had developed into. Government has once again proven by interfering with the housing market it has help to create a great housing and credit mess along with hiding the problems of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. And then it blames capitalism for it. It needs to blame itself. What Congress could have done was to help create energy independence-it only has had 35+ years to do that and to stimulate the economy by the elimination of taxes on inheritances, and lower and eliminate all taxes on interest, dividends and capital gains. Let capitalism run itself and downsize government at all levels. Just another reason why I am voting for McCain/Palin this election.

Vote Mike Vitali State Representative 85th District

Wallingford residents finally have a chance to unseat one of the most liberal tax and spend Democrats of all time, Mary Mushinsky. Our current representative and her cureent massive tax and spending increases have help stripped our state of its economic vibrancy and growth. Her liberal arguments continue to be feeble to anyone who must work for a living. It is time once and for all for her to be voted out of office. Mike Vitali represents a breath of fresh air for Wallingford. He is young, innovative and actually willing to work to help lower spending and taxes for our community and state. Mike Vitali is a product of schools and our town, we could not ask for a better candidate to represent us. For those voters in the 85th District, I urge you to vote for Mike Vitali as your State Representative and also I know I am voting for the McCain/Palin ticket for a positive future for our country.

How Does Hard Work Pay Off Economically?

How does hard work pay off economically? If you are a liberal millionaire Democrat you need not work in life. For example, if you are a Chris Dodd you were able to get a favorable subprime mortgage and save a great deal of money on the life on your mortgage. What you have done is unethical but remember you are a millionaire liberal Democrat who does not need to work for a living. If you are a candidate for President like Obama who needs to spend your entire working career being non productive and always receiving a paycheck from some form of government agency whether local, state or federal. This non productivity now allows you to tell the productive business entrepreneur (i.e. Joe the Plumber) that you can not keep all that you earn. Your hard work must be shared with those like himself and those who do not wish to work or be productive. No you must share your wealth with those who probably are inherently lazy and enjoy living off the government meal ticket. Government and we the taxpayers of our economy apparently owe those like Dodd, Franks, Pelosi, Reid, Obama and Biden and many others who do not wish to work a living. You as a productive, hard working individual who wishes to get ahead in life must listen to the stale rhetoric of a failed 75+ year program of the Great Society. A Great Society if you are only a millionaire liberal Democrat. Productivity, creation of wealth and hard work needs not to be penalized by a Great Society program that has failed our country miserably. We can not afford any more penalties for efficient labor and creation of jobs which in turn create wealth and prosperity in our economy.
Just another reason why I am voting for McCain/Palin.

The Tax Cut That Isn't - Another Lie

The tax cut that isn't is being sung by the Obama machine is just another lie. When one really tries to understand this plan one can see that it is no way shape or form a tax cut. It is a tax increase for anyone who earns $40,000 a year or more. If you earn over $150,000 a year look out because your taxes will jump, even more at $250,000. With this plan over 45% of the American taxpayers will no longer pay taxes. Why the shift from now 24% to 45%? To buy more votes for this miserable and failed economic plan? Why are we going to create economic disincentives to those who work for a living and who are self sufficient? Why is hard work and wealth wrong to the Democratic party even though most of them who represent us are rich and have the audacity to exempt themselves from the laws they create for us. No 95% of American will not get a tax cut.
I also have to laugh at Warren Buffet being an advisor to his campaign. Although he is a brilliant investor (who likes to keep salaries low for those that work for him and hates to pay dividends) he knows very little about our tax structure. He has always complained that the rich do not pay enough in taxes, if that is the case then instead of giving $5billion to GE give it to the Federal Government for more wasteful spending or to bail somebody else out.
Thus the Obama plan is more of the same; rape the working class of our economy and keep the economically distressed more economically distressed so that they have no incentives to work, gain self esteem and personal wealth. Just another reason why I am voting for McCain/Palin this year.

Why Sometimes We Should Listen To Our Economic Past..

Sometimes we need to listen to our economic past in order to understand our present. Over the years in my Microeconomics classes I have given a topic paper assignment about the late Milton Friedman. Friedman in my economic opinion was a brilliant man, I loved studying him when I was in college in the 70's. The basis of Friedman was simple, government needs only to provide for three functions: a military defense, it needs to enforce contracts between individuals and it also needs to protect citizens against crimes against themselves and their properties.
That is it. It is simple yet to the point, our economy can run itself without governmental intervention as is so prevalent today.
Government has become self serving at all three levels, local, state and federal. It has created an entitlement mentality which continues to erode the fabric of our nation as a whole and continues to demean the philosophy that economic hard work and self sufficiency helps create economic growth and well being. In my economic opinion the brilliance of Mr. Friedman is too lost today by a new group of economists who argue for more governmental spending and intervention. In 2008 the economic sky is not falling but has been entrapped by a group of millionaire self serving politicians like Dodd, Franks, Reid and Pelosi who now use their power for economic gain in total violation of their oaths of office.
I think if Mr. Friedman were alive today he would be helping and voting for the McCain-Palin ticket rather than the economic socialist ticket of the failed Democratic party. Yes, sometimes we should and need to listen to our economic past in order to understand the mess that our Congress has gotten ourselves into.

Economics Nobel Prize For What? Who?

The Nobel Peace Prize for Economics makes no sense to me whatsoever. Paul Krugman? Oh you mean the liberal New York Times columnist who is always right and anyone who disagrees with him wrong? I will credit him with his intelligence and his insight on the concepts of economic free trade and the functions of economic geography. However is this an actual foundation for the Nobel Prize? But looking at an organization that gave Al "Can we make some money on global warming" Gore, I can see why they gave it to him. It is because of his writings in the liberal New York Times.

Let us look at what Donald Luskin wrote in National Review Online:

These days Krugman’s liberal agenda always takes precedence over economic principle. He has described himself as “an unabashed defender of the welfare state.” He has declared, “For me, Sweden of 1980 would be ideal.” He has called Barack Obama’s sweeping plan for socialized medicine “naïve” because it doesn’t contain enough mandates. He has said that “We should be getting 28% of GDP in [tax] revenue,” when the highest level ever collected, even in wartime, is less than 21 percent.
In 1999 Paul Krugman was paid $50,000 by Enron as a consultant on its “advisory board,” and that same year he wrote a glowing article about Enron for Fortune magazine. But he would change his tune. After Enron collapsed in 2001, Krugman wrote several columns excoriating the company. (One featured what may be the most absurd howler in the history of op-ed journalism: “I predict that in the years ahead Enron, not Sept. 11, will come to be seen as the greater turning point in U.S. society.”) In most of these columns Krugman worked hard to link Enron to the Bush administration, and in one he actually blamed Enron’s consultants for the company’s collapse — while neglecting to mention that he, too, had been an Enron consultant.

Oh well, selective memory is fine for the Nobel Prize. I have also noticed on many occasions his columns have really nothing to do with economics but drone on about the virtues of bigger government and how bad conservative economists are. But that is now the view of the Nobel Prizes. They are now somewhat meaningless and how they advocate peace is beyond me. Thus as an economist I will ignore the mention of this yearly prize and go about my own research which continues to advocate less government, elimination of taxes on all dividends, interest, capital gains and inheritances. Oh if you can't tell by now, Mr. Obama will do everything to raise your taxes middle class or not. That is why I am voting for McCain and Palin.

Can You Spare $3000 for a Job?

Is this an economic incentive? If you create a job you will get a $3000 tax credit. Wow! This new plan unveiled by Mr. Obama makes little economic sense to me. First, does he realize how much it actually costs to create a job for a business? A business must look at both its fixed and variable costs when creating a job. What is the hourly salary along with the social security taxes and whatever benefits it pays will be the actual cost of the job, for example $22 a hour wage plus another $8 in taxes and benefits equals $30 a hour cost. Multiply it by 40 hours a week and you have $1200 a week or $62,400 for the year. If you subtract this tax credit it will cost the business $59,400 a year for this new job creation. The business must earn an additional $59,400 in sales/profit to even begin to justify this new job. If the costs of creating the job outweigh the benefits to the business then the job will not be created. You really do not need to be an economist to figure that out.
Thus in the simple world of Presidential politics, Mr. Obama yet again shows his ignorance of the business world and the economy of the United States. Why would you as a business person risk $62,400 to get $3000 back as a tax credit? I just love the fantasy world that the US Congress lives in. This is not an economic incentive in any way, shape or form. Just another lie by the supposed Economist Obama.

Should We Really Blame Him?

Obviously if you are Chris Dodd, the answer is no. If you are him you are making a great salary, have great benefits, have a sweetheart mortgage deal and can help cause one of the biggest financial meltdowns in your nation's history and then place blame on everyone else but yourself. What is better than that? However if you are like millions of Americans like myself, who work hard for a living, work 2+ jobs, pay your taxes on time, live within your means in a non sweetheart mortgage derived home, can only send your children to public schools, get no assistance from the government at any level and have just seen your 401K drop 30% in value over the year, you need not complain nor will your complaints be heard by the omnipotent US Congress. So let us only blame ourselves for voting these incompetent fools into Congress, although in my case I never voted for Dodd. Oh please Chris can you one day just come clean on your preferred mortgage? We know you do not care about us who live within our means and play by your false rules.