Andrew Mellon on Taxes (Someone Show this to Obama)

“There is no reason why the question of taxation should not be approached from a non-partisan and business viewpoint. ... Tax revision should never be made the football either of partisan or class politics but should be worked out by those who have made a careful study of the subject in its larger aspects and are prepared to recommend the course which, in the end, will prove the country’s best interest.

I have never viewed taxation as a means of rewarding one class of taxpayers or punishing another. If such a point of view ever controls our public policy, the traditions of freedom, justice, and equality of opportunity, which are distinguishing characteristics of our American civilization, will have disappeared and in their place we shall have class legislation with all its attendant evils. The man who seeks to perpetuate prejudice and class hatred is doing America an ill service. In attempting to promote or defeat legislation by arraying one class of taxpayers against another, he shows a complete misconception of those principles of equality on which the country was founded. Any man of energy and initiative in this country can get what he wants out of life. But when that initiative is crippled by legislation or by a tax system which denies him the right to receive a reasonable share of his earnings, then he will no longer exert himself and the country will be deprived of the energy on which its continued greatness depends.” - Andrew W. Mellon

Deficit Cutting Made Easy!

It is incredibly easy for me to sit here on my computer and in just a few minutes find $1.2-$1.5 Trillion in Federal Government spending cuts over the next ten years (I could find $5-$10 Trillion in just a few hours). Of course, I do not have have personal interests such as reelection to worry about. Nonetheless, it is simple to find spending cuts which is why I'm so puzzled to hear that the super-committee is having difficulty finding the cuts. More than half of the minimum cuts will come off the books automatically at the end of this year (End of the Iraq War)! Below are a few spending cut options that can be implemented: 

Cut deficit by $1.2-$1.5 Trillion over 10 years ($120-$150 Billion a year)

1. $66,000,000,000 - End of the Iraq War

- This is technically a spending cut since $66 Billion will no longer be needed annually for the War in Iraq. The super-committee is already more than half way there.

2. $29,266,824,800 - Cut Federal Government Employees Salary and Benefits by 10% (after 5% of employees are laid off) 

- Average Federal Worker Salary: $67,691, Annual Benefits: $40,785

- Average Private Sector Worker Salary: $42,432, Annual Benefits: $9,882

- After the 10% cut, the federal worker would still be making $45,314.40 more than the private sector worker in salary and benefits annually.

3. $18,400,000,000 - Reduce Corporate Welfare by 20% ($92 Billion Annually)

4. $15,403,592,000 - Layoff 5% of Federal Government employees

- There are about 2,800,000 federal employees (far too many). If 5% of the workforce was laid off that would be about 140,000 people. It may be a difficult for politicians to fire workers, but they are paid to do the difficult things. The nation is in a debt crisis and if the inflated size of the Federal Government is not reduced the crisis will eventually destroy America.

5. $10,000,000,000 - Reduce foreign aid by 20% ($50 Billion Annually) 

- It is time for that money to be used at home.

6. $9,130,800,000 - No more earmarks

 - Obama did promise an end to earmarks!

7. $3,100,000,000 - Cut Saturday Post Office delivery

- The Post Office loses the American taxpayers about $8 Billion annually, it is time for some changes.

8. $146,000,000 - Federal employees refusing to fly coach

- The American taxpayers aren't paying for federal employees to live luxuriously. If federal employees want to travel in style they should pay out of their own pockets.  

Total Annually: $151,447,216,800 ($1.51 Trillion over 10 years) 

Are Teachers Underpaid or Overpaid?

The below analysis has been visible all over social networks in support of teachers the past few weeks. It is an attempt to show how teachers are underpaid. I will add that I support teachers and many of my family members are teachers, but in the instance of being fair, I will show you why the below numbers are completely off base.

Read the entire thing before you judge me....

Teachers' hefty salaries are driving up taxes, and they only work 9 or 10 months a year! It's time we put thing in perspective and pay them for what they do - babysit! We can get that for minimum wage. That's right. Let's give them $3.00 an hour and only the hours they worked; not any of that silly planning time, or any time they spend before or after school. That ...would be $19.50 a day (7:45 to.............................. 3:00 PM with 45 min. off for lunch and plan-- that equals 6 1/2 hours). Each parent should pay $19.50 a day for these teachers to baby-sit their children. Now how many students do they teach in a day...maybe 30? So that's $19.50 x 30 = $585.00 a day. However, remember they only work 180 days a year!!! I am not going to pay them for any vacations. LET'S SEE.... That's $585 X 180= $105,300 per year. (Hold on! My calculator needs new batteries).What about those special education teachers and the ones with Master's degrees? Well, we could pay them minimum wage ($7.75), and just to be fair, round it off to $8.00 an hour. That would be $8 X 6 1/2 hours X 30 children X 180 days = $280,800 per year. Wait a minute -- there's something wrong here! There sure is! 

The average teacher's salary (nation wide) is $50,000. $50,000/180 days = $277.77/per day/30 students=$9.25/6.5 hours = $1.42 per hour per student--a very inexpensive baby-sitter and they even EDUCATE your kids!) WHAT A DEAL!!!! 

Heaven forbid we take into account highly qualified teachers...

Misleading Political Headlines are Providing Misinformation to Many

Dewey Defeats Truman

In recent months, as I have read more and more political articles online and in the newspaper, I have realized that many political article headlines are misleading, bordering on untruthful. When comparing the body of these articles to the headlines it seemed evident to me that journalists are writing misleading headlines purposefully. Why would journalists do this? ... I decided to analyze how I view articles in newspapers to try and derive an answer to my question.

When reading the newspaper I typically skim over all the headlines in the paper and stop at a few articles that I want to read. This technique is probably performed by most people. By reading the article headlines I get a sense of the articles without having to read all the articles in the newspaper. After completing my quick examination I discovered the answer to why journalists write bias headlines. ... Many people only read the headline of an article.

Since many people read headlines and not the full articles, journalists can sway public opinion by merely writing a misleading headline (that often aligns with the journalist’s perspective). Of course, a journalist is supposed to be objective and leave their point of view at the door step, but unfortunately many journalists today have become egregiously bias in their reporting. To fortify my inference, I came across a study that proclaims 44% of Google news visitors scan article headlines without ever accessing (reading) the articles. I'm sure journalists know that statistic, and others alike, and that prompts them to write deceptive headlines thus fooling almost 50% of the population into believing something that is untrue. 

Operation: Blame the Tea Party

“A man can fail many times, but he isn't a failure until he begins to blame somebody else.” - John Burroughs

Do I know anyone who constantly blames others? Hmm … oh yea, Barack Obama and the members of his Administration do that often. In fact, they lay blame to anyone who is of an opposing political party or they deem threatening while rarely, if ever, admitting their own failures. Mr. Obama even holds primetime press conferences with the primary purpose of telling the American Citizens who is to blame for the current state of America (by the way, it isn’t him). How can this Administration try to fix the problems of this country if they cannot admit that many of their own policies are failing? The answer is they can’t because they choose to ignore reality.

A great example of Obama blatantly ignoring reality is when he filled out his Census form in 2010 and checked the box “Black, African American, or Negro” and didn’t check the box labeled “white” despite the FACT that he is 50% white (or Caucasian). This should not only be considered ignoring reality, but lying on a Census form subject to a $500 fine. Don't hold your breath for that government deficit reducer. This example does not have any real direct effect on Americans, but should not be considered an insignificant occurrence. If Obama can ignore his race when it suits him, what else could he choose to ignore or lie about in order to push his agenda? A person who is in a powerful position and chooses to believe something not based on fact or reason, but based on what he wishes to be true is a dangerous person.

I'd be remiss if I didn't mention that I think Barack Obama is a good person, but unfortunately his idealistic naivety is putting the United States in a precarious position. The modern day Roman Empire may be crumbling right before our eyes and Barack Obama is playing the violin for himself.