Gas Prices Drop : Could Be Much More

A drop in the gas price is good, and according to this article will save families hundreds of dollar every year. But it doesn't go far enough in that a drop of just a few cents is not enough for real gain in prosperity as if the Key Stone pipe line were approved, government owned land and coastal areas of our country were opened to explorations and 'fracking' approved in all states, we would see dollars dropped in gas prices, not cents.

Imagine how much our country could benefit if our government would were actually there to help the population rather then see the population as 'enemies of  the state'.

What Does the Drop in Gas Prices Mean for the Economy?
Source: Joseph Lawler, "Falling gas prices to provide mini-stimulus," Washington Examiner, October 29,

October 30, 2014

Drivers have been seeing lower prices at the pump over the last few weeks, with gas prices having fallen by 30 cents over the last month. Today, the average price sits above $3.00 per gallon. Writing for the Washington Examiner, Joseph Lawler says the drop will have benefits for the American economy overall.
When gas prices fall, consumers benefit:

• Just a one-cent drop in the price of gas saves consumers $1.4 billion during a year.
• Businesses that rely on transportation (and, therefore, gas) also benefit from the price drop, and prices of their goods fall.
• The average household will have an extra $700 this year, thanks to the drop in oil prices over the last month.

Lawler notes that gas prices are not the only thing dropping, as commodities across the globe have seen a fall in prices recently. According to economists, the price drop is due to fears of slow growth in Europe. While that is bad news, Lawler says falling gas prices will likely produce a net benefit for American consumers.
 

Wage Stagnation : Progressive Failue to Deliver

There is an easy answer to this question - progressive socialist liberal democrats. When there is failure, look no further then the democrats. There is history everywhere for all to see. Also, we are living the democrat failures.

What's Causing Wage Stagnation?
Source: James Sherk, "Why Has Wage Growth Stagnated?" Heritage Foundation, October 28, 2014.

October 30, 2014

Unemployment is falling, and the last year has seen a 2.6 million job gain, yet most polls indicate that most Americans believe the economy is only getting worse. Why? James Sherk, senior policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation, says the answer is due to the many economic realities that are not touted in the official numbers: the declining labor force participation rate and weak wage growth.
                                                     
Adjusting for inflation, wages between July 2009 -- when America's post-recession recovery began -- and August 2014 have barely changed, rising just 1.4 percent over the entire time period. Why the stagnation? Sherk offers a few theories:

• The poor economy provides little incentive for business, and a drop in the demand for labor also creates a drop in price, which, in the case of labor, is wages. Sherk notes, however, that labor demand has improved in recent years with 2014 job openings at levels not seen since before the Great Recession. Even so, wages have remained low.
• When long-term unemployment benefits expired at the end of 2013, America's labor supply increased, and an increase in supply usually leads to a drop in price. However, Sherk says that if supply is the reason, it can only be responsible for more recent changes, as benefits only expired at the end of 2013.
• Obamacare made hiring new workers more expensive. To offset those costs, employers reduce wages.

Sherk writes that it will take more time and data before it is clear which of these three reasons is the primary culprit behind wage stagnation.

 

Ebola Nurse Hickox A Tool for Progressives? : Hickox IS Connected

Isn't this just more of the same from the progressive socialist democrats ? The thinking of the socialists democrats now in power in Washington, is if there is a crisis we have to exploit it to our political advantage. That people will die is of no consequence.

All that matters is getting and keeping power. Remember this when you vote in November - our country's survival is at stake

Ebola Nurse Kaci Hickox: Obama’s Tool?

A little background on Ebola nurse Kaci Hickox, who screeched like a stuck pig until Chris Christie released her from quarantine under pressure from On High:

http://dailycaller.com/2014/10/27/released-ebola-nurse-kaci-hickox-works-for-cdc-her-lawyer-is-a-white-house-visitor/

Hickox was released from Ebola quarantine in Newark, N.J., Monday afternoon after the White House pressured New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie to release the nurse that was working in Sierra Leone with Doctors Without Borders. Hickox’s case for release was also bolstered by New York civil rights attorney Norman Siegel, who took on Hickox’s case. …

Here’s an overlooked factor that could have contributed to her White House-backed release: Hickox is an official CDC Epidemic Intelligence Service (EIS) officer who performed work for the CDC in recent months.

As for her well-connected lawyer,

Hickox’s lawyer Norman Siegel, meanwhile, was an official guest at the White House State Dinner on Feb. 11, 2014, accompanying Jackie Robinson’s widow Rachel Robinson, who supported Siegel’s failed 2009 run for New York City Public Advocate. Siegel is the former director of the New York affiliate of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

It helps to have friends in high places. Or maybe it would be more appropriate to say, it helps to be useful to the regime in promoting its agenda. Natural News smells a rat:

The timing of Hickox’s quarantine, her ties with the party in power at the White House, the deliberate hiding of her ties to the CDC and the scrubbing of her LinkedIn.com profile all raise legitimate suspicion that her quarantine complaints have all been staged as a P.R. stunt to promote opposition to state-level Ebola quarantine efforts.

President Obama is already pressuring the Governors of NJ, NY and IL to reverse their quarantine protocols. “The Obama administration has expressed deep concerns to the governors of New York and New Jersey and is consulting with them to modify their orders to quarantine medical volunteers returning from West Africa,” reports the NY Times.

Placing a very vocal nurse in quarantine and encouraging her to complain about civil rights violations — all while arranging a mass media carpet bombing of the public with those complaints — seems far too convenient to be a coincidence. … It is difficult to believe that this quarantine outrage just happened to coincide with President Obama’s attempts to have the quarantines closed down.

Why would Obama want to close down attempts by states to fill the gap where the federal government refuses to do its job? For the same reason he did the same to Arizona when it attempted to enforce federal immigration law with SB1070 — and for the same reason potential Ebola vectors are still allowed to pour into the country from West Africa.

Whatever Alinskyite plans Obama has cooked up with Valerie Jarrett, the spread of Ebola throughout the USA appears to play a part in them.

 

 

 

Progressive Voters Deny Reality : Blinded by The Light!

Do we need to know more about the progressive socialist democrat voters then this? It's obvious to so many that this is a fact - living history is so hard to deny, and yet, the democrats stand shoulder to shoulder in living a fantasy.

Progressive Socialism : A Failure to Deliver

I think this picture illustrates just how bad the situation of  a declining economy and a foreign policy disaster that we now face due to the leadership of Mr Obama and the progressive socialist liberal democrats.

That this, to many means nothing, as millions of Americans will still vote for more democrats  this November.

What is it that make so many unable to see hard facts that they are actually living and suffering under and deny that they exist?

Is it just easier to put their hands over their eyes and ears then to confront reality? Are they so invested in allowing others to make decision that even when it comes to their own personal security they still opt out to others the responsibility of deciding what is best for themselves and their families?

Is this what we have come to in America? Where's the pride in accomplishment of a job well done? Is it easier to stand by while others take our pride in family and personal freedom away and replace it with dependency and poverty? But what we should be doing is standing up and demanding enough is enough by voting out those that are attacking of way of life that is based on liberty that the founding fathers gave so much to acquire, and that has brought so much prosperity to our country?

November can be the turning point to start the healing, or the end of a great country because no one cared enough to take a stand to save the greatest country in the world that has given us everything. As the saying goes, " Freedom means having nothing else to lose".

You choose.

Business Tax Reduction Works for Revenue Generation / Jobs Study Shows

Why is it that given proof that lowering taxes on business nearly guarantees more revenue generation as business expands and new businesses come into a state. It makes sense that if state makes the effort to reduce taxes, and prospective businesses see others succeed, will want to come into areas where the financial future is bright.

But just he opposite will occur where the prevailing political powers believe revenue generation is best accomplished by increasing taxes and not job creation. How is that possible, and yet as this study shows, many states still are dragging their collective feet, unwilling to change from a failing system that believes that by just taking from the productive they can succeed. 

Rather then allowing those that are productive, that will contribute to the over-all financial system by providing jobs as they expand their businesses, seek only to sustain systems that fail even in the face of others that are succeeding with tax reduction. Go figure!

Wyoming Ranks Best, New Jersey Worst, for Business Taxes
Source: Scott Drenkard and Joseph Henchman, "2015 State Business Tax Climate Index," Tax Foundation, October 28, 2014.

October 29, 2014

The Tax Foundation has released its annual business tax climate index, ranking the fifty states for the strength of their tax systems for business. According to Scott Drenkard and Joseph Henchman, the report's authors, the state's with the highest scores tended to lack major taxes like the corporate tax, sales tax or individual income tax, while the states with the lowest scores had confusing systems with high rates. Notably, Indiana and Utah -- while they do have all of the typical major taxes -- still scored in the top 10 because they impose low rates on a broad tax base.

According to the rankings, the top 10 states were Wyoming, South Dakota, Nevada, Alaska, Florida, Montana, New Hampshire, Indiana, Utah and Texas. At the bottom of the list were Iowa, Connecticut, Wisconsin, Ohio, Rhode Island, Vermont, Minnesota, California, New York and -- in last place -- New Jersey.

Drenkard and Henchman explain that a state tax system is critically important to economic growth, because a state's tax system is what can attract -- or repel -- new businesses and risk-taking. Taxes, they write, always diminish a company's profits, and when a business pays money to the government, it passes those costs elsewhere. Whether it is consumers who suffer from the taxes in the form of higher prices, employees who see lower wages or fewer jobs or shareholders who receive lower dividends, taxes undoubtedly have an impact.

The report identifies some changes in the rankings from last year's index to this year, which included the state of North Carolina. North Carolina jumped from 44th place up to 16th, based on its recent tax system overhaul which replaced its multi-bracketed income tax system with a single bracket with a flat rate, reduced its corporate income tax and simplified its sales tax.
 

Stock Market Yeild Historically Positive : Fear & Ignorance Drives People Out

Ignorance breeds fear and fear guarantees failure on matter what the situation. To succeed in any endeavor, one has to be prepared to make decisions that will effect outcomes. How else can a person make good decisions other then gathering knowledge of the subject? Knowledge is power to succeed.

Fear of the unknown is probably the greatest failing of the human spirit and drives many people to remain struggling for prosperity. Knowledge of the stock market and it's history of overall gain is lost on the ignorant and fearful.  

As studies show, and the polls substantiate, nearly halve of the population is willing to give up freedom to chose for them selves a life of prosperity for promised security that historical has proven never to come true. And yet, millions that vote each election for security promised by progressive socialist democrats never fulfill that promise. 

Who knew? More then 47% of the population today will vote for the socialist democrats to bring more promises of security, but will deliver only more failure and pain. This has gone on for decades but so many among us still seek the easy road of dependency.

This November, vote for success and prosperity for everyone, vote out the socialist democrats responsible for America's decline and dependency. There are no other options!

Holding onto Stocks during the Recession Yielded Benefits
Source: Josh Zumbrun, "Bad Stock-Market Timing Fueled Wealth Disparity," Wall Street Journal, October 27, 2014.

October 29, 2014

From 2009 to the present, stock values have almost tripled. Some investors reaped these benefits, while others -- many of whom had bought stocks when prices were rising in 1990s and the 2000s -- sold their stocks as the market tumbled, taking large losses.

Over at the Wall Street Journal, Josh Zumbrun reports that individuals' divergent responses when the stock market fell during the Great Recession is one reason behind growing wealth gaps, with many individuals and families simply selling their stocks at the wrong time:

• Looking at the bottom 90 percent of households, the share of households with stocks fell by 4.4 percentage points. According to the Survey of Consumer Finances by the Federal Reserve, that is as if 5.4 million households sold stocks.
• The top 20 percent of families are 5 percent less likely to own stocks today than they were in 2007.
• According to a study from University of Michigan economists, households with higher levels of education and the strongest stock portfolios tended to continue purchasing stocks during the market downturn, while other households were more likely to sell.

Those who remained in the market and held onto their stocks benefited greatly. Economist Frank Stafford gives the example of two investors who held $100,000 in stocks in 2007:

• If one of those families lost half of their stock portfolio value during the downturn and sold in 2009, they might have just $50,000 in a savings account today.
• If the other family, which also lost half of its stock value, held onto its stocks, it could have $130,000 in stock today.

By taking their dollars out of the stock market, many families are now unable to benefit from the stock market. According to Jeremy Siegel, a University of Pennsylvania economist, stocks have returned 6.7 percent annually, on average, over the last 200 years -- better than bonds, gold and the U.S. dollar.
 

Social Security Disability Needs Work Incentive Mandate : System Flaud / Abused

Social Security Disability is being used as an escape from having to work for a living. This abuse will diminish the ability of the system to help those that really need the help. Given the political climate that exist today with the progressive socialists that dominate the government at all levels, reform is not emanate.

We do have a chance to change the system of abuse by voting out those that are responsible this November. Vote out the democrats at all levels of government that are guilty of sustained political abuse of the system just to get and keep power by making sure as many people as possible remain dependent.

Injecting Work Incentives into the Social Security Disability Program
Source: Jagadeesh Gokhale, "SSDI Reform: Promoting Gainful Employment while Preserving Economic Security," Cato Institute, October 22, 2014.

October 29, 2014

In 2013, the Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) program spent $143 billion while taking in just $111 billion. That shortfall, explains Jagadeesh Gokhale, economist for the Cato Institute, will only continue, and the SSDI Trust Fund is projected to run out of money entirely in 2016.

In addition to being insolvent, Gokhale explains that the SSDI program -- intended to provide a safety net for individuals unable to work -- is full of work disincentives. Many individuals enrolled in the program are actually able to work, at least to some degree, but they choose not to for fear of losing SSDI benefits.

Gokhale explains that some individuals move into the SSDI program after exhausting unemployment benefits. Indeed, various research indicates that there are a number of SSDI enrollees with work capabilities:

• A study comparing identical SSDI applicants -- some of whom were admitted to the program while the rest were rejected from the program -- found that many rejected applicants returned to  the work force, indicating that over 25 percent of current SSDI beneficiaries actually have work capacity.
• Another study found the likelihood of a rejected SSDI applicant returning to work to be 35 percent.

If a substantial number of SSDI enrollees actually have work capabilities, shouldn't they be encouraged to exercise those capabilities and reenter the work force? Gokhale suggests a new benefit structure in order to induce enrollees to work rather than remain in SSDI, outside of the labor force, for fear of losing benefits. His plan would:

• Use a "benefit offset" that would reduce an enrollee's SSDI benefits if he enters the workforce but would provide an additional subsidy -- from a non-SSDI source -- based on his earnings.
• That subsidy would increase as his earnings increase, in order to encourage, rather than discourage, additional work.

In short, Gokhale describes his plan as one that would pay capable individuals to work rather than pay them to remain idle. While there are many SSDI enrollees who appear to have some level of work capability, they choose not to enter the labor force. By creating an incentive structure that only improves with work activity, Gokhale suggests more SSDI beneficiaries would return to work and seek employment.
 

Minimum Wage Increases Good Job Growth? : Facts Say Untrue

The debate goes on as to who will benefit from a minimum wage increase and who will lose. Nearly all studies show most people that could benefit from a wage increase will be turned out as these people for most part are unskilled and their employers will not be able to cover the increased expense and still stay in business.

Who knew? Worse, who cares? The people that have their hair on fire to have the wage increases are not doing so to benefit the workers, this is scam by the progressives socialist democrats, the unions, to increase the voter base and fill dwindling finances.

The gain for the democrats will be the thousands that get the wage increase, and the millions that will lose their jobs and go on welfare. Who cares indeed.

Minimum Wage Supporters Tout Misleading Jobs Figures
Source: Erin Shannon, "Minimum wage increases in the states are unrelated to job growth," Washington Policy Center, October 2014.

October 29, 2014

Minimum wage advocates are touting new figures from the Department of Labor which indicates that 12 of the 13 states that increased their minimum wages during the first half of 2014 saw higher job growth than the states that did not increase their minimum wages. According to the Labor Department, those minimum wage states saw 0.85 percent growth, while the other states had 0.61 percent growth.

But does that mean that raising the minimum wage creates job growth? Hardly.  Erin Shannon of the Washington Policy Center explains what's going on behind the numbers in a new study.

The fact that some states that raised their minimum wages saw increased job growth is no indication that the wage hikes caused that growth. Nearly every U.S. state has seen job growth during the first half of 2014, and most of the states with the highest job growth actually did not increase their minimum wages.
According to Shannon:

• Of the top three states for job growth (North Dakota, Nevada and Utah), none increased their minimum wages in 2014, and North Dakota does not have a minimum wage at all. Two of the bottom three states for growth (Vermont and New Jersey), however, did increase their minimum wages.
• Of the top 20 states for job growth, just five increased their minimum wages.
• Seventeen states had unemployment rates significantly below the national average of 6.1 percent. Only one of those states raised its minimum wage this year.

Florida, Oregon, Colorado and Washington ranked fourth, seventh, eighth and eleventh, respectively, for job growth during the first half of 2014. Yet those wage hikes cannot have had a significant impact on job creation, according to Shannon. She explains:

• The increases were not passed by Congress but take place automatically under a state law which adjusts the minimum wage annually according to inflation.
• Those four states saw very small increases -- less than 3 percent and ranging from 13 cents in Washington to 22 cents in Colorado. It requires a larger increase in the minimum wage to produce negative job effects. According to economists, a 10 percent increase in the minimum wage leads to a 2 to 3 percent drop in employment.
• Because the wage increases take place automatically each year, they are predictable.

Shannon also noted that while Arizona and Florida had high job growth and an increased minimum wage, both states suffered heavy losses during the Great Recession. Job creation in those states is largely about trying to make up for recession losses, not additional growth. Of the eighteen U.S. states that have recovered all of the jobs that they lost during the economic downturn, only four of them (Colorado, Montana, New York and Washington) increased their minimum wages this year.                       
 

Medicare Drug Plans Need Reform : Abuse & Fraud Abound

Federal Government bureaucrats know what's best for everyone. That Part D is off limits for control is just another crippling aspect of big government's failure to deliver. Who knew?

This November, vote out the big government socialists that have made the people of this country 'enemies of the state'. Failure to do so is not an option.

Medicare Drug Plans Need the Tools to Fight Fraud
Source: Devon M. Herrick, "Medicare Drug Plans Need the Tools to Fight Prescription Drug Fraud," National Center for Policy Analysis, October 29, 2014. 

October 29, 2014

More than 16,000 people die every year from abusing pain relievers, according to research from the Centers for Disease Control. And for every one prescription drug death, 10 people are admitted for prescription drug substance abuse treatment and there are 32 related emergency room visits. Indeed, prescription drug abuse is not a small problem: for every death, there are 130 other people chronically abusing opioid pain relievers and 825 nonmedical users of opioids.

As NCPA Senior Fellow Devon Herrick explains in a new report, prescription drug abuse is made possible through fraud; individuals may visit multiple doctors for pain prescriptions and fill the prescriptions at different pharmacies, evading detection, in order to feed their own addictions or sell drugs to others. But while individual doctors and pharmacies may not recognize that a patient is abusing drugs, drug plans can easily identify questionable drug utilization and detect potential fraud.

The problem, explains Herrick, is that Medicare Part D drug plans are not allowed to take action on such fraud; while state Medicaid programs allow drug plans to restrict enrollees with questionable drug utilization to using just one doctor or one pharmacy, Medicare Part D plans have no such authority.

As a result, there is little that Part D drug plans can do to combat prescription drug abuse, which, in addition to being unsafe, is expensive: drug diversion costs insurers $75 billion annually by one estimate. It requires countless unnecessary office visits and 1.2 million emergency room visits each year. An individual who is "doctor shopping" in order to obtain numerous prescriptions might visit a dozen doctors each month, undergoing unnecessary and redundant tests at each visit.

Herrick argues that Medicare Part D should institute a "Lock In" program, which would allow drug plans to restrict an individual who has demonstrated questionable drug-seeking behavior to using just one doctor or one pharmacy -- or both -- for that particular drug.

State Medicaid programs which have these plans (and 46 states have plans that lock certain Medicaid enrollees into specific providers) have been able to generate cost savings and reduce narcotic drug use.
 

Climate Changers Found Fraudulent : Satellite Data Proves 'Changers' Wrong

To continue to claim global warming as a threat to our survival is proof the environmentalists and progressive democrats are mentally deranged, that is, the gene for insanity is dominate in these people which forces 'the warmers and changers' to say things that are beyond comprehension for the common citizen. 

But when the common citizen doesn't die from heat exhaustion or drown from the rising sea levels, they begin to take notice and wonder just what all the $billions of tax dollars are going for. And on top all this hot air from the warmers, there demands of more money for research to save the planet just happens to coincide with the roll out of the newest Mercedes Benzes, citizens get up set.

Who’s The Warmest of Them All?

(From Power Line Blog)

The climatistas are already wetting their pants with the news that 2014 is supposedly on track to be the warmest year evah! The AP’s environmental “reporter” Seth Borenstein (who is really just an environmental activist with a byline, like most environmental “reporters”*) has told us so.
Not so fast, says Dr. Roy Spencer, who is, as you may recall, one of the inventors of the NASA satellite systems that give us the most accurate global temperature readings: “I claim 2014 won’t be the warmest global-average year on record. . .   With only 3 months left in the year, there is no realistic way for 2014 to set a record in the satellite data.”
Spencer explains that the claim of the hottest year on record is based on surface thermometer data and is not backed up by the satellite data:

[T]hermometers cannot measure global averages — only satellites can. The satellite instruments measure nearly every cubic kilometer – hell, every cubic inch — of the lower atmosphere on a daily basis. You can travel hundreds if not thousands of kilometers without finding a thermometer nearby. . .
[T]he alarmists will continue to use the outdated, spotty, and heavily-massaged thermometer data to support their case. For a group that trumpets the high-tech climate modeling effort used to guide energy policy — models which have failed to forecast (or even hindcast!) the lack of warming in recent years — they sure do cling bitterly to whatever will support their case.
As British economist Ronald Coase once said, “If you torture the data long enough, it will confess to anything.” Here’s the chart of the two satellite temperature series (Spencer explains the difference and divergence between the two in the complete post if you’re interested, but the point is, both fail to validate the pants-wetters.)

Spencer goes on to explain that even if 2014 does come in as the warmest year ever, it is still no reason to wet your pants:

Which brings me to my second point. If global temperatures were slowly rising at, say, a hundredth of a degree per year and we didn’t have cool La nina or warm El Nino years, then every year would be a new record warm year.
But so what?
It’s the amount of temperature rise that matters. And for a planet where all forms of life experience much wider swings in temperature than “global warming” is producing, which might be 1 deg. C so far, those life forms — including the ones who vote — really don’t care that much. We are arguing over the significance of hundredths of a degree, which no one can actually feel.

* Several years ago the Society of Environmental Journalists (SEJ) invited Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to give a keynote address at their annual meeting. The assembled environmental “journalists” gave him a standing ovation. QED. (To her credit, a New York Times reporter of my acquaintance who was in the audience did not join the ovation and told me privately that she thought the ovation was a “disgrace.”) On another occasion about 10 years ago now, the SEJ invited me to come and debate then-Rep. Mark Udall. Udall backed out at the last minute, and the SEJ rescinded its invitation to me rather than let me appear by myself.  I used the same term directly with the head of the SEJ that the Obama administration is using for Netanyahu this week.  Heh.

 

Tesla Sales Directly to Consumers : Michigan Says No ; Why Not?

Well, it seems it's politics as usual, the dealerships and the established manufactures have decided that the consumers should not a say in their vehicle purchasing decisions. This is just like most other federal government policy of regulation and laws that imamate from those that believe they are the smartest people in the room.

It's just amazing how transparent they are in their power grabs, but unfortunately the general public is so slow to see and understand what is happening to their individual freedoms to choose.

Tesla should have the right to sell their cars any way they want. It's the American way of things.

Michigan Bans Tesla Sales
Source: Jared Meyer, "'Anti-Tesla Bill' Means Economic Loss for Michigan," Townhall.com, October 25, 2014.

October 28, 2014

The state of Michigan has banned the sale of Teslas, a move which will only hurt Michigan residents, writes Jared Meyer of Economics21.

Tesla sells its cars directly to consumers, unlike most car manufacturers which sell their vehicles through dealerships. With such a model, Tesla can reach its consumers directly and avoid price negotiations with dealerships. By banning Tesla's direct sales, Michigan is hurting the state's economy:

• Teslas can cost over $100,000. Banning the vehicles will undoubtedly cost the state tax revenue.
• Those who support the Tesla ban claim that it is in the name of consumer safety, but it is really about economic protectionism. Significantly, Meyer points out that General Motors, Ford and Chrysler have spent $34 million on lobbying and political contributions so far this election season. Tesla has spent $8,600.
• Consumers see higher prices from the dealership model. According to a Department of Justice report, the traditional automobile distribution system is responsible for almost one-third of a vehicle's price. Half of that is due to dealerships.

Meyer writes that the dealership model does have benefits and it can offer consumers flexible prices and a place to service vehicles. However, if the model is superior and more beneficial to consumers, Meyer contends that the state should not have to ban Tesla from using the direct sale model. There are many Michigan residents who may appreciate and prefer the ease of doing business with Tesla directly, writes Meyer. Unfortunately, the new law takes that choice away from consumers.

Tax Code Must Be Reformed For Prosperity

Tax reform can only take place when those that we elect to congress and the presidency really believe form is necessary, other wise nothing will happen. It will be business as usual, corruption and waste of our treasure and legacy.

The bottom line is, do the people care what really happens in the country if the impact of the corruption doesn't effect them directly? In the end of course it will be devastating, but the level of ignorance of money and finances is huge, and therefore it's only when people are standing in the soup line do they begin to wonder how it all came to be. By then, of course, it's too late.

This November 4th is a good time to start the turn around to save our country by voting out those that brought us the problem in the first place, the progressive socialist liberal democrats.

Fixing the Tax Code
Source: Curtis S. Dubay, "How Tax Reform Would Help American Families," Heritage Foundation, October 20, 2014.

October 28, 2014

Full of mismatched incentives, the American tax code is in dire need of reform, yet there has been relatively little pressure from families on Congress to make necessary changes. Why? Curtis Dubay of the Heritage Foundation says that tax reformers have done a poor job of explaining to American families how changes to the tax code would improve their economic situation.
Dubay hits on some of the main problems with the current tax code:

• High tax rates discourage families from sending a second worker into the labor force, because after accounting for the additional costs of a second worker -- such as child care and transportation, among others -- the high rates make the benefits of a second job not worth the costs.
• Because saving money is taxed -- interest income, dividends and capital gains are all hit with high tax rates -- American families are encouraged to spend money rather than save it. This only hurts families' financial security and ability to cover costs in the future.
• Many businesses pay income taxes on the business owner's individual tax return. When they face high tax rates, they are left with fewer dollars to reinvest in their businesses, raise wages and create additional jobs.
• Investment is highly taxed, so investors become more risk averse. This limits their willingness to invest in new businesses, and the drop in entrepreneurship limits the growth of new jobs.

How could these problems be fixed? Dubay offers a number of solutions, including:

• By transitioning the tax code into a system with a single, low rate, second earners could more easily enter the labor force, and incomes would rise.
• Taxing consumption (what Americans take out of the economy) rather than investment (what they put into the economy) would get rid of the incentives that discourage saving.
• By getting rid of investment taxes, Americans would put their money towards new business ventures, creating jobs as well as new products for consumers.

Dubay cites research from the Tax Foundation which indicates that American families could see their wages rise by 10 percent over 10 years due to tax reform.
 

Italy's Labor Law Reforms : Millions Protest

Look no further the United States for the insanity of labor laws. The Italians have a flawed system for sure but the US is close. Just look at the mess in New York City with teacher union system of firing or just laying off bad teachers.

It takes years, if ever, to get rid of a bad teacher, and all the while they are out of the class room they are getting paid their full salary!! The National Labor Relation board tried to stopped Boeing from moving to a state that didn't demand Boeing workers join a union.

Reforming Italy's Labor Laws
Source: "Italy's Economic Suicide Movement," Wall Street Journal, October 26, 2014.

October 28, 2014

The official unemployment rate in Italy is 12 percent. The European nation's labor market is in disarray, and its labor code of nearly 3,000 pages is in dire need of reform. Italy's Prime Minister, Matteo Renzi, is attempting to make such reforms, but the Wall Street Journal reports that many Italians are not pleased. Just this weekend, 1 million protestors came to Rome to object to Renzi's proposals.

But with its difficult labor laws, it is no wonder that Italy's economy is in trouble:

• Cassa Integrazione Guadagni is a scheme that allows Italian businesses who need to shave their workforce to put a worker on "standby" rather than fire him outright. The government will pay the worker a large portion of his lost salary until he is rehired. Such a program keeps workers from moving to new jobs while businesses struggle to compete.
• Firing a worker in Italy for poor performance is incredibly difficult, and employers have to convince a judge that there is no alternative option available to the employer short of firing the worker. These hearings can take months, and litigation is not cheap.
• According to the World Economic Forum, Italy ranked 141st out of 144 countries in terms of its hiring and firing practices.
• Italian unions are stubborn, and businesses -- in order to avoid having to negotiate with them -- stay small. Of all the countries in the European Union, Italy has the largest number of small businesses because companies are concerned about what growth would mean in terms of union negotiations.

All of these factors are burdensome and make Italian businesses slow to hire new workers, wreaking havoc on the Italian economy. The Prime Minister has proposed a relatively modest set of reforms, yet his country's workers remain adamantly opposed to them.
 

Fixing the Doc Fix : Reforming Medicare

This is a good article on how this situation can be repaired by reform of Medicare and the free market.

Fixing the Doc Fix
Source:  Hadley Manning, "Doc Fix Problems and Solutions," Independent Women's Forum, November 2014.

October 28, 2014

Medicare's "doc fix" is in need of reform, argues Hadley Manning, the director of health policy at the Independent Women's Forum.
Since 1997, the "Sustainable Growth Rate" (SGR) formula has been a part of Medicare, intended to control costs by automatically reducing, from year to year, reimbursement rates for doctors participating in the Medicare program.
In reality, however, the cuts do not take place; since 2003, Congress has overridden the SGR and prevented the cuts to doctors. This is more commonly known as the "doc fix." Manning explains why the SGR cuts and doc fix are so problematic:

• Medicare needs to cut costs (the Medicare Trust Fund is running out of money and the program has a 75-year unfunded liability of $30 trillion), but if the SGR cuts as they are currently set take place, doctors -- many of whom are already unwilling to treat Medicare patients -- will be more likely to refuse to take new Medicare patients.
• Medicare already reimburses doctors less than private plans. In 2013, 28 percent of Medicare patients had difficulty finding a new doctor. With the SGR cuts, that number will rise, because doctors will have little incentive to take on new patients.
• Doctors who do take on Medicare patients raise their prices on patients with private insurance plans to make up for losses. According to Milliman, a consulting firm, a typical privately-insured family pays $1,800 more than they otherwise would to health care providers in order to make up for underpayments from the government.
• The doc fix leads to lobbying every year on the part of doctors' groups, which Manning deems a waste of resources.
• It masks the costs of health care, because budget scoring agencies -- which incorporate the SGR cuts into their budget predictions -- produce inaccurate and misleading estimates of Medicare's costs.

Manning says that Medicare needs a real, long-term solution for doctor reimbursement. Rather than the annual doc fix, she suggests transforming Medicare into a premium support program, meaning that the government would give seniors funds with which they could purchase their own private insurance plan. As a result, seniors would have more choice and reimbursement rates would be determined not by a government formula but by doctors and insurance companies.
 

Minimum Wage Debate Needs Clarity of Outcomes

When a problem is properly explained, the general public will be able to make rational decisions that will have good outcomes for everyone. It stands to reason that pollsters should be seen with skepticism when the results of a poll can turn on the wording alone.

Minimum Wage Leads to Benefit Cuts, Unemployment
Source: Iain Murray, "Minimum wage, maximum damage," Washington Examiner, October 27, 2014.

October 28, 2014

While many in the public may be in favor of raising the minimum wage, Iain Murray, vice president at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, explains why such legislation would harm the people it is alleged to help.

Seventy-nine percent of economists agree that the minimum wage increases unemployment for young and unskilled workers, and numerous studies on the effect of the wage confirm that view. For example:

• A 2007 study by economists David Neumark and William Wascher analyzed 100 minimum wage studies, finding that two-thirds of the studies showed negative effects of the wage on employment. Most damage was to low-skilled workers and the young. Just one-eighth of the studies found positive effects.
• A study by professor Aspen Gorry showed how the minimum wage impacts youth because it affects a worker's ability to gain job experience. He found that the 2007 federal minimum wage increase raised unemployment generally by 0.8 percentage points but unemployment for 15- to 24-year-olds by nearly 3 percentage points.
• France has a minimum wage of $12 per hour and a youth unemployment rate of 24 percent -- twice the rate in the United States. According to Gorry, the difference is entirely due to France's wage rate.

How does the minimum wage remain so popular if it has such negative effects? Murray says that most people only see the paychecks that rise, while few see the negative effects that follow: job losses, cuts to hours, increases in automation and a loss of fringe benefits. Moreover, many workers -- often the young and most unskilled -- are simply not hired in the first place due to minimum wage increases.

The loss of fringe benefits is one that NCPA Senior Fellow Richard McKenzie analyzed in a recent study. He explained that, while many minimum wage advocates will claim there are relatively few job losses from minimum wage hikes, the hikes have effects in other areas: the nonmonetary fringe benefits that employers offer their employees. Indeed, Murray explains that the loss of benefits is exactly what has happened in SeaTac, Washington, which recently raised its minimum wage to $15 per hour:

• The Northwest Asian Weekly reports that one hotel cleaning lady in SeaTac said of the wage, "It sounds good, but it's not good." Since the increase, she has lost her 401(k), employer health insurance, paid holidays and vacations. And while her employer previously fed her and covered her parking costs, she is now responsible for both of those expenses.
• One SeaTac waitress reported similar effects. Not only have her tips decreased, but her employer quit covering her parking and food costs.

Consumers are also hit by the wage increase, as fast food restaurants will pass on the increased labor costs to their customers.

Murray cites an interesting poll from Bloomberg News from March 2014. When it asked respondents whether they supported the minimum wage rising to $10.10 per hour, 69 percent supported the proposal while 28 percent opposed it. But then the poll changed its wording, explaining to respondents that a CBO study found that the wage increase would increase 16.5 million Americans' incomes but destroy 500,000 jobs. When asked whether that trade off was acceptable or unacceptable, only 34 percent found it acceptable.
 

Health Care Insurance Purchases : Free Market Solutions

Free market solutions always are better then ones that are controlled by institutions, government, that have agendas that are different from your own and have the power to dictate outcomes.

Republicans have always wanted to make changes to the process of how people bought their health care insurance but have always been stifled by government dictating who will sell insurance and where it will be purchased.

 Little wonder the cost of health care and insurance was and is still expensive and getting now more so with ObamaCare.

What Happens When Consumers Shop for Health Care?
Source: Jason Millman, "The incredible cost savings that are possible when patients can actually shop around," Washington Post, October 21, 2014; Christopher Whaley et al., "Association Between Availability of Health Service Prices and Payments for These Services," Journal of the American Medical Association, October 22, 2014.

October 23, 2014

Price transparency is hardly a novel concept -- if someone wants to purchase a new car or hire a yard service, he would typically explore the different available options to find a good price. And providers' cost information is readily available; what consumer wants to blindly purchase something only to find out the cost later?

In health care, however, price transparency is quite uncommon. Finding out the cost of even the most basic of procedures, writes Jason Millman at the Washington Post, can be a challenge. NCPA researchers have written extensively on the lack of clear pricing within the health care sector. With the exception of cosmetic surgery, where consumers know their costs and pay out of pocket (and where prices have dropped over the last two decades as a result), health care is largely lacking in transparency.

That state of affairs, writes Millman, is beginning to change; as health care costs rise and more consumers are being asked to pay their own costs out of pocket (rather than those costs being covered by a third party), consumers are becoming more aware of the prices associated with medical procedures.

Castlight Health is a business that provides health price information to employers. It recently conducted a study on the impact of price transparency on consumer behavior. Studying 500,000 people enrolled in employer health care plans, Castlight determined that those consumers who used the company's price transparency system and were able to see the precise cost of any procedure had lower payments for all of the services studied: imaging services, CT scans and clinician office visits. According to Castlight:

• Advanced imaging tests were 13 percent lower for those who used the transparency tool, with an average savings of $124.74.
• Lab tests cost 14 percent less for those who checked the prices before agreeing to the services.
• Clinician office visits were 1 percent cheaper for those checking prices.

In the current market, health care providers do not compete on price, because the majority of a patient's health care costs are paid for by a third party, not for the consumer himself. As NCPA Senior Fellow Devon Herrick has explained, in the health care markets in which consumers shoulder the cost of their care, costs are more stable.
 

Inconvenient Truth : Mr Obama, Weak & Delusional

The sad part here is there are millions of people who refuse to see the flaw that drives Mr Obama. He believes he is royalty, the "one" that everyone has been waiting for.

But as Mr Obama sees himself as infallible, the population is beginning to see him as the man behind the curtain, is nothing special but actually delusional and weak.

Worse, he has the power to cause great damage to our country and is doing so at every turn. Little wonder then when the truth becomes inconvenient, he uses lies to cover his failures caused by his unacceptable ideology of tyranny.

Europe's Existence Parished With Auschwitz

The author here is unknown but something to understand - there is a force in this world that if not confronted and destroyed will destroy us. History is riff with examples of civilizations that ignored the warning signs and perished.

 

If anyone believes this can not happen to us is delusional as our own government is denying the attacks on our country are not terrorists by just violent people. The progressive socialists use this coming catastrophe as a means to gain political power.

 

By denying the existence of terror, they are willing participants in our destruction.

 

What really died at Auschwitz? 

 

Here's an interesting viewpoint:

 

The following is a copy of an article written by Spanish writer Sebastian Vilar Rodrigez and published in a Spanish newspaper on Jan. 15 2011.

It doesn't take much imagination to extrapolate the message to the rest of Europe - and possibly to the rest of the world.

 

THIS WAS IN A SPANISH NEWSPAPER: "EUROPEAN LIFE DIED IN AUSCHWITZ" By Sebastian Vilar Rodrigez

 

"I walked down the street in Barcelona and suddenly discovered a terrible truth - Europe died in Auschwitz ... We killed six million Jews and replaced them with 20 million Muslims. In Auschwitz we burned a culture, thought, creativity, talent. We destroyed the chosen people, truly chosen, because they produced great and wonderful people who changed the world.

 

The contribution of this people is felt in all areas of life: science, art, international trade, and above all, as the conscience of the world. These are the people we burned.

 

And under the pretence of tolerance, and because we wanted to prove to ourselves that we were cured of the disease of racism, we opened our gates to 20 million Muslims, who brought us stupidity and ignorance, religious extremism and lack of tolerance, crime and poverty, due to an unwillingness to work and support their families with pride.

 

They have blown up our trains and turned our beautiful Spanish cities into the third world, drowning in filth and crime. Shut up in the apartments they receive free from the government, they plan the murder and destruction of their naive hosts.

 

And thus, in our misery, we have exchanged culture for fanatical hatred, creative skill for destructive skill, intelligence for backwardness and superstition. We have exchanged the pursuit of peace of the Jews of Europe and their talent for a better future for their children, their determined clinging to life because life is holy, for those who pursue death, for people consumed by the desire for death for themselves and others, for our children and theirs.

 

What a terrible mistake was made by miserable Europe .

 

A lot of Americans have become so insulated from reality that they imagine America can suffer defeat without any inconvenience to themselves. Recently, the UK debated whether to remove The Holocaust from its school curriculum because it 'offends' the Muslim population which claims it never occurred. It is not removed as yet. However, this is a frightening portent of the fear that is gripping the world and how easily each country is giving in to it.

 

It is now more than sixty years after the Second World War in Europe ended. This is a memorial in memory of the six million Jews, twenty million Russians, ten million Christians, and nineteen-hundred Catholic priests who were 'murdered, raped, burned, starved, beaten, experimented on and humiliated.' Now, more than ever, with Iran, among others, claiming the Holocaust to be 'a myth,' it is imperative to make sure the world never forgets.

 

How many years will it be before the attack on the ???World Trade Centre??? 'NEVER HAPPENED' because it offends some Muslim in the United States ? If our Judeo-Christian heritage is offensive to Muslims, they should pack up and move to Iran, Iraq or some other Muslim country.

 

"The world will not be destroyed by those who do evil, but by those who watch and do nothing"?? - Albert Einstein

                                                 

---

 

               
                            

 

 

 

Affordable Heath Care Act for Seniors (ObamaCare) : Golden Retreivers Have it Better

Next week we have a chance to begin to change the country from socialist nightmare back to some sort of Democracy and bring back individual freedom. Believe to stop ObamaCare from destroying everyone's personal lives, it will destroy your children's as well, you will have to understand who brought this to us and the vote accordingly.

 

 

Two patients limp into two different  doctors' offices with the same complaint: Both have  trouble walking and may require hip surgery.  Patient 1. is examined  within the hour, is x-rayed the same day and has a time booked for surgery  the following week.

 

Patient 2. sees his  family doctor after waiting 3 weeks for an  appointment, then waits 8 weeks to  see a specialist, then gets an x-ray,  which isn't reviewed for another week  and finally has his surgery scheduled for 6 months from then,  pending  the review boards decision on his age and remaining value to  society.

 

Why the different  treatment for the 2 patients?

 

The FIRST is a Golden  Retriever taken to a vet. 

The SECOND is a Senior  Citizen on Obama care.

In November, if there  is no change in government, we'll all have to find a good  vet