LAYOFFS AND DOWNSIZING....

Has anyone out there ever been laid-off or downsized?

I can tell you one group that never has suffered this indignity. Our ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES!!

When a company falls on difficult times, one of the things that seems to happen is they reduce their staff and workers. The remaining workers need to find ways to continue to do a good job or risk that their job would be eliminated as well. Wall street, and the media normally congratulate the CEO for making this type of "tough decision", and his board of directors gives him a big bonus.

Our government should not be immune from similar risks.

Therefore: Reduce the House of Representatives from the current 435 members to 218 members and Senate members from 100 to 50 (one per State). Also reduce remaining staff by 25%.

Accomplish this over the next 8 years. (two steps / two elections) and of course this would require some redistricting.

Some Yearly Monetary Gains Include:

$44,108,400 for elimination of base pay for congress. (267 members X $165,200 pay / member / yr.)

$97,175,000 for elimination of the above people's staff. (estimate $1.3 Million in staff per each member of the House, and $3 Million in staff per each member of the Senate every year)

$240,294 for the reduction in remaining staff by 25%.

$7,500,000,000 reduction in pork barrel ear-marks each year. (those members whose jobs are gone. Current estimates for total government pork earmarks are at $15 Billion / yr)

The remaining representatives would need to work smarter and would need to improve efficiencies. It might even be in their best interests to work together for the good of our country?

We may also expect that smaller committees might lead to a more efficient resolution of issues as well. It might even be easier to keep track of what your representative is doing.

Congress has more tools available to do their jobs than it had back in 1911 when the current number of representatives was established. (telephone, computers, cell phones to name a few)

Note:
Congress did not hesitate to head home when it was a holiday, when the nation needed a real fix to the economic problems. Also, there were 3 senators that were not doing their jobs while on the campaign trail for 18+ months) but were still accepting full pay. These facts alone support a reduction in senators & congress.

Summary of opportunity:

$ 44,108,400 reduction of congress members.

$282,100, 000 for elimination of the reduced house member staff.

$150,000,000 for elimination of reduced senate member staff.

$59,675,000 for 25% reduction of staff for remaining house members.

$37,500,000 for 25% reduction of staff for remaining senate members.

$7,500,000,000 reduction in pork added to bills by the reduction of congress members.

$8,073,383,400.00 per year, estimated total savings. (that's 8-BILLION just to start!)

Big business does these types of cuts all the time.

If Congresspersons were required to serve 20, 25 or 30 years (like everyone else) in order to collect retirement benefits there is no telling how much we would save. Now they get full retirement after serving only ONE term.

IF you are happy how the Congress spends our taxes, then just ignore this post. IF you are NOT at all happy, then I assume you know what to do.

Next Week: The Administration! What we might call the CEO and Staff!

A.M.

YOU'RE FIRED!

BANK BAILOUTS...

Big bailouts for 'higher-ups' anger left-out middle class
Santa Rosa Press Democrat - ?19 hours ago? The massive government bailouts and Obama's housing rescue plan have stirred passions across the nation as people debate whether such help is necessary or ...

Bank Bailouts and Trust Preferreds: Still Too Much Risk Here
Seeking Alpha - ?5 minutes ago? With the statements and actions of the Fed and Treasury continuing to show favoritism toward maintaining the solvency of financial institutions

Treasury details "stress test" for banks looking for bailouts
Consumer reports - ?Feb 25, 2009? The two-part "Capital Assistance Program" will give banks access to the remainder of the government's $700 billion bailout fund. One part of the plan

Northern Trust under fire for lavish parties
ABC7Chicago.com - ?Feb 24, 2009? Kerry plans to introduce a bill this week to end what he calls extravagant spending practices of banks that receive taxpayer bailouts. ...




“Hell, back in 1990, the Government seized the Mustang Ranch brothel in Nevada for tax evasion and, as required by law, tried to run it. They failed and it closed. Now we are trusting the economy of our country and our banking system to the same nit-wits who couldn't make money running a whore house and selling whiskey!"

....Elliott

CONSERVATISM vs. LIBERALISIM

History 101 (Crash course)

For those that don't know about history ... Here is a condensed version:

Humans originally existed as members of small bands of nomadic hunters/gatherers. They lived on deer in the mountains during the summer and would go to the coast and live on fish and lobster in the winter.

The two most important events in all of history were the invention of beer and the invention of the wheel. The wheel was invented to get man to the beer. These were the foundations of modern civilization and together were the catalyst for the splitting of humanity into two distinct subgroups:

1. Liberals (the gatherers)
2. Conservatives. (the hunters)

Once beer was discovered, it required grain and that was the beginning of agriculture. Neither the glass bottle nor aluminum can were invented yet, so while our early humans were sitting around waiting for them to be invented, they just stayed close to the brewery. That's how villages were formed.

Some men spent their days tracking and killing animals to B-B-Q at night while they were drinking beer. This was the beginning of what is known as the Conservative movement.

Other men who were weaker and less skilled at hunting learned to live off the Conservatives by showing up for the nightly B-B-Q's and doing the sewing, fetching, and hair dressing. This was the beginning of the Liberal movement.

Some of these liberal men eventually became known as girlie-men. Some noteworthy liberal achievements include the domestication of cats, the invention of group therapy, group hugs, and the concept of democratic voting to decide how to divide the meat and beer that conservatives provided.

Over the years Conservatives came to be symbolized by the largest, most powerful land animal on earth, the elephant. Liberals are symbolized by the jackass.

Modern liberals like imported beer (with lime added), but most prefer white wine or imported bottled water. They eat raw fish but like their beef well done. Sushi, tofu, and French food are standard liberal fare. Another interesting evolutionary side note: most of their women have higher testosterone levels than their men. Most government social workers, and employee's, personal injury lawyer's, journalists, dreamers in Hollywood and group therapists are liberals. Liberals invented the designated hitter rule because it wasn't fair to make the pitcher also bat.

Conservatives drink domestic beer, mostly Bud. They eat red meat and provide for their family & community. Conservatives are big-game hunters, rodeo cowboys, lumberjacks, construction workers, firemen, medical doctors, police officers, corporate executives, attorney’s, athletes, members of the military, airline pilots, teachers who believe in our founding fathers, and generally anyone who works productively. Conservatives who own companies hire other conservatives who want to work for a living.

Liberals produce little or nothing. They like to govern the producers and decide what to do with the production. Liberals believe Europeans are more enlightened than Americans. That is why most of the liberals remained in Europe when conservatives were coming to America . They crept in after the Wild West was tamed and created a business of trying to get something for nothing.

When a fishing boat comes to the dock, Liberals want to confiscate some of the fish to feed those who cannot fish. Conservatives want to hire people to fish and let them learn how to buy their own boat.

Here ends today's lesson in world history:

It should be noted that a Liberal may have a momentary urge to angrily respond to the above.

A Conservative will simply laugh and be so convinced of the absolute truth of this history that it will be forwarded immediately to other true believers and to more liberals just to tick them off.

And there you have it. Let your next action reveal your true self.

WE LIVE IN THE LAND OF THE FREE, ONLY BECAUSE OF THE BRAVE

Thanks to Ron V.

Note: This is NOT about Republicans and Democrats. It’s a distinction as to what you believe about the Constitution, National Defense, Personal Responsibility, Fiscal Responsibility, and most importantly Freedom!
Moderates are a melding of Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, and all others that believe in the above ideas.

War was declared on the United States of America
2,724 days, 9 hours, 24 minutes and 12 seconds ago.

Conservatives want to end the war in victory for the people of Iraq, so they may also have personal and economic freedom.
Liberals choose to walk away, because it has just ‘taken too long”, AND there would be more money to spend on people in this country who want more hand-outs.

REGONOMICS vs OBAMANOMICS

With regards to:

Peter Ferrara
Director, Entitlement and Budget Policy, Institute for Policy Innovation

President Reagan’s economic recovery plan included four specific components on which he explicitly campaigned over and over and then implemented once elected.

These were:
1. Reductions in tax rates to restore incentives for economic growth. This consisted of, first, a reduction in the top income tax rate of 70% down to 50%, and then a 25% across the board reduction in income tax rates for everyone. The 1986 tax reform then reduced tax rates further, leaving just two rates, 28% and 15%. Reagan also cut corporate income tax rates and capital gains tax rates
2. Spending Reductions. The reductions included a $31 billion cut in spending in 1981, close to 5% of the federal budget then, or the equivalent of about $150 billion in spending cuts for the year in 2008. In constant dollars, non-defense discretionary spending declined by 14.4% from 1981 to 1982, and by 16.8% from 1981 to 1983. Moreover, in constant dollars, this non-defense discretionary spending never returned to its 1981 level for the rest of Reagan’s two terms! By 1988, this spending was still down 14.4% from its 1981 level in constant dollars. Even with the Reagan defense buildup, total federal spending declined from a high of 23.5% of GDP in 1983 to 21.3% in 1988 and 21.2% in 1989. That’s a real reduction in the size of government relative to the economy of 10%
3. Anti-inflation monetary policy to restrain money supply growth.
4. Deregulation. Reagan’s deregulation plan has now saved consumers an estimated $100 billion per year in lower prices. Reagan’s first executive order, in fact, eliminated price controls on oil and natural gas. Production soared, and the price of oil declined by over 50%.
The results were spectacular. These four components produced a 25-year economic boom from 1982 to 2007. In their new book, “The End of Prosperity,” Art Laffer and Steve Moore call the these years “the greatest period of wealth creation in the history of the planet.” They note that — adjusted for inflation– more wealth and income was created during this Reagan boom than in any other prior period in U.S. history. That’s right, than any other entire period dating from President George Washington all the way up to Ronald Reagan.
But Barack Obama is doing exactly the opposite on each of these four points:
–He is still promising tax rate increases, at least by letting the Bush tax cuts expire.
–He just passed the greatest increase in government spending in the history of the planet.
–He is promising massive increases in regulatory burdens, including global warming cap and trade regulation that would cost the economy another trillion dollars a year.
–The Fed is already furiously reinflating the money supply, sowing seeds of further havoc in the future.
Even the Obama tax cuts do not follow the Reagan economic recovery plan because they are not reductions in tax rates, which is what drives the incentives that govern the economy.
A reduction in tax rates increases incentives by allowing people to keep a higher percentage of what they earn from productive activity. But Obama’s tax cuts are all based on tax credits, which do nothing to improve incentives. They are really just the same as his government spending in terms of their effect on the economy, just like sending more welfare checks out to everyone.
At AmericanSolutions.com, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has proposed an updated version of the Reagan economic recovery program for today. It includes, among other items, a reduction in the federal corporate income tax rate from 35% to the 12.5% rate that over the past 20 years has lifted the standard of living in Ireland from the bottom of the EU to the top. It would eliminate the capital gains tax to match rates in China, Singapore, and other international competitors — a move that would entice capital investment from the world over to America. It would provide middle class tax relief by reducing the 25% income tax bracket to 15%, establishing a flat rate tax of 15% for close to 90% of American workers. Gingrich also proposes that a cut in the payroll tax by 50% for 2 years. He also proposes that our government work to control government spending to balance the budget, something Gingrich himself achieved when he was Speaker of the House. Under his plan, the United States would also adopt a real, comprehensive energy program that would allow production of domestic U.S. oil and natural gas, as well as nuclear power, clean coal, ethanol, and renewable fuels.
Obama keeps saying he is only interested in what works, not ideology. So why doesn’t he include any of the above components that have a proven track record of effectiveness? Why is our president ignoring what works and insisting on embracing an ideology that will simply expand big government?

Why indeed?