Pursuing Life, Liberty and Happiness
|
June 19, 2010
Filed Under (Uncategorized) by Grierson on 19-06-2010
Dependence on foreign oil is something we have been trying to figure out since before I was even born. I saw an interesting video from comedian John Daily
Click here to watch the videoAfter watching this I thought to myself. Is it really that hard to become LESS dependent on oil? Are there really no other solutions? Here are a few solutions I have thought of in the last 30 seconds: Wind power – we have lots of wind, turbines can be built… Solar Power – half of my state has plenty of sunshine all year round… Nuclear Power – sure it is a bit scary sounding, but really I am pretty sure we have some new technology out there and available since Chernobyl blew up close to 30 years ago. Its cheap power… If we were to use electricity, have plug in cars and find renewable energy sources we could reduce and eventually eliminate our dependence on oil. Maybe if oil companies became energy companies they would look into the future and decide to spend some of the extra billions they have laying around on some alternative sources. I am sure they do, but maybe a nice little tax break on profits could be given for spending and research on alternative fuels. Lets stop talking about it and really start doing it. Anyone have a good windmill kit provider I can take a look at? I would love to power my house for the environmental impact of a simple spinning object in my yard.
March 24, 2010
Filed Under (General Post) by Grierson on 24-03-2010
It was a pretty fun evening in Springville, Utah at the Republican Caucuses. It was my first time attending the event. I have often heard of conventions and caucuses in states far away that everyone hears about when picking who the presidential candidates were etc., but for some reason I was always under the impression that the caucus was for party leaders. Little did I know, the caucus is an event that anyone who is registered to vote can participate in. In our local caucus it was required that you be registered to vote and declare that you were a member of the republican party in order to speak, vote etc. in the republican caucus meeting. I went in support of one of my local neighbors to become a chairman of our precinct. We had well over 100 people attend which was about double the number attending from the neighboring precincts. It made me proud to see so many people were there to come and have their voice be heard. This year the Utah Senate seat for Bob Bennett is up for election. It has been a hotly contested seat this year with many vying for a chance to unseat the senator. He has been in for a few terms now and his record has shown that he is willing to make deals and do what he feels he has to in order to make things go in Washington. Many feel that he has compromised the beliefs of our party, state and its citizens and they are calling to unseat him. During the caucus we nominated a chairperson, vice chair and secretary. Then we nominated our delegates. I was nominated for both the state and county delegate positions. It was neat to be able to share my love of our country and constitution with my neighbors. Being my first time, I was a bit nervous and did not get out all the things I wanted to say, however it was a good experience and I will be much better prepared next time the elections come around. The caucus was fun, exciting and a very positive experience. It was very interesting to be in the environment where everyone has similar beliefs and yet are trying to run for positions while promoting the same platforms (or very similar). A quick note to all. Go attend your caucus. You will have a great opportunity to learn and take part in even more of the election process.
March 19, 2010
Filed Under (Uncategorized) by Grierson on 19-03-2010
Recently in his February 10, 2010 testimony before the Committee on Financial Services, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, D.C., the Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke prepared a report about the current economic policies of the Federal Reserve. The goal was to explain the exit strategy the Reserve has for removing the extremely risky lending habits it has been using to try and provide economic stability for our nation. You can see the entire report at: http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/testimony/bernanke20100210a.htm#fn9. Of particular interest to me is his statement near the end of his prepared statments in section 9. WHOA! Did you read that? Do you know what they are suggesting? THIS IS THE LAST STRAW THAT WILL CAUSE THE CAMELS BACK TO EXPLODE INTO THE STONEAGE! If you are not aware, recent history has caused us to move off of the gold standard, spend ourselves into oblivion as a country and now we are talking about removing the requirement for banks to hold funds in reserve. The current money supply is made by bank a lending to bank b. Then bank b can lend out 90% of the money it has to bank c. Bank c can then lend to bank d who can then lend out 90% and so on and so forth. The 10% held is called the reserve. Actual HARD ASSETS (if you can call fake paper money hard assets) will no longer be required to be held by a bank. So what does all this craziness mean? Your bank will no longer be required to hold any cash, they can lend out more and continue to make risky loans etc. at an even greater amount than they can today. It also means your money is going to be worth less as it will increase the money supply and INFLATION occurs when there is more money in the money supply. Welcome to the $10 gallon of gas and the $5 value menu at your local McDonalds. Prices are going up my friends and your savings will take the hit. (Cash in the bank earning 1.45% interest doesnt cut it when inflation is 10%, you just lost 8.55% of your money). Please contact your local representatives and ask them to support a bill to audit the Federal Reserve and bring to light the criminal activity that would have caused you or I to go to prison. Its not too late if we act.
February 04, 2010
Filed Under (General Post) by Grierson on 04-02-2010
In an article I read today about the new budget and how the government is voting to raise the debt ceiling (which is a joke in the first place) by another 1.9 trillion dollars ( another $6,000 for EVERY US Resident – notice I said resident not Citizen or person who can vote). Here was a portion that stood out to me: “We don’t have a choice,” said Rep. John Tanner, D-Tenn. “We are on an unsustainable march toward a fiscal Armageddon.” Obama’s budget projects the government’s debt doubling to $26 trillion over the next decade. It offers few solutions for seriously closing the gap other than promising to appoint a bipartisan commission to come up with a plan to address the problem. I have a solution for you Mr. President and all members of Congress and the Senate… STOP SPENDING MONEY YOU DONT HAVE. Its really that simple. You work hard, you earn money, you can spend that money. You dont have the money, you do without. I know it looks nice to send millions of dollars to other countries in foreign aid, buy lots of new buildings, hire lots of government employees to enforce new legislation that you feel it is your duty to pass, and to sit around at your coctail dinners and enjoy all your nice benefits of retirement for spending 4 years of your life working hard. However, the other 99.9% of us work for 40+ years to have a retirement, we struggle just to make our house payments and rent and when we dont, we get kicked in the rear on our way out the door. Maybe it is time to kick MOST of you out the door and send you packing with NO retirement benefits, no extra bonuses and no bailouts.
November 06, 2009
Filed Under (Uncategorized) by Grierson on 06-11-2009
Bravo… Clap Clap Clap! Trillions (yes you read that right, the bailout didnt stop at 8 billion, that was just the begining) of dollars WASTED to save jobs has done nothing. Some may argue, it helped save a few hundred thousand jobs. I argue it caused more problems than it helped. When the market started to crash and panic ensued, there were a few banks, car makers and large corporations that were going to fail. WE SHOULD HAVE LET THEM. However, to help stabalize the economy we let the government put an idea into our head that they can fix the problems by spending BILLIONS of dollars (your tax dollars which WILL go up from all the spending). Well my personal feelings on the matter? When the person in charge starts to panic at any business, the employees start looking for new jobs and stop spending money. The same goes for when the government PUBLICLY freaks out, the citizens do too. I contend that all the panic, hoopla, pomp and heroic legislation that created our bailout actually made things worse. Personally I would rather have seen a few big companies go belly up, people would have to suck up and hurt for a bit, but the rest of the world could continue on and work through the pain. Yes it would have still hurt and shockwaves would have been felt in every other industry. But, did the bailout really slow that down? I think it sped up the panic, made EVERY industry cinch up the belt, made consumers freak out, stop spending and it has caused a chain reaction of frugalness slowing down every market and every industry. The great plan of giving away my future and that of my children has failed. Any business who acts the way our government does would have a number of executives going to prison for fraud. Will we prosecute our leaders? I wish we could. We should. They should at a minimum be fired for their incompetence. But nothing will happen. Its all just the same old thing. Have the buddies at the Federal Reserve print more money, spend spend spend… Could we please have someone who is NOT in debt voted into office so they can show some fiscal responsibility? Is anyone left out there that has rational thought? Please… Someone hear our cry for help. Someone figure out that we are on an unsustainable path of borrowing money that DOES NOT EXIST. I dont want your dollars… I want hard goods, something tangible that will still be there when dollar bills are worth less than the paper they are printed on. Anyone selling any silver/gold or other hard assets out there? I have a bunch of monopoly money I would gladly trade you for it.
November 06, 2009
Filed Under (Uncategorized) by Grierson on 06-11-2009
The big idea was to help jumpstart car sales in America. The dems had a great proposal. Lets go ahead and do Cash for Clunkers, get a ton of gas hogs off the road and sell a bunch of new cars. Great program, we the citizens just gave the car companies a few billion dollars (yes, you and I get to pay for that out of our tax dollars) they make a ton of money, the people who ALREADY CAN AFFORD A CAR i.e. they just bought a BRAND NEW CAR get a great deal on cars – well what about the little guy? You, me and all the others out there who dont purchase NEW cars, but may like a nice used vehical = screwed. What do I mean by that? Well, take a look at used car prices. All those cash for clunker vehicals worked and were drivable (it was required for the trade in). The law requires them to be junked so nobody continues to use those horrible pollution mobiles (how much pollution does it cost to scrap them, and how many resources/pollutants were used to create the new cars). Now what we have is a very low inventory of drivable used cars that MOST people can actually afford to purchase. That has caused a 16% increase in used car prices. What does this mean to you and me? Well, not only are we going to pay for the auto industry bailout and the cash for clunkers program, but we are also going to pay an additional 16% for any used cars we purchase this year. Great job Congressmen, Senators and President Obama. Give a great deal to those with enough money/credit to buy a new car and stick it to those of us who buy within our means.
September 16, 2009
Filed Under (General Post) by Grierson on 16-09-2009
Thanks to our government I will really never be out of debt. Thanks to Mint.com for making it easy on those who are non-beleivers so they can see where we are really headed. PS This is not a bash on the current president. Its a bash on THE PRESIDENT, THE CONGRESS, THE SENATE, THE FED AND EVERYONE ELSE WITH THEIR HEAD IN THE SAND! If anyone operated a business with this much disregard for accounting principles they would be in JAIL according to our laws. Can we please throw the book at our elected officials? http://www.mint.com/blog/finance-core/visualizing-one-trillion-dollars/
September 10, 2009
Filed Under (General Post) by Grierson on 10-09-2009
The original Yes We Can was not the current president of our country. His take on the subject, also very different. I beleive we as Americans are doing a great disservice by allowing fear of the unknown to cause our liberties to be stripped from us right before our eyes. This did not begin with the current administration and crosses all party lines. Lets join back together as Americans and push our freedoms forward, not move into repressive large government run initiatives.
YES WE CAN
June 27, 2009
Filed Under (Uncategorized) by Grierson on 27-06-2009
The new energy bill that was passed today is going to cause major problems for Americans who are already suffering from a major world recession. The cap and trade system will cause the Utility Rates for Americans to skyrocket. The words came from President Barack Obama himself while he was on the campaign trail. A quick video can be seen at: http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?rn=3906861&cl=14163769&ch=4226716&src=news By increasing costs for American companies to produce goods here in the USA, the government just said goodbye to a large number of jobs. Companies will now be moving out of the country to produce goods where environmental constraints are not as limiting and expensive. Good job again government. Another policy that = FAIL.
April 16, 2009
Filed Under (Uncategorized) by Grierson on 16-04-2009
So with tax laws so clearly convoluded and impossible to understand there is a new push (well relatively new in that it has been pushed for almost 10 years) to tax interstate commerce that transacts over the internet. What I see from this is a tax that will make it harder for retailers to sell to out-of-state customers, regulations that will take place across state boarders and the ability for states to audit companies with no presence in their boarders. Have you ever tried to figure out how to pay sales taxes for a trade show in another state? I remember going to a trade show as an exhibitor on multiple occasions and it was pretty much near impossible to figure out all of the paperwork for taxes, how much to collect etc.
Well, its about time we started moving back to a system in which states had more control and power rather than a strong federal government. This country was founded on individual State freedoms. Its about time we made some progress and returned to that status.
Below is a great article written by Dean McClellan and posted at:
April 15, 2009 5:00 PM PDT
Tax-free Internet shopping may be at an end
Tax protester at San Francisco “tea party” gathering on April 15 holds up sign saying “IRS: We take $$$$$$ from working people to pay for big government.” (Credit: Declan McCullagh/CNET) If a little-known but influential alliance of state politicians, large retailers, and tax collectors have their way, the days of tax-free Internet shopping may be nearly over. A bill expected to be introduced in the U.S. Congress as early as Monday would rewrite the ground rules for mail order and Internet sales by eliminating what its supporters view as a “loophole” that, in many cases, allows Americans to shop over the Internet without paying sales taxes. Currently, Americans who shop over the Internet from out-of-state vendors aren’t always required to pay sales taxes at the time of purchase. Californians buying books from Amazon.com or cameras from Manhattan’s B&H Photo, for example, won’t pay sales taxes at checkout time that they would if shopping at a local mall. “We will have the bill ready for introduction by next Monday,” said Neal Osten of the National Conference of State Legislatures. “We finalized the language and now we’re working out the remaining issues and adding some new provisions at the request of various stakeholders.” This is hardly a new debate: pro-tax officials and state governments have been pressing Congress to enact such a law for at least seven years. They argue that reduced sales tax revenue threatens budgets for schools and police, and say that, as a matter of fairness, online retailers should be forced to collect the same taxes that brick-and-mortar retailers do. Even though those arguments have been unsuccessful so far, the National Conference of State Legislatures and its allies believe the recession has sliced into sales tax revenue so much that Congress will have to act. A report this week from the Rockefeller Institute says that sales taxes have declined by 6.1 percent, the largest decline in half a century. “One of the big things the states have learned in the recession is they have declining revenues,” said Scott Peterson, executive director of the Streamlined Sales Tax Project, which counts state politicians and tax collectors on its governing board. “We’re very optimistic about Congress this year. We think we are within a day or two of finalizing the legislation.” The final legislation is expected to be introduced by Sen. Mike Enzi, a Wyoming Republican, and Rep. Bill Delahunt, a Massachusetts Democrat, who have championed similar proposals in the past. Delahunt’s office on Wednesday confirmed he was interested; Enzi’s did not respond. On the other side are the Direct Marketing Association, the Electronic Retailing Association, and companies including eBay, L.L. Bean, and Overstock.com. One of their biggest objections to the idea of collecting sales taxes on out-of-state shipments is the dizzying complexity of state laws. Take candy, which would seem to be a straightforward item to tax. It isn’t. During a 2003 discussion of tax policy, a representative of Indiana, James Turner, noted that a proposed definition of candy would have taxed the Milky Way Midnight candy bar but not the original Milky Way bar. But further investigation showed that Turner’s counter-proposal would have treated “certain flavors of Pop Tarts” and Cookies and Twix Crunchy Cookie Bars as candy–but not Cookies and Snickers Crunchy Cookie Bars. Peanut butter Girl Scout cookies would be candy, but Thin Mints or Caramel deLites would be classified as food. Bizarre distinctions like this, coupled with the existence of more than 7,000 different tax agencies, are why the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that out-of-state retailers generally couldn’t be obligated to collect sales taxes unless Congress changes the law. The justices noted in a 1992 case called Quill v. North Dakota: “Congress is now free to decide whether, when, and to what extent the States may burden interstate mail order concerns with a duty to collect use taxes.” One exception to that rule is a legal concept called “nexus,” which means a company can be forced to collect sales taxes if it has a sufficient business presence. If Amazon had an office in California, it already would be collecting sales tax for Golden State residents. (Another exception is the sale of cigarettes, which is covered by the Jenkins Act.) In response to complexity concerns, the pro-tax forces have offered a proposal that they hope Congress can be persuaded to adopt. The concept is called the Streamlined Sales Tax Agreement, invented in 2002 by state tax officials hoping to straighten out some of sales tax laws’ most notorious convolutions. Since 2003, more than 20 states have signed on, either wholly or partially, to the agreement, meaning they agree to simplify their tax codes and make them uniform. If enough states participate, proponents believe it will be easier to convince Congress to make sales collection mandatory for out-of-state retailers. “You’ll see governors from states who are active participants pushing the Hill to move the issue forward–Kansas has been a long-standing leader. North Dakota, Iowa, Oklahoma, those are some with members on the governing board,” said David Quam, director of the office of federal regulations at the National Governors Association. “The states have done the heavy lifting of coming up with a voluntary system that makes sense. Now it’s Congress’ turn to grant states the authority to collect this.” Representatives of the Streamlined Sales Tax Project are gathering in Washington, D.C. next month for a three-day governing board meeting, including a “lobbying day” that’s scheduled for May 13. Under existing law, the caveat is that online purchases from sites like Amazon and eBay only seem to arrive tax-free. Legally, however, purchasers are required to pay their own state’s sales tax rate–the concept is called a “use tax”–and then voluntarily report the amount owed at tax time. California residents, for instance, are now burdened with a sales and use tax of at least 8.25 percent. State law is strict: if Californians travel to a state with a 5 percent tax and shop there, the law requires them to cough up the 3.25 percent difference when they return. Online purchases are taxed as well. But compliance is spotty at best. California’s Board of Equalization estimates the state lost $1.34 billion in 2003 because residents aren’t paying use taxes–and attributes $208 million of that to online purchases. “There’s no member of NRF that does not support” the forthcoming legislation, said Maureen Riehl, vice president of government relations at the National Retail Federation. “The sooner we can get it done the better, as far as retailers are concerned.” Online retailers tend to disagree. If the Streamlined Sales Tax Project (SSTP) were actually simple and easy for a shipper to work with, they might be more willing to compromise, but that may not be the case. “The states are desperate for new revenue and I think they realize they’re straying far from the simplification they originally promised,” said Steve DelBianco, executive director of NetChoice, which counts as members AOL, eBay, NewsCorp, Oracle, Verisign, and Yahoo. “That creates an urgency on their part–to get the federal mandate before it becomes clear they have no intention to simplify.” “They have no real intention of simplifying or compensating sellers for the burdens of collecting,” DelBianco said. “It’s a shell game.” Among his complaints: That states are unwilling to compensate sellers for the burden of sales tax collection; that small businesses with minimal sales should be exempt; that only one state (as opposed to all states) should be able to audit a business; that participating states are not paying attention to the idea of simplification and are actually making definitions more complex. “There has to be some oversight,” DelBianco said. “These guys have demonstrated–the streamlined states have demonstrated — an inability to stick to the streamlined promise. Only the U.S. Congress is going to be able to protect sellers from unreasonable burdens.” CNET’s Stephanie Condon contributed to this report.  Declan McCullagh, CNET News’ chief political correspondent, chronicles the intersection of politics and technology. He has covered politics, technology, and Washington, D.C., for more than a decade, which has turned him into an iconoclast and a skeptic of anyone who says, “We oughta have a new federal law against this.” E-mail Declan. |
|
|||||||||||
