Your tax dollars at work?

A recent article in the Wall Street Journal highlights a growing trend in government subsidized housing.

We are now learning that not only have your tax dollars been used to bail out banks that make bad loan decisions and home buyers who stupidly signed for home loans they couldn’t afford, but now enterprising individuals are buying up some of these foreclosed houses and renting them out as federal section 8 subsidized housing.

You can go to GoSection8.com and browse to see what’s available, most are traditional subsidized housing, apartment, townhouses, duplexes and so forth, but there are a few gems, such as this one, 10215 Splendor Ridge, Las Vegas. It’s a 2,203 sq. ft. 4/3 for only $1,900 / month. Now really, what section 8 qualified tenant really needs a house of this caliber? That’s aside from the moral question of whether taxpayer dollars should be paying for this.

One tenant whose story is told on the WSJ reporter’s blog moved from St. Louis to Las Vegas to rent a 2,000 sq. ft. section 8 home, her rent based on her income is $400 for the 5 bedroom home. The taxpayer chips in $1,400 a month. Does anyone besides me see anything wrong with this picture?

One individual mentioned in the story bought a Las Vegas home for $60K cash, registered it as Section 8 housing and is now getting $1,500 a month deposited in his account, courtesy of the taxpayer. After taxes, maintenance and fees, he’s profit is $15,000 per year. Not bad. Meanwhile, the federal budget deficit continues to spiral out of control.

I’m waiting for a thank-you note, or two, or three, think I’ll get one?

the lesson of apollo 13

Forty years ago this month the world shared a collective gasp as the words came across the miles, “Houston, we’ve had a problem.” Apollo 13, the third US spaceflight to the moon had suffered an explosion of one of it’s oxygen tanks and the future was looking very dim.

Left to right: Lovell, Mattingly, Haise.

It was the third day of what was to be a mission to land at and explore the Moon’s Fra Mauro formation. Suddenly, 199,990 miles from Earth, there was an explosion of one of the Service Module oxygen tanks, resulting in the failure of both O2 tanks.

With power, oxygen and water supplies dwindling the crew was forced to cut short their quest to the moon, turn around and hope through some miracle they would land safely and see their families again. Did they worry or despair? There wasn’t time. Did they look to the President or Congress for help? No way! They needed answers and they needed them now!

So who did these interstellar explorers turn to in their time of desperation? There was no rescue capsule to send for them. They couldn’t just stop and get off. They turned to the people they knew they could trust. They turned to the team, the engineers and scientists who designed and provided the support for their mission.

James Lovell, Fred Haise, and Jack Swigert also knew that no matter what plan, what “MacGyver-ed” contraption Mission Control came up with, it’s implementation depended solely on them, the crew of Apollo 13.  The best plan will go nowhere if it’s not carried out, if those it’s meant to help don’t take ownership and put forth the effort, what ever it takes, to carry out the task.

The mission of Apollo 13 could well have ended in disaster, instead it became a symbol of what can happen when we start thinking “outside the box.” When we turn to our own ingenuity, inner strength and creativity, work as a team towards a common goal, never give into despair and never give up amazing results can happen.

What would have happened had the crew of Apollo 13 simply sat back and had taken no responsibility for their circumstances and their future? The failure of the craft was certainly not attributable to anything they had done. It could be argued that they were depending on the very people who may have created the problem to bring to them the solution. Yet, they trusted them, and the crew believed in themselves to carry out the plan.

Apollo 13 crew postmission onboard USS Iwo Jima

Through sheer grit, determination and creative problem solving, nearly 3 days later, a total of 5 days, 22 hours, 54 minutes after exploding off lauch pad 39a at Kennedy Space Center, Apollo 13 and her crew splashed down in the Pacific Ocean near Samoa and were retrieved by the USS Iwo Jima.

So, what lessons can be learned from Apollo 13 that apply to us as individuals and as a nation?

First, we have to take ownership, of our individual lives and of the life of our nation.  We can no longer entrust others to honor and uphold the most important gift we have as citizens or the United States, our freedom.

It is sad to have to admit it, but for the most part, those we elect to represent us have become seduced by the power entrusted to them.  In falling to that seduction, they have forgotten their oath of office and sacred duty to serve and represent those who elected them to office.  Many have come to believe that they are “deserving” of the power and that they should not serve the people, but contrarily the people should serve them.

In that same vein, the people, the voters have abdicated their responsibility to know and understand their government, instead immersing themselves in the pleasures of living and “trusting” their representatives to just “do the right thing.”  If we have learned anything over the past 10 years,when left to their own, politicians will tend to do what they want, right or wrong, rather than seek to best follow the will of the people they represent.

Second, when we don’t know what to do, go to those who best understand the systems.  In recent history that has come to mean “go to Washington.”  But that would be like going to those who file bankruptcy to get budget advice.  To the morbidly obese for dieting suggestions or to the chronically ill for healthy living tips.

Our relationship, as voters, to Washington politicians should be the same as that of an employer to employee.  After all, that’s exactly what they, the politicians are, our employees.  When a business owner has an employee who is working against the interests of the business, he doesn’t shrug his shoulder and sigh, “oh well, that’s just how he is.”

No!  That business owner, that employer counsels and instructs that employee what he or she is required to do, and expects them to follow instructions.  If that employee fails to do so, they loose the opportunity to represent that businessman.  We citizens, as those who “employ” the politicians must take the same stance with them and have the same expectations.

Finally, as “owners” in this great experiment called America, we must take action.  Had the astronauts of Apollo 13 failed to take action on the advice of their expert engineers, instead of praising that flight as a “successful failure,” we would be visiting a memorial to the bravery of her crew.

In 1775, had those who found rule by an overbearing and unresponsive English government simply whined and complained, we would still be a colony of the British Empire.  Instead, those brave men not only complained to their government, they formed a revolution.  In those days, that meant when the king turned a deaf ear to their repeated complaints following their principals meant taking up arms to secure their freedom.

Thankfully, today, our constitution has given us a less violent remedy.  It’s called the freedom to vote.  But we must take that obligation at the ballot box just as seriously as our founding fathers did the sword and musket.  If there must be carnage in Washington, that battle must take place at the ballot box.  As citizens, our weapons are our freedom, our intellect and our good judgment.  We must learn, get involved and act.

We, as individuals and as a nation, must take action to not only regain our freedom, but to prove to ourselves and to the world that we individually deserve that freedom.  For if we merely sit back and take a disinterested view of our democratic process and of our governance, we truly don’t deserve the freedom given to us by our constitution.  Moreover, we do deserve the chains and bondage heaped on us by those we entrusted to keep us free.

new tools for citizenship

Maybe you thought the federal budget, this multi-trillion document that is supposed to guide our government’s spending, is far to big to understand, too much financial “geek speak” to make sense to those with our feet firmly on the ground.  Well, think again.

The Heritage Foundation has a new resource, the 2010 Federal Budget Chart Book.  It illustrates our federal budget, how your political representatives collect and spend your dollars, in broad, easy to understand terms.

Did you know that federal spending per household has skyrocketed from $11,337 in 1965 to $31,088 this year?  in the next 10 years it’s projected to shoot up to $36,139.  In case you didn’t understand, that’s PER YEAR!

With all the demagogy, you would never know that while defense spending has decreased from 7.4% of the budget in 1965 to 4.9% this year, entitlement spending has actually increased from 2.5% ti 9.9% of the federal budget in the same time.

To pay for all that spending federal taxes have increased from $11,202 per household in 1965 to $16,543 last year, peaking at $23,947 in 2000.   In 2007, the latest year this data is available, the top 5% of income earners paid over 60% of all income taxes.  Who were those lucky people, those super rich 5%?  Anyone who earned at least $160,041 that year.

Meanwhile, the bottom 75% of income earners, those who earned less than $66,532 in 2007, were responsible for only %13.41 of all income taxes that year.  Kinda blows the liberal mantra that the rich pay nothing and the poor pay everything right out the door, doesn’t it?

At their current rate of growth, entitlement spending is projected to gobble up every bit of federal tax dollars, at the current rates, by 2052, leaving nothing for defense, roads and bridges, air traffic control, law enforcement and everything else we’ve come to expect, or even wish they didn’t but they still do, from the federal government.

That means that while in 1965 federal spending consumed only, only?, yes, only 2.7% of the total US economic output, by 2052 it will consume, at the current rate of growth, 18.2% and we really will be wishing for those “good ole days.”

So, what can we do about it?  The first thing is to educate yourself.  One of the primary responsibilities of good citizenship is to educate one’s self about their government.  For too long most of our citizens have entertained themselves with TV, movies, video games, hunting, baseball, gadgets, cars, beautifying their homes, football, you name it, we’ve distracted ourselves while the political class have stolen our nation, our economy, our freedoms and our hard earned dollars from us.

After you’ve educated yourself, find out about ways to get involved, constantly write and politely badger your representatives about their votes, their spending habits, their duty to protect the tax dollars entrusted to them and not spend them wastefully.

Yes, just about any budget item can find an advocate who can passionately articulate it’s merits.  But just because a budget item has merits doesn’t mean it should be funded by government.  What’s wrong with allowing, even requiring private citizens and business to fund projects they find worthy instead of turning to the pockets of the citizens?

Funding closer to home not only refines and winnows projects that have true merit, but it also brings it closer to those who can watch closely that the dollars are spent wisely, and if not, shut them off.

As Ronald Reagan said, “a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth.a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth.”  Just a few weeks ago we got a whopper!   It’s time the people cut off the life line.

Heaviest Element Yet Known to Science

This was sent to me by a friend and though I’ve yet been able to source and vet it’s authenticity and accuracy, I thought I’d pass it on for you all to ponder. Consider…

“Lawrence Livermore Laboratories has discovered the heaviest element yet known to science.

The new element, Governmentium (Gv), has one neutron, 25 assistant neutrons, 88 deputy neutrons, and 198 assistant deputy neutrons, giving it an atomic mass of 312.
These 312 particles are held together by forces called morons, which are surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles called peons.

Since Governmentium has no electrons, it is inert; however, it can be detected, because it impedes every reaction with which it comes into contact. A tiny amount of Governmentium can cause a reaction that would normally take less than a second, to take from 4 days to 4 years to complete.

Governmentium has a normal half-life of 2 – 6 years. It does not decay, but instead undergoes a reorganization in which a portion of the assistant neutrons and deputy neutrons exchange places.

In fact, Governmentium’s mass will actually increase over time, since each reorganization will cause more morons to become neutrons, forming isodopes.
This characteristic of morons promotion leads some scientists to believe that Governmentium is formed whenever morons reach a critical concentration. This hypothetical quantity is referred to as critical morass.

When catalyzed with money, Governmentium becomes Administratium, an element that radiates just as much energy as Governmentium since it has half as many peons but twice as many morons.”

“We are all in the same boat on a stormy sea and
we owe each other a terrible loyalty.” – G. K. Chesterson

The cost of "my rights"

“A privilege is something we receive when someone else pays. The police and firefighters whose deaths we will remember this month on Sept. 11 in part purchased my “right” to walk the streets of New York terror-free.” – Mindy Belz

Some might include “the home children live in, the bed they sleep in, the food they eat, the clothes they wear, ad nauseum.” Sadly, many have put forth the argument that these “privileges” are “rights.”

Many of yesterday’s children have grown to become today’s young adults who confuse “privileges” with “rights” and in the end determine it is their “right” to shove their hand, or better stated have government shove it’s “hand,” into the pockets of their friends, family, neighbors and fellow citizens to pay for what they erroneously believe to be “rights.”

That’s not only wrong; it’s pure and simple, selfish, self-centered and self-destructive. No one has the “right” to someone else’s property, wealth (great or small) or time unless there is an expectation of remuneration. Few have an understanding of the value of what other’s have, that is especially true in children who are always demanding of their parents the latest in clothes, toys, electronics, entertainment, food with little understanding that there is a price to be paid for all and the source of that payment is finite.

Sometimes parents, in an attempt to please their children, quiet them, assuage their need to conform to their peer group or just feel like they are being good parents, will give into their child’s demands. That can lead to an unhealthy expectation on the part of the child that all their expectations are equally important and must be equally met. They may then extend that expectation to their adult expectations of what government and the taxpayer should give them, limiting their own social, moral, and financial personal responsibilities. They think it is their “right” to have what they want with no understanding of the cost.

Other times, a parent may be unable to provide for a child’s demands for his “rights,” or see those demands as unhealthy, and withhold some of those “privileges.” The child may in young adulthood grow to think he was “abused” by his “unfair” parents and in rebellion turn to government as the “sugar daddy” to fill what he may see as “rights” but are really “privileges.” Thus he demands from government, becomes a dependent of government, and ultimately becomes a slave to government to which he has ceded his power of freedom, and, perhaps, even life and death.

Much of the demand for “rights” in today’s ongoing debate finds its root in the erroneous understanding of “rights” vs. “privilege” and the teaching our children have received in much of their education about the role of government in their lives. They have been taught that government is their source of everything and it is in government that they will find complete fulfillment of their needs.

Sadly, they have not learned that what government gives with one hand, it takes away with the other. There is no “zero sums” formula where there is no cost for added service. They have also not had the historical perspective of seeing that government rarely meets the promises it makes, nor does it create a program, policy, bureaucracy, benefit or entitlement that ends up meeting cost projections. Rather, without fail, legislative cost projections are exceeded by many multiples. What was sold as costing $100 million ends up costing $300 million. What was budgeted for $1 billion ends up costing $3 billion.

In the 1960′s when Medicare was being debated in Congress, then President Lyndon Johnson, as a strong advocate of Medicare, counseled legislators that if they were to win the debate, and thus the vote, they had to move the debate off the subject of cost. He told them don’t let the costs get projected too far out because it will scare other people:

“A health program yesterday runs $300 million, but the fools had to go to projecting it down the road five or six years, and when you project it the first year, it runs $900 million. Now I don’t know whether I would approve $900 million second year or not. I might approve 450 or 500. But the first thing Dick Russell comes running in saying, ‘My God, you’ve got a billion-dollar program for next year on health, therefore I’m against any of it now.’ Do you follow me?”

That $300 million program now costs $408,000,000,000 in fiscal year 2009. That’s $408 billion, 1,360 times its original projected cost and 14% of the federal budget. Medicare and SCHIP add another $224 billion to the current budget. Those plans have no incentive to hold down costs, in the twisted world of government budgeting, if an agency cuts costs and comes in under budget in one year, they are not rewarded but penalized.

Government also has no incentive to hold costs down, because it has the power of the legislative and judicial system to demand more and more taxation from the citizens it is supposed to protect. Yet, today’s young adults, in their focus on perceived “rights” and “entitlements” fail to consider the ultimate cost of their demands for more and more government intervention in their lives.

We as individuals have a right to demand quality health care services from those we pay. We have the ability to go to a different provider when we are not served properly. We have that right because we are paying the bill, either directly or via individual or employer provided insurance plans. We pay for those plans either directly or as part of our compensation package. We have, not perfect control, but control nevertheless, over the direction of our health care.

Health care in the US is about 1/6th of our economy, which is 16% or $2.404 TRILLION dollars. That is 77% of the total US government outlay for FY2009. And some want to turn over control of that portion of our economy, no, our lives, to a faceless government bureaucrat.

Under a plan of “privilege” where my neighbor, friends and family pay for my health care via government controlled plans, whether the so called “public option” or government mandates, I become dependent on and responsible to that other party and the whims of bureaucracy to meet my very personal health care needs. To a people who know of the struggle of running up against a government bureaucracy like the IRS or Social Security or Medicare, where faceless individuals have near unlimited power over your income, your finance, your freedom, your health care and even your life, the thought of more invasion by government into the intimate area of personal health is an fearful affront.

Those who have no understanding or experience in these matters merely see it as a relief from the responsibilities of life. That’s a relief they may one day come to regret.

“We are all in the same boat on a stormy sea and
we owe each other a terrible loyalty.” – G. K. Chesterson

Time to come down off the "high"

With the election over, journalists, pundits, commentators, most politicians and most importantly, the President-Elect, Barack Obama, have all begun to scale back the rhetoric. These professionals, for the most part, understand there is an important distinction between campaigning for political office and holding that office.

The words, thoughts and ideas expressed in a campaign are idealistic, crafted to appeal to a candidate’s constituency’s hope and dreams. A political candidate also knows the rhetoric of campaigning will rarely become policy. Therefore he or she must scale back the expectations of their constituencies otherwise those who carried them to office will turn on them when they realize their idealized hopes will not be attained, or at least to the degree they were led to believe during the campaign.

To his credit, President elect Obama began lowering expectations in the final week of his campaign when it became clear that barring unforeseen and hugely inaccurate polling, he would most likely become this nation’s 44th President. The difficulty for Obama is that most of the constituency he has courted, the youth vote and the wealth envy vote, do not understand the difference between campaigning and governing.

Political candidates have since the beginning of politics promised far more than they can deliver. In the form of government in this nation, that fact is inherent in our Constitutional Republic. You see, this is not a democracy, despite the misguided belief perpetuated by the educational system and the media.

Sadly, the constituencies of President-Elect Obama have drunk the “Kool-aid” of “Change” and truly believe that their candidate and our soon to be President will enact all that he has promised. Many remain in “campaign mode” ravenously attacking anyone expressing ideas and opinions even slightly different from their own. They look for attack and disparagement in even the most benign of comment.

Their youthful idealism and expectations, their lack of understanding of the American political process, will lead them to disillusion and disappointment. At the same time, their inability to tone down their rhetoric and attacks will serve only to alienate them from both those who may agree with them as well as those who don’t.

Their friends, families and fellow employees will all soon tire of the constant argumentative attitude and newly empowered political groupies will soon find themselves not only disappointed in their expectations, but distanced from those who would have otherwise been there for them when they finally realize their candidate cannot fulfill the all promises made and their government has failed them despite their hope for change.

“We are all in the same boat on a stormy sea and
we owe each other a terrible loyalty.” – G. K. Chesterson