Happy New Years! May 2012 bring You health & happiness

As I ring in the new year, my resolution is to ask more questions and demand more answers from life and the leaders who affect my life.  2011 has come to a close with so many unanswered questions and begins 2012 with much uncertainty, in the world of economics, for my Country.  So it is time to ask tough questions in the run-up to the 2012 elections.

When the economy is run with a sure hand, using sound economic principles, it empowers me, the consumer, to plan and invest with confidence.  When the economy is run by the seat of someone’s pants, using unproven economic strategy in the “hopes” of spawning economic growth; it is my responsibility to myself, to pull back my savings into a safe harbor until the storm of uncertainty has subsided.

To start the New Year off right, I plan to ask those seeking to be leaders many questions and I trust you will too.  The start of my questioning begins with these recent events:

· When Netflix proposed an increase to the “monthly fee” for their DVD/Instant Viewing online movie services (a purely voluntary choice of service); John Q public went ballistic and the MSM reported it. Within 30 days Netflix removed the increase in fees, broke-up the service and now delivers a much less desirable service to their customers. The intent of the fee increase was to deliver a fresher line of movie products to their customers, an improvement in services for a minimal increase in fee’s when compared to the costs incurred through Direct TV, Xfinity, and other major cable TV services.

· Bank of America announced their intention to charge a “fee” for the usage (purely voluntary to choose Bank of America as your bank) of their ATM’s or debit cards; John Q public went ballistic and the MSM reported it.  Fee was cancelled within 2 weeks.

· Verizon announced their intention to charge a “fee” for paying your bill online or by your phone app (purely voluntary to choose Verizon as your cell phone provider); John Q public went ballistic and the MSM reported it.  Fee was cancelled within 48 hrs.

· Where is John Q’s outrage at “ALL” of the thousands of fee’s being added daily by local/state/federal governments by monopolies that John Q public cannot avoid????

· Isn’t this a valid question to ask Political Leaders, John Q public and the MSM?

YiT, Shelly

---

LiveJournal Tags: 2012 Election,New Years,Question,John Q Public,MSM,Taxes,Fees,Monopoly,Choice,Economy,Leaders,Politics

Higher taxes = Public Dependency, Lower taxes = Personal Responsibility

Found this ditty on a blog (if you click this link you need to sign-up to read the submitted materials…so far, it’s a very un-invasive blog and I’ve found many insightful posts) today and with all of the petulance and whining on display across the United States at our financial hubs, I just had to share it.  If you’ve never run a business and only been an employee, you may not understand these words…I hope I am wrong about that.  It also speaks for the need of a “flat tax”.

Yours in Truth,  Shelly

---

"I have never viewed taxation as a means of rewarding one class of taxpayers or punishing another.  If such a point of view ever controls our public policy, the traditions of freedom, justice and equality of opportunity, which are the distinguishing characteristics of our American civilization, will have disappeared and in their place we shall have class legislation with all its attendant evils.  The man who seeks to perpetuate prejudice and class hatred is doing America an ill service.  In attempting to promote or to defeat legislation by arraying one class of taxpayers against another, he shows a complete misconception of those principles of equality on which the country was founded.  Any man of energy and initiative can get what he wants out of life.  But when that initiative is crippled by legislation or by a tax system which denies him the right to receive a reasonable share of his earnings, then he will no longer exert himself and the country will be deprived of the energy on which its continued greatness depends."
"This condition has already begun to make itself felt as a result of the present unsound basis of taxation.  The existing tax system is an inheritance from the war.  During that time the highest taxes ever levied by any country were borne uncomplainingly by the American people for the purpose of defraying the unusual and ever-increasing expenses incident to the successful conduct of a great war.  Normal tax rates were increased, and a system of surtaxes was evolved in order to make the man of large income pay more proportionately than the smaller taxpayer.  If he had twice as much income, he paid not twice, but three or four times as much tax.  For a short time the surtaxes yielded a large revenue.  But since the close of the war people have come to look upon them as a business expense and have treated them accordingly by avoiding payment as much as possible.  The history of taxation shows that taxes which are inherently excessive are not paid.  The high rates inevitably put pressure upon the taxpayer to withdraw his capital from productive business and invest it in tax-exempt securities or to find other lawful methods of avoiding the realization of taxable income.  The result is that the sources of taxation are drying up; wealth is failing to carry its share of the tax burden; and capital is being diverted into channels which yield neither revenue to the Government nor profit to the people."
"Taxation: the people's business", Andrew Mellon, 1924

There were some pretty smart people in America.  Andrew Mellon was treasury secretary for the decade of the roaring 20s, and then vilified and persecuted mercilessly by FDR.  Sometimes you can find in dusty history books more wisdom than anyone from the current government.

---

From the Wikipedia link on Andrew Mellon, I feel a need to cover Mellon’s well intentioned, but unheeded advice to President Hoover on how to reverser “the Great Depression”.  ~ Shelly

Mellon became unpopular with the onset of the Great Depression. He advised Herbert Hoover to "liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate farmers, liquidate real estate… it will purge the rottenness out of the system. High costs of living and high living will come down. People will work harder, live a more moral life. Values will be adjusted, and enterprising people will pick up from less competent people."^[7] Additionally, he advocated weeding out "weak" banks as a harsh but necessary prerequisite to the recovery of the banking system. This "weeding out" was accomplished through refusing to lend cash to banks (taking loans and other investments as collateral), and by refusing to put more cash in circulation. He advocated spending cuts to keep the Federal budget balanced, and opposed fiscal stimulus measures. In 1929-31, he spent much of the time overseas, negotiating for repayment of European war debts from World War I.

---

LiveJournal Tags: Andrew Mellon,Taxes,Responsibility,Capitalism,Wall Street,Constitution Day,Economy,Finance,Fees,Fiscal,Free Markets,Politics,Dependency

A Little Carbon Tax’l Cure What Ails Us

Just how will imposing carbon taxes help the U.S. or World economies?  Well with cap and trade implemented by the fiat of the EPA, there will be plenty of money to keep big government funded.

Yours In Truth    Shelly

---

September 18, 2011 8:54 pm

BA faces €50m bill for carbon emissions

By Pilita Clark, Environment Correspondent

British Airways faces a bill of nearly €50m, the highest of any airline, when carriers around the world are brought into the European Union’s carbon emissions trading scheme next year, a new study estimates.

But BA and other large European carriers will face a relatively smaller burden than their rivals in the US and China, because they should get an average of 81 per cent of the carbon allowances needed under the scheme for free. The Chinese and American carriers will only get an average of up to 64 per cent, says the report by Thomson Reuters Point Carbon, the energy research firm.

The airline industry’s total bill is expected to be €1.1bn ($1.5bn) at today’s carbon prices, the study says. The whole sector may only make a $4bn profit this year, the International Air Transport Association has forecast.

“Compared to airlines’ annual fuel bills, these additional costs are minor, but compared to profits they are considerable,” said Andreas Arvanitakis, Thomson Reuters Point Carbon associate director. “The question is how much of the cost can be passed to passengers and cargo clients.”

The findings come amid a fierce row over the EU’s move to make any airline flying into and within the bloc pay for pollution.

US airlines have taken legal action against what they say is an “astonishing” step, and Chinese complaints have prompted warnings of a trade war from European aircraft-maker Airbus.

Airlines have been exempt from Europe’s six-year-old cap and trade scheme, the world’s largest, which forces big polluters to pay for their carbon emissions above certain limits.

Carriers will now have to surrender allowances, each equal to one tonne of carbon dioxide, to cover their annual emissions. A portion will be allocated for free but heavy polluters will have to buy more allowances, now trading for about €12 each.

The exact number of free allowances each airline will get will not be known until official figures are published this month. But Point Carbon’s calculations, based on the latest public data, offer an early picture of how airlines’ competitive positions may be affected.

The €50m bill BA faces amounts to €1.66 per passenger, much more than the €0.14 expected for Delta, its US rival on the lucrative London-New York route, says Peter Hind of the RDC Aviation consultancy, whose data are used in the Point Carbon study.

BA said: “Any estimates of the shortfall in our carbon allowances are just that – an estimate. Our own analyses of the costs of the EU ETS to our business are commercially confidential and we would not speculate as to the costs to other airlines.”

Read the full story here.

---

LiveJournal Tags: Agenda 21,Cap & Trade,EPA,Environmental Defense Fund,Economy,Environment,Fees,Fraud,Taxes,Tax Dollars

Washington Senators Make End Run Around I-1053–“No New Taxes w/o Super Majority Vote in WA State”

A bill up for consideration is SB 5944 which would allow State Legislators to remove tax incentives and credits by simple majority.  On its face this sounds appropriate enough if you do not consider the removal of incentives and credits as a tax increase.

Look over the bills and tell your representatives your thoughts on this end run to increase taxes in the State of Washington.

Yours in Truth    Shelly

LiveJournal Tags: Taxes,Washington,State of Washington,Increase Taxes,Legislature,SB 5944

This Week’s EFF Olympia Weekly:

As promised I will be sharing the Evergreen Freedom Foundation’s (EFF) weekly updates on Olympia.  If we are ever to get a handle on government spending and debt, ‘We the People’ must work to shine the light of transparency on their spending; how much, to whom, for what, is it a legal expenditure and under what authority of our Constitution/Charter does the government have the right to spend our tax dollars on this?

Please enjoy this weeks posting from EFF.  If you find the information valuable, I ask that you share it with your friends and contacts.

Yours In Truth    Shelly

LiveJournal Tags: EFF,Evergreen Freedom Foundation,Washington State,Spending,Finance,Budget,Taxes,PDC

EFF Olympia Weekly: Budget blues, phony fees, and good ideas ignored

Every week the Evergreen Freedom Foundation puts out a report on what’s been happening in the Washington State Legislature.  The EFF is a jewel for fiscal conservancy and I would like to share their reporting with you.

Yours In Truth    Shelly

If you’d like to go directly to the EFF website, click here.

LiveJournal Tags: Evergreen Freedom Foundation,EFF,Washington State,Washington,State,Legislature,Budget,Finance,Fiscal,Conservancy,Governor,Gregoire,Governor Gregoire,Taxes,Fees