Guns

In 1969 I was transferred to a small town in Indiana to start up a new plant to cut up and prepackage chicken for Kroger stores. Within a few months we were up and running and I attended a meeting with the managers of 75 stores in the Louisville area. At the meeting I was asked if there were any problems and I pointed out that the packages do not cool properly when stacked more than two high in the coolers. The big boss then stood up and told everyone not to stack more than two high and then turned to me and asked if there was anything else and I responded that there was not. I bring this up because it reminds me of government solutions to problems. Case in point is the uproar over gun control. About 20 something years ago there was a shooting and congress reacted by banning certain rifles. After a number of years the ban was lifted and statistics showed no change in gun violence associated with these rifles. In reaction to the recent school shootings the senate has introduced a bill to ban these same rifles. There is something about people in positions of authority who think that just by banning something they take care of the problem. I think they should ban sin and we could all live happily ever after.

Fracking

As the new fracking process gains momentum, the US will start down the road of being a net exporter of oil and gas. The price of gas is low and getting lower causing industries around the world which use gas to move production to the US. This includes not only industries that use gas for fuel but many chemicals use methane as a starting point. Add to this the weaker, (cheaper) dollar, increased productivity from US companies along with stagnate wage growth and exports become more competitive. The demand for our biggest exports of farm products has increased with growth in China and India and prices have risen accordingly. As these trends continue the trade deficits that have been a drag on the US economy will decline causing further growth in the economy.

60's

It is commonly agreed that hindsight yields a different view of events and as I look back to the 60’s that is definitely the case. While many things motivated change there were three that I think led the way. First was the war in Viet Nam, second the mistreatment of blacks and finally the lack of equality for women. I’d like to zero in on the third known as the women’s movement led by women called feminist. I suppose there are many ways to define feminism but I see it as a woman who feels that she doesn’t need a husband to have satisfying life. Understand that I grew up in the 40’s and 50’s and at that time a woman’s place was in the home. Girls graduated from high school and immediately set out to find a husband. Being a home maker was the dream of most young women and it was a cultural thing. Look at the TV shows in the 50’s and you will find Beaver and Father Knows Best. Mom stayed at home and took care of the family. When I went off to college in the 50’s there were four men for every woman and the joke was that they were their just to find a husband. There was a popular song at that time that describes how we felt about women. It was title, “The Girl That I Marry”. The girl that I marry will have to be As soft and as pink as a nursery The girl I call my own Will wear satin and laces and smell of cologne Her nails will be polished And in her hair she'll wear a gardenia And I'll be there Instead of flittin', I'll be sittin' Next to her I'm cheerful like a kitten A doll I can carry, The girl that I marry must be With the onset of the 60’s women came into their own and they made a serious miscalculation. Instead of wanting to be equal to men they chose to be like men. This led to what was called free love as women tried to prove that they were just as interested in multiple sexual partners as men. Young mothers purchased toy kitchen sets for their boys and Ken the doll partner to Barbie was introduced. These feminist believed that the differences between boys and girls was due to the environment. In the old argument between nature and nurture, nurture won out. These cultural changes were reinforced by the social changes caused by the Great Society where things like equal pay for equal work were introduced.

Gores book

Former Vice-President Al Gore, in his book entitled, “An Inconvenient Truth”, made 10 predictions that were deemed to be exaggerations. The book was made into a movie and shown in schools though out the world. Gore was given the Noble Peace Prize for his efforts. When asked about the distortion of facts to achieve an objective he replied: “Nobody is interested in solutions if they don’t think there’s a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.” ~Al Gore I offer one example to illustrate the point. In his movie while showing scenes of severe flooding, the narrator says that sea level could rise 20 feet in a short period of time. Since 1992 satellites have measured sea level to unprecedented accuracy and these measurements show a rise of 3 mm per year which would be a rise of one foot in 100 years.

Millionaires

More on millionaires and billionaires. Take the example of a very rich person. This person only pays 15% on income since most is from capital gains. That means they have invested their money in some type of risk taking adventure, like financing a new company or just buying stock in a company. Just what choices does a rich person have when it comes to their money? They can spend it and that of course helps the economy. The can invest it in some type of business and that helps the economy. The can put it in the bank and banks are allowed by law to loan out 9 dollars for every one dollar they have so the banks have more money to loan which means lower interest rates and that is good for the economy. So there is nothing economically wrong with rich people having lots of money, so what is the problem. The problem is that the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer and people feel there is something inherently wrong with that. This feeling is exacerbated when people feel that there is an uneven playing field. They feel that the rich using insider information are gaming the system and there is good reason to feel that way, since there are many recent examples of illegal activities on the part of certain wealthy people. The main objection by groups like the Tea Party and the Occupy Wall Street is corruption in government and business. To talk about taxing these rich people more is a distraction from the real problem which is corruption. One thing that will have a profound effect on corruption is penalties. We have yet to see anyone go to jail on the recent fiasco of the home mortgage derivatives. Fines are no deterrent but jail time is and not just a couple of years in a country club prison.

Taliban

The President has proposed that we tax millionaires and billionaires to help balance the budget. He has not stated the specific tax rate. There are 80,000 Americans who earn more than 1 million and they average 4 million. If we take all of their money we would bring in 320 billion dollars. (80,000 x 4,000,000). That would reduce this year’s deficit from 1,270 billion to 950 billion. Taxing the rich is OK by me but we must tackle the entitlements. Social security, Medicare and Medicaid cost 1,600 billion dollars per year. We have to reduce spending as well as increase revenue something like the Boles/Simpson plan prepared last year but ignored. 1. The advantage of arguing over taxing the rich is that no one has to talk about entitlements. The President doesn’t want to talk about them neither do the Republican candidates. They all saw what happened when Paul Ryan came out with his plan which he reiterated today. He proposed changes in entitlements and got crucified. There is a tendency to blame elected officials for lack of courage but taking on entitlements is a sure way to get kicked out of office and for that you can blame the voters. It reminds me of what Pogo said about the government, “we have met the enemy and they is us”. Until we voters are willing to bite the bullet and reduce some of our benefits the politicians will continue down the path we are on.

Millionaires

The President has proposed that we tax millionaires and billionaires to help balance the budget. He has not stated the specific tax rate. There are 80,000 Americans who earn more than 1 million and they average 4 million. If we take all of their money we would bring in 320 billion dollars. (80,000 x 4,000,000). That would reduce this year’s deficit from 1,270 billion to 950 billion. Taxing the rich is OK by me but we must tackle the entitlements. Social security, Medicare and Medicaid cost 1,600 billion dollars per year. We have to reduce spending as well as increase revenue something like the Boles/Simpson plan prepared last year but ignored. 1. The advantage of arguing over taxing the rich is that no one has to talk about entitlements. The President doesn’t want to talk about them neither do the Republican candidates. They all saw what happened when Paul Ryan came out with his plan which he reiterated today. He proposed changes in entitlements and got crucified. There is a tendency to blame elected officials for lack of courage but taking on entitlements is a sure way to get kicked out of office and for that you can blame the voters. It reminds me of what Pogo said about the government, “we have met the enemy and they is us”. Until we voters are willing to bite the bullet and reduce some of our benefits the politicians will continue down the path we are on.