TAX EQUITY

Two of the President's choices for Cabinet positions have had to pay substantial sums in back taxes and penalties for under reported income.  

1. I suspect that the amount that they had to repay was limited by the fact that they were only required to refile for the previous 3 years. It seems quite likely that these two individuals are and have been tax avoiders for much longer, and should probably be audited for the entire time that they were in the Senate and possibly for any other years that they were in service to the Government.

2. What is the possibility that only 2 of the 100 members of the Senate are (were) the only ones guilty of making such "mistakes" in their tax reporting? Maybe all other Senators should also be required to submit to audits of their taxes by independent auditors.

3. Next, maybe the Government should expand their tax audit efforts to the House of Representatives as well. For example, I saw a report that the Speaker of the House was being provided with weekly air transportation at Government expense to and from California. Is that representative declaring this as income? According to the report, this perk for the one individual amounts to as much as 5 million dollars per year cost to the taxpayers. 

4. And further, how many other Government employees, and elected officials are given similar perks without having to declare these perks as income? 

5. Every year, I have provided full reporting of my taxes and benefits as required and have been cautioned to be certain that taxes that are due are paid on time. And, I am not unique. So, since we are all citizens of this Country, should we not be treated equally? Or, as in the book "Animal Farm" "Some are more equal than others".

6. Until these inequities are corrected, ordinary people should probably not be prosecuted for underreporting of taxes, and, maybe, not even be required to pay their taxes. 

BAILOUT SURPRISE?

The President is incensed by the massive size of the financial community's bonuses for last year. 

WHY?

Most of last year the financial community made do without the stimulus money,  so whatever a company does with its resources should not be open to government question or intervention. This statement should be true in a Capitalistic, free market and free country. 

The policies of a Company in a free society should not be materially limited by the government even if the company benefits from government financial support. Of course, in the free society, the government should not be doling out money to a company with no expectations of a return (except for goods or services provided to the government).

The trend to provide tighter regulation and control of all aspects of our existence will continue in this Country, because the government is trying to change the nature of the so called free enterprise system. We are fast becoming a Socialistic or National Socialistic country which is quite close to becoming a totally controlled state similar to the old Soviet Union. Free enterprise along with free speech and unfettered travel is (seems to me) in serious jeopardy of becoming extinct. It may take a little longer than today, or tomorrow, or in the next four years, but, it is coming. This Country needs a real change in direction.

GENERAL THOUGHTS

The trend towards a new Socialistic country here in the US continues to gain momentum. I have difficulty in understanding the trend and the desires of so many politicians to accept this status. The latest move, which was entirely predictable, is in the nationalizing of the banking (read: all financial endeavors) system. Next should be the major industrial organizations (autos, steel,etc.) followed by farming and mines.

I believe that we are totally helpless in changing this trend and, will mourn for the days when we were free from such intense Government controls. The Federal government will continue to be more invasive in our daily affairs, no matter which political party is in control. 

The new President is continuing to backslide on his commitments that he made and seems to be controlled by his political party and not by any previously proclaimed principles. Some of his so-called decisive changes (repudiation of the previous President's policies) seem to be more politically motivated than well thought out changes in national direction. For example; he has signed an order to close the detention center for the Muslim detainees, yet has no formulated plan to their fate (release them, try them, execute them) or even where to send them if they will be retained in custody. There really needs to be some forethought on how to handle these people before making such a move as closing the prison. 

Now that the Politicians have completed the reelection cycle, there is a strong de-emphasis on the military's casualties and discomfort. The unpopular (supposedly) war in Iraq, is being downplayed and more emphasis is being placed on Afganistan. But, remember, not as a burden on the soldiers, but as a necessary fight for ???.

More later.

UNITED WE STAND

Stirring words, and very true. The US successfully transitioned its Federal Government from a partially conservative direction to a decidedly socialistic agenda.  I wish the new administration well and can hope that there will be some consideration for the desires of the majority of the people and not a shift towards the special interest groups. We will see, but, unfortunately, I doubt that it will happen.  Hopefully, we will regain the respect for the office of the President no matter who is serving. 

A DIFFERENT APPROACH

There have been many attempts to disarm the general population in the US. Here comes a slightly different idea.

Thomas K. Irvine, a lawyer with certain subspecialties, is outraged with the apparent criminal acts of the HAMAS group in the Gaza Strip. HAMAS has been firing rockets and mortars into Israel with increased frequency to the point that Israel countered with ground and air forces intent on destroying HAMAS capabilities (probably quite effectively). 

But, Mr Irvine has what appears to be a more far reaching solution; Ban all projectiles that are not intelligently aimed. Anyone  or any political organization that so uses, trades, or transports such devices would be subject to severe penalties by a (supposed) world court as well as the organizations leaders.  The charges would be considered "crimes against humanity"

Wow! The implications in this is really astounding. First one needs to identify what munitions would be identified in such a ban. Besides rockets and mortars we could include conventional artillery rounds fired from anywhere (field guns up to and including shipboard armament), Conventional bombs dropped from aircraft,  Hand grenades, Rifles and Pistols,  Arrows fired from bows of any type, Spears, bladed weapons such as knives that are thrown, and even maybe rocks (bolas) when thrown.  I do not know how such things as land and sea mines would be covered. Remember, the definition states something that is intelligently aimed which probably would not include people. 

Next try to identify the appropriate world court and who would be able to fairly judge charges, and then attempt to legislate their power to try and implement sanctions. 

Finally, try to identify any political entity (nation, state,county, city) that would readily give up their sovereignty, to the world court so they would allow themselves to be punished. Also consider what penalties should be imposed.

Sounds to me like the lawyers of the world would see steady employment on this proposal (except in areas controlled by rogue states and unlawfully controlled regions. 

So remember, if this is seriously considered,  the next time a child throws a rock at another child they may be guilty of "crimes against humanity"

SO IT BEGINS

Even before the new President is sworn in, the affront to the US is beginning. It appears that the aircraft used to transport the President will be replaced in order to provide a better and updated version. The only problem as I see it is that the primary company that will most likely be called upon is Airbus,  a FRENCH  company. 

Many might see this as an attempt to provide the best available in our world economy. I see it as a direct repudiation of the US, its companies, and its workers. Another concern of mine is the possibility that the US may have to compromise its security by providing classified documents and protocols to a foreign government (company). 

So did you really wanted this new person as President?

NEW YEAR SAME OLD STUFF

It's a new year, but the trend in various areas of interest have not changed. The worst set of conditions that I can remember now exist in US politics. 

The Governor of Illinois appears to be an unrepentant scam artist who seems to revel in Chicago style politics. He doesn't have the decency to resign with dignity.  He has designated a replacement for a seat in Congress that may be tainted by payoffs and unfair favoritism. 

The government of Minnesota appears to be as corrupt as any third world nation could ever be.  The simple vote counting there, for Congress appears to have been rigged and more than one instance of "ballot stuffing" has occurred. The participants have argued for a recount until the States representatives got the desired outcome. 

I believe that all of the votes cast for all offices both Federal and State at least in Minnesota needs to be thrown out and a new and unbiased set of votes need to be cast. This time, there should be enough oversight of the voting process so that there will be no fraud. All positions that were up for consideration, including the voting for President needs to be considered.  Then, the parties who allowed this to happen need to be censured.