We just got our "SavingsPlus" password and user ID in the mail yesterday 12/24/2012, and what a joke this thing is. Sue wrote a recent blurb on the topic, which is reproduced below. Try not to laugh at the folly of our California lawmakers and what they are trying to foist upon us as "real solutions to real problems". It won't even pass legal muster. Here is the link to California's own website on SavingsPlus. You can read more from this Press Release dated 9/28/2012 on the SavingsPlus program. Read on:
California State Senate Bill 1234 (aka "California Secure Choice Retirement Savings Trust"): California took a tentative (and likely pointless) step toward requiring private employers to withhold 3% of their employees’ wages to give over to a State-run pension plan. The State would collect the money, invest it and eventually pay out retirement sums to the “contributing” employees.
However, the law will not go into effect unless three major hurdles are overcome, which will be very unlikely. The hurdles are:
(1) A State-created board must conduct a market analysis and conclude that the retirement system would be self-sustaining;
(2) the IRS must rule that the contributions can be made on a pre-tax basis; and
(3) the U.S. Department of Labor must rule that the law is not preempted by a federal benefits law known as ERISA.
Given the grossly optimistic assumptions that the State has used in the past to contend that existing public employee pension funds were somehow fully funded, it is likely that the State-created board will pass the 1st hurdle. However, the 3rd hurdle, ERISA preemption, is unlikely to be surmountable. ERISA law clearly provides that no State shall make any law imposing or regulating employee benefits, including pension plans.
The courts have universally applied this rule in a very broad manner, voiding laws similar to SB 1234. The chances of the Department of Labor saying that SB 1234 is not barred by ERISA are slim, at best. But even if all of these hurdles are cleared, additional legislation will be required to actually implement the program.
Tuesday, December 25, 2012
WORLD: Happy Holidays from the Waags!
This is a photo of our dog Shayna sitting in front of the living room window. This is particularly meaningful because our strange dog of 17 years, Shayna, probably will see 2013 as her last year on this earth. She had a good run for such an odd dog, and we love her and will miss her.
About the photograph: Even though we don't have any snow in San Luis Obispo, it appears that there is a pine tree and snow outside - a fortuitous deception for this photographer. Also, I photoshopped in the lights around the frame of the window by cloning a light from one on the Christmas tree. Not a deception - just advantageous art. Merry Christmas!
STATE: ObamaCare and the California Legislative Supermajority in 2013
********************
UPDATE 12/25/2012: To those who are still under the illusion that ObamaCare will some you some money, think again. We use a program called TASC (AgriPlan, BizPlan) to administer our Section 105 Plan for our business. After the advent of ObamaCare, TASC immediately raised their annual fee to administer our plan from $220 per year to the current rate of $395 per year. The reason for DOUBLING our plan administration fee was due to additional complexity added by ObamaCare. The complex and expensive new requirements that primarily kick in in 2014 (including the new Health Insurance Exchanges) will mark the beginning of the end for private medical insurance in this country. We'll just have to wait and see.
********************
ORIGINAL ARTICLE POSTED 12/25/2012
Below are 2 articles that I wrote for a recent publication. They set the stage for employers to get ready for 2013 - it'll take your breath away! I predicted we are going to go off the fiscal cliff, and it looks like that is going to happen. Anyways, here are the 2 articles.
Article 1. ObamaCare
This publication gives extensive coverage to the ever-increasing demands placed upon employers by the health mandate commonly referred to as “ObamaCare”. Thanks to our benefits attorney for covering “where we have been and where we are going” for employers that are still trying to provide affordable health care coverage to their employees. We normally do not devote this much space to coverage of a single subject, but anything that dramatically changes one-sixth of our entire U. S. economy cannot be ignored or glossed over. [Note that the article that is being referred above to is NOT posted in this blog, as it is WAY too long at 3,103 words!]
Not being health care benefit experts, we are just as anxious as our clients and friends when it comes to understanding what ObamaCare may be foisting upon us. The legislation underlying the mandates is complex, technical, and often obscure. This newsletter, unfortunately, is only able to serve as a starting point for helping you and your business to sort it out.
Democrat Supermajority in 2013
A less talked-about change of dynamics for 2013 has to do with our new Democrat supermajority in the California state Legislature. Democrats have unrestricted, unchecked power in the executive and the legislative branch, and all the responsibility (and blame) that goes with it.
Since it takes two-thirds of the California Legislature to enact a variety of important legislation, the Republicans have for years been able to easily frustrate Democrat ambitions. With Democrat victories in the November 2012 election, there is now an unfettered shift in power.
Many expect a full-out assault on the taxpayers of California, while others hope that restraint is the order of the day. Either way, Democrats will own 100% of whatever direction is taken.
Democrat leaders are facing years of pent-up desire among their grassroots supporters to roll back spending cuts, rebuild the state’s water system, amend the state’s tax code, revamp California’s governance system and more. We’ll just have to wait and see what happens. It should be an interesting year for California businesses.
Article 2. Small Employers Cope with the New Health Law: Cost and Compliance Issues with ObamaCare
With many small employers still recovering from the financial collapse of 2008, they now face certain increased cost impacts from ObamaCare on their fiscal bottom lines.
Compliance Issues Still Not Well-Defined: If small employers are uncertain about the impact to their business of the new health care reform laws, they are not alone. The simple fact is that, though the “Affordable Care Act” (“ACA”) was passed into law in March of 2010, the federal government is still trying to define the requirements for employers.
Exceeding the 50 Employee Headcount: One of the magic numbers related to ObamaCare is fifty - that’s right, as in, do I have more or less than 50 employees? As in: if I stay under 50 employees, then I might escape the requirement starting in 2014 to offer workers health insurance or pay a penalty for not providing it.
Legal Ways to Stay Under the 50 Employee Number: Many small employers are looking for possible ways to legally stay under the 50 employee threshold. The easiest and most obvious way is to simply not grow their business over that 50-employee count. Unfortunately, that may mean giving up on revenue growth targets and the additional jobs that would go with it.
Other small employers have been looking at splitting the company up into multiple pieces, each with fewer than 50 employees. However, the Internal Revenue Service already thought of that — workers who are employed in a common group of businesses must be treated as being employed by a single owner, so this will not work unless you truly divest parts of your business.
Dealing with Increased Health Costs: Even before taking into account the added expenses of the new health care law, family health insurance premiums have roughly doubled since 2002. Avoiding the associated costs and regulatory burdens of ObamaCare are not options for many larger businesses. Already operating on thin margins, many business owners feel they have to find a way to deal with the increased health costs or close down all or part of their operations.
Other business owners are exploring raising their prices if possible, or moving part of their operation overseas and out of the reach of ObamaCare, just like the “big boys” already do.
While many struggle to provide health insurance to their employees by paying the most they can afford to pay, owners worry that they will not be able to meet the “minimum essential” mandate, which requires employers to pay 60% of the total cost of the plans benefits. So the impact of ObamaCare may be that some employers who offer insurance will stop doing so.
Towards a Single-Payer Solution: Many observers also believe that the expected drop off in employer-sponsored health coverage due to onerous costs and regulatory burdens may pave the way for a single-payer health care system in the future. Note that I believe that this is exactly the result of the complex, incomprehensible and unaffordable ObamaCare. ACA will create much chaos and mayhem first before citizens finally scream for a single-payer system. The calm, rational logical for single-payer will be: ANYTHING is better than this cr*p health care plan we have now! I am predicting that it would take about 15 to 20 years of ObamaCare chaos before a change to single-payer is fully engaged.
UPDATE 12/25/2012: To those who are still under the illusion that ObamaCare will some you some money, think again. We use a program called TASC (AgriPlan, BizPlan) to administer our Section 105 Plan for our business. After the advent of ObamaCare, TASC immediately raised their annual fee to administer our plan from $220 per year to the current rate of $395 per year. The reason for DOUBLING our plan administration fee was due to additional complexity added by ObamaCare. The complex and expensive new requirements that primarily kick in in 2014 (including the new Health Insurance Exchanges) will mark the beginning of the end for private medical insurance in this country. We'll just have to wait and see.
********************
ORIGINAL ARTICLE POSTED 12/25/2012
Below are 2 articles that I wrote for a recent publication. They set the stage for employers to get ready for 2013 - it'll take your breath away! I predicted we are going to go off the fiscal cliff, and it looks like that is going to happen. Anyways, here are the 2 articles.
Article 1. ObamaCare
This publication gives extensive coverage to the ever-increasing demands placed upon employers by the health mandate commonly referred to as “ObamaCare”. Thanks to our benefits attorney for covering “where we have been and where we are going” for employers that are still trying to provide affordable health care coverage to their employees. We normally do not devote this much space to coverage of a single subject, but anything that dramatically changes one-sixth of our entire U. S. economy cannot be ignored or glossed over. [Note that the article that is being referred above to is NOT posted in this blog, as it is WAY too long at 3,103 words!]
Not being health care benefit experts, we are just as anxious as our clients and friends when it comes to understanding what ObamaCare may be foisting upon us. The legislation underlying the mandates is complex, technical, and often obscure. This newsletter, unfortunately, is only able to serve as a starting point for helping you and your business to sort it out.
Democrat Supermajority in 2013
A less talked-about change of dynamics for 2013 has to do with our new Democrat supermajority in the California state Legislature. Democrats have unrestricted, unchecked power in the executive and the legislative branch, and all the responsibility (and blame) that goes with it.
Since it takes two-thirds of the California Legislature to enact a variety of important legislation, the Republicans have for years been able to easily frustrate Democrat ambitions. With Democrat victories in the November 2012 election, there is now an unfettered shift in power.
Many expect a full-out assault on the taxpayers of California, while others hope that restraint is the order of the day. Either way, Democrats will own 100% of whatever direction is taken.
Democrat leaders are facing years of pent-up desire among their grassroots supporters to roll back spending cuts, rebuild the state’s water system, amend the state’s tax code, revamp California’s governance system and more. We’ll just have to wait and see what happens. It should be an interesting year for California businesses.
Article 2. Small Employers Cope with the New Health Law: Cost and Compliance Issues with ObamaCare
With many small employers still recovering from the financial collapse of 2008, they now face certain increased cost impacts from ObamaCare on their fiscal bottom lines.
Compliance Issues Still Not Well-Defined: If small employers are uncertain about the impact to their business of the new health care reform laws, they are not alone. The simple fact is that, though the “Affordable Care Act” (“ACA”) was passed into law in March of 2010, the federal government is still trying to define the requirements for employers.
Exceeding the 50 Employee Headcount: One of the magic numbers related to ObamaCare is fifty - that’s right, as in, do I have more or less than 50 employees? As in: if I stay under 50 employees, then I might escape the requirement starting in 2014 to offer workers health insurance or pay a penalty for not providing it.
Legal Ways to Stay Under the 50 Employee Number: Many small employers are looking for possible ways to legally stay under the 50 employee threshold. The easiest and most obvious way is to simply not grow their business over that 50-employee count. Unfortunately, that may mean giving up on revenue growth targets and the additional jobs that would go with it.
Other small employers have been looking at splitting the company up into multiple pieces, each with fewer than 50 employees. However, the Internal Revenue Service already thought of that — workers who are employed in a common group of businesses must be treated as being employed by a single owner, so this will not work unless you truly divest parts of your business.
Dealing with Increased Health Costs: Even before taking into account the added expenses of the new health care law, family health insurance premiums have roughly doubled since 2002. Avoiding the associated costs and regulatory burdens of ObamaCare are not options for many larger businesses. Already operating on thin margins, many business owners feel they have to find a way to deal with the increased health costs or close down all or part of their operations.
Other business owners are exploring raising their prices if possible, or moving part of their operation overseas and out of the reach of ObamaCare, just like the “big boys” already do.
While many struggle to provide health insurance to their employees by paying the most they can afford to pay, owners worry that they will not be able to meet the “minimum essential” mandate, which requires employers to pay 60% of the total cost of the plans benefits. So the impact of ObamaCare may be that some employers who offer insurance will stop doing so.
Towards a Single-Payer Solution: Many observers also believe that the expected drop off in employer-sponsored health coverage due to onerous costs and regulatory burdens may pave the way for a single-payer health care system in the future. Note that I believe that this is exactly the result of the complex, incomprehensible and unaffordable ObamaCare. ACA will create much chaos and mayhem first before citizens finally scream for a single-payer system. The calm, rational logical for single-payer will be: ANYTHING is better than this cr*p health care plan we have now! I am predicting that it would take about 15 to 20 years of ObamaCare chaos before a change to single-payer is fully engaged.
Wednesday, December 12, 2012
WORLD: Hey, Today is 12/12/12!!!!
WORLD: Hey, Today is 12/12/12!!!! Okay, I thought it was a cool date. Apparently, I'll do anything to avoid working! For that, I owe you a cool photo stream (below). This set of three is from a recent trip to the Mojave Road (click on Photo to enlarge):
This is a well-known stop along the Mojave Road 4x4 adventure trail - the old bus parked in an area that was farmed (!) during the Great Depression in the late 1930's when it rained hard out there for a few years! That's Sue in the window.
In general, there is a certain fascination when an old bus is found in the middle of nowhere - apparently. That concept was made famous by Christopher McCandless' death in 1992 and subsequent book by John Krakauer "The Call of the Wild" - click here for info on the book (you should read it, and though it is depressing, it does make the point that you shouldn't be wandering the wilderness alone when you have no clue to what you are doing; RIP C. McC.). Fascinating fact: Chris McCandless was born in El Segundo, Calif., where I went to High School and my brother and Mom still live.
This is a well-known stop along the Mojave Road 4x4 adventure trail - the old bus parked in an area that was farmed (!) during the Great Depression in the late 1930's when it rained hard out there for a few years! That's Sue in the window.
In general, there is a certain fascination when an old bus is found in the middle of nowhere - apparently. That concept was made famous by Christopher McCandless' death in 1992 and subsequent book by John Krakauer "The Call of the Wild" - click here for info on the book (you should read it, and though it is depressing, it does make the point that you shouldn't be wandering the wilderness alone when you have no clue to what you are doing; RIP C. McC.). Fascinating fact: Chris McCandless was born in El Segundo, Calif., where I went to High School and my brother and Mom still live.
The bus sprouts awesome spraypaint color from the front:
Well-known saying on the hood of the bus:
"Jesus Loves You - Everyone Else Thinks your (sic) An Asshole!"
Tuesday, December 11, 2012
NATIONAL: 'Tis the Season!
Just got in an email from John U - thanks for the laugh, buddy. Have a great Christmas - hope all is well. Haven't seen or talked to you in a while - maybe 2013? Click image to enlarge.
Another funny one, sent to me by R1:
An old man was asked, "At your ripe age, what do you prefer to get - Parkinson's or Alzheimer's?"
The wise one answered, "Definitely Parkinson's. Better to spill half an ounce of Jack Daniels, than to forget where you keep the bottle!"
Below: one of our elderly friends, barely escaped this tragic wreck, but D*MN if he didn't remember where he kept the jack! Some would say that he was lucky to walk away, but I say he was lucky to get Parkinson's instead of Alzheimer's, since he managed to find the bottle of jack hidden in the glovebox while waiting for the Jaws of Life to pry him out of the wreckage! (Note: I normally do NOT put photos of anyone who is recognizable, but in this case, it really could be any of us with a bottle of Jack plastered to our face!). Click Photo to Enlarge.
Friday, December 7, 2012
NATIONAL: Soak the Rich, No Matter What!
No, I am not in the 1% - not even close. Perhaps within the Top 20%, but I'd have to look it up and I'm just too busy (or too lazy) to do it - I'm not sure which. I'm on an overnight coffee buzz, as I just stayed up all night as a volunteer supervisor at the Homeless Shelter Overflow hosted by the Carmel Lutheran Church in SLO. So I may be using poor, sleep-deprived judgment in writing this, but hey - I'm going for it anyways...
********************
SOAK THE RICH, PART I - STATE DISABILITY INSURANCE
"What an Outrage: Millionaires Get Unemployment, Too" Click on the article and read it, then read my comments below. The article is from the December 2012 AARP Bulletin, Page 8 (yes, I'm THAT old).
The AARP is irrationally opposed to millionaires who PAY THE MANDATORY UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE PREMIUM (aka State Disability Insurance, or SDI), and then when they get laid off, have the NERVE TO ACTUALLY TRY TO COLLECT on the insurance that they PAID for! What an outrage! Shouldn't they just shut the F*CK up and pay their mandatory unemployment INSURANCE premiums, and then when they are laid off, shouldn't those D*MN millionaires just forego collecting on the SDI they already paid for? Is this where our society is headed - Soak the rich, no matter what?
Surely, the 1 percenters don't understand how insurance works - collect on an insurance policy after they paid their premiums - how dare they? And what's next? How about having our wise and willful government confiscate the auto insurance pay-out of millionaires when they get into an accident? Isn't that the same thing? Just have the millionaires who reliably pay their auto insurance, then when its time to collect (i.e., their car is damaged by others), what right do those D*MN millionaires have to collect on their auto insurance policy? Doesn't our government need it more than the millionaires need it to fix their car? Whew. Glad I'm not a millionaire - the new public ENEMY number one, apparently.
New Legislation Proposed?: The geniuses at the AARP note that lawmakers are proposing legislation to make the millionaires continue to PAY for unemployment insurance, but NEVER be able to COLLECT. The legislation is called "The Ending Unemployment Payments to Jobless Millionaires Act" (hey, at least the name is accurate for once!), and it is said to have wide support. At least our representatives should have the B*LLS to remove the word INSURANCE from the SDI unemployment insurance payroll deduction line item on everyone's paycheck, should the legislation get passed into law. Maybe they could just call it the Unemployment Tax - just what it would become.
This is all part of an unwise trend towards Means Testing benefits and entitlements that would otherwise accrue to those who either:
(A) earn a big paycheck, or
(B) are frugal and have saved and invested for a lifetime.
Read this fine article about the trend in Means Testing and Wealth Taxation by clicking here. Even though the article in "National Affairs" was written in the Fall 2011, it still applies today and gives a thorough treatment of the subject. Don't be ignorant - read the article and decide for yourself.
In case you don't understand how SDI works, here are some quick statistics for California. The bottom line is that millionaires pay a maximum of $1,009 per YEAR in SDI, and can collect up to a maximum of $1,067 per week.
********************
SOAK THE RICH, PART II - ELIMINATE HOME MORTGAGE DEDUCTION
Just got through reading a story from the Los Angeles Times dated 12/10/2012 that indicates that Fiscal Cliff negotiations may include reducing but NOT eliminating the mortgage deduction (click here to read it).
BACKGROUND (EDUCATE YERSELF): When the federal government first began collecting income taxes from us in 1913, the mortgage interest deduction was allowed at that time, along with any other consumer interest, including credit card interest deductions and auto loan interest deductions. In 1986, the tax code was modified to eliminate the credit card and auto loan deduction, but the mortgage deduction was specifically kept because then-president Reagan said he wanted to keep it was a way to help common folks achieve the American dream of home ownership. Those who say that the mortgage interest deduction was NEVER meant to help Americans buy and afford homes would appear to be INcorrect. More recently, the home mortgage interest deduction was limited to mortages on up to $1,000,000 and you can read about that here. I was not able to find out when the $1,000,000 limitation went into affect, but it was fairly recently.
Statistics have shown that mortgage interest helps those with household incomes over $100,000 much more than those below that income level. In fact, 78% of the $83,000,000,000 (83 billion dollars) went to those with household income above $100,000. Fair enough. I would not personally call those making $100,000 a year, especially in places like Los Angeles, New York and San Francisco, "rich". I would call them upper middle class, so let's go with that. The mortgage deduction really helps upper middle class citizens own homes - these are the homes that are built (think contractors) and maintained (think plumbers, electricians, etc.) by lower and middle income earners. Wonder what reduction in the mortgage interest deduction would do to those lower earners? The law of unintended consequences would rear its ugly head again (it almost always does), should reductions in mortgage interest deduction go into affect, in my opinion.
Statistics have shown that mortgage interest helps those with household incomes over $100,000 much more than those below that income level. In fact, 78% of the $83,000,000,000 (83 billion dollars) went to those with household income above $100,000. Fair enough. I would not personally call those making $100,000 a year, especially in places like Los Angeles, New York and San Francisco, "rich". I would call them upper middle class, so let's go with that. The mortgage deduction really helps upper middle class citizens own homes - these are the homes that are built (think contractors) and maintained (think plumbers, electricians, etc.) by lower and middle income earners. Wonder what reduction in the mortgage interest deduction would do to those lower earners? The law of unintended consequences would rear its ugly head again (it almost always does), should reductions in mortgage interest deduction go into affect, in my opinion.
********************
SOAK THE RICH, PART I - STATE DISABILITY INSURANCE
"What an Outrage: Millionaires Get Unemployment, Too" Click on the article and read it, then read my comments below. The article is from the December 2012 AARP Bulletin, Page 8 (yes, I'm THAT old).
The AARP is irrationally opposed to millionaires who PAY THE MANDATORY UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE PREMIUM (aka State Disability Insurance, or SDI), and then when they get laid off, have the NERVE TO ACTUALLY TRY TO COLLECT on the insurance that they PAID for! What an outrage! Shouldn't they just shut the F*CK up and pay their mandatory unemployment INSURANCE premiums, and then when they are laid off, shouldn't those D*MN millionaires just forego collecting on the SDI they already paid for? Is this where our society is headed - Soak the rich, no matter what?
Surely, the 1 percenters don't understand how insurance works - collect on an insurance policy after they paid their premiums - how dare they? And what's next? How about having our wise and willful government confiscate the auto insurance pay-out of millionaires when they get into an accident? Isn't that the same thing? Just have the millionaires who reliably pay their auto insurance, then when its time to collect (i.e., their car is damaged by others), what right do those D*MN millionaires have to collect on their auto insurance policy? Doesn't our government need it more than the millionaires need it to fix their car? Whew. Glad I'm not a millionaire - the new public ENEMY number one, apparently.
New Legislation Proposed?: The geniuses at the AARP note that lawmakers are proposing legislation to make the millionaires continue to PAY for unemployment insurance, but NEVER be able to COLLECT. The legislation is called "The Ending Unemployment Payments to Jobless Millionaires Act" (hey, at least the name is accurate for once!), and it is said to have wide support. At least our representatives should have the B*LLS to remove the word INSURANCE from the SDI unemployment insurance payroll deduction line item on everyone's paycheck, should the legislation get passed into law. Maybe they could just call it the Unemployment Tax - just what it would become.
This is all part of an unwise trend towards Means Testing benefits and entitlements that would otherwise accrue to those who either:
(A) earn a big paycheck, or
(B) are frugal and have saved and invested for a lifetime.
Read this fine article about the trend in Means Testing and Wealth Taxation by clicking here. Even though the article in "National Affairs" was written in the Fall 2011, it still applies today and gives a thorough treatment of the subject. Don't be ignorant - read the article and decide for yourself.
In case you don't understand how SDI works, here are some quick statistics for California. The bottom line is that millionaires pay a maximum of $1,009 per YEAR in SDI, and can collect up to a maximum of $1,067 per week.
Tuesday, December 4, 2012
WORLD: Psy Brings us Gangham Style & Suzie and the Terminators Brings us Micro-Manage Style
Stayed tuned for more on this cultural phenomenon.
Micro-Manage Style
Micro-Manage
Style.
All
the while.
I am the new boss and I’m not here to amuse ya,
Don’t want your in-put / cuz I’m here to abuse ya.
Everybody thinks they know / how to do their job.
But you know who does a better job? Do you?
I’ll give you a guess
:
It’s me and I’m the hardest one / to impress.
I’m not saying that you people need to be oppressed.
Suck up to me and kiss my feet until you are a pest.
You passed the test!
CHORUS:
And I’m the leader,
the greatest leader.
Who’d have known? Me!
You should have known! Yay!
I run the office,
so who’d oppose me?
Any of You? Nay!
How bout you? Nay!
It may have been a greatest fear, the CEO chose chose ch ch ch
ch chose me
!!
Micro-Manage Style!
All the while!!
Work-work-work-work.
Micro-Manage Style!
Let’s chill for a while.
Back to work!
Hey – Do it my way!
Work-work-work-work-work.
Micro-Manage Style!
Hey – Do it my way!
Work-work-work, then work / torture!
I think you thought you knew just how to get along.
But I can see you even / drink your coffee wrong.
You should throw back hot shots, and drink it extra strong.
Your five-minute break still / way too long.
Teach-a how to dress.
You can-not come to work here / in that awful vest.
Need to change your hair because it’s just / not the best.
By the way, you really smell / so here’s a bar of Zest.
‘Member more is less!
CHORUS:
Micro-Manage Style!
Make sure and smile!
Micro-Manage Style.
You’re in denial.
All the while.
Hey – Do it my way!
Work-work-work-work-work.
Micro-Manage Style!
Hey – Do it my way!
Work-work-work, then work / torture!
I’m
in your head, always in your head.
Even
when you are asleep and layin’ in your bed.
I’m
in your head, always in your head.
Even
when you are asleep and layin’ in your bed.
What
I say!
Micro-Manage
Style!
Hey – Do it my way!
Work-work-work-work-work.
Micro-Manage Style!
Hey – Do it my way!
Work-work-work, then work / torture!
Micro-Manage Style!
Monday, December 3, 2012
WORLD: Becoming a Millionaire is a Skill
FANTASY: Let's suppose we take all the wealth in America and divide it evenly between all the folks currently in the country (legal and illegal). Then we say "Go", and let everyone go about their business.
Within a year, what do you suppose will happen to that equal distribution of assets? Answer: those who are good at hustling and making money will, once again, become the 1%. That much is obvious, but why? Because making money is a skill that some people are good at, and no matter how much the government intends to "soak the rich", it only ends up hurting the lower and middle class, because the rich know how to work within ANY system and make money.
Think of the rich as having skills like Michael Jordan, Kareem Abdul Jabbar or Magic Johnson, only in financial instead of basketball terms. You might not like this fact, and you may agree with decisions that fly in the face of this reality, but reality it is. Below, we have some recent real world examples from Britain and France that illustrate this point rather vividly.
THE SCARY FISCAL CLIFF: During the current negotiations regarding the so-called "Fiscal Cliff", much is made of taxing the millionaires and billionaires, because they can "afford to give a little more". That much is true, though digging deeper into this issue is much more interesting. Shall we?
There is a neat little article on Britains Missing Millionaires. I'll pause while you read it. Here's a favorite quote from the article: "A funny thing often happens on the way to soaking the rich: They don't stick around for the bath." Okay, if you didn't read the article, here's my synopsis:
Within a year, what do you suppose will happen to that equal distribution of assets? Answer: those who are good at hustling and making money will, once again, become the 1%. That much is obvious, but why? Because making money is a skill that some people are good at, and no matter how much the government intends to "soak the rich", it only ends up hurting the lower and middle class, because the rich know how to work within ANY system and make money.
Think of the rich as having skills like Michael Jordan, Kareem Abdul Jabbar or Magic Johnson, only in financial instead of basketball terms. You might not like this fact, and you may agree with decisions that fly in the face of this reality, but reality it is. Below, we have some recent real world examples from Britain and France that illustrate this point rather vividly.
THE SCARY FISCAL CLIFF: During the current negotiations regarding the so-called "Fiscal Cliff", much is made of taxing the millionaires and billionaires, because they can "afford to give a little more". That much is true, though digging deeper into this issue is much more interesting. Shall we?
There is a neat little article on Britains Missing Millionaires. I'll pause while you read it. Here's a favorite quote from the article: "A funny thing often happens on the way to soaking the rich: They don't stick around for the bath." Okay, if you didn't read the article, here's my synopsis:
- Britain 2009: 16,000 taxpayers declared income of a million euros or more, at the current federal tax rate of 40% (higher than the rate in the US today).
- Britain 2009: These 16,000 millionaires pay 13.4 billion euros in taxes, or 9% of all federal taxes.
- Britain 2010: Top tax rates raised from 40% to 50% in order to "soak the rich" to pay for all the goodies.
- Britain 2010: Millionaires say "we're not gonna take it anymore" (regarding the higher 50% rate) and leave the country in droves.
- Britain 2010: Now there are only 6,000 millionaires (down from 16,000 the year before). These remaining millionaires pay only 6.5 billion euros, amounting to a mere 4.4% of federal tax receipts. Tax collections from those making a million dollars or more have been reduced by MORE THAN HALF! Instead of raising revenue, this clever rate increase dramatically REDUCED taxes collected - I'm shocked!
- Conclusion: Rich people aren't the stupid fellows that the Obama-ites that re-elected him think they are. They won't take a tax fleecing without a fight - what a surprise! Rich people get rich by knowing how to make money and how to keep it, because its a SKILL!
The story doesn't end there, however. Let's move on to France. The French failed to observe the behavior of their British brethren across the English Channel (see above), and recently topped them with a top tax rate of 75% - that will certainly soak those rich buggers! Now we get to read about France's Missing Millionaires. An interesting side affect of the rich French folks leaving is that they have decided to put up their fancy mansions on the market at fire sale prices, and the foreign SUPER rich have moved in to snap them up, knowing that they won't have to become a taxpaying resident of France and pay the 75% income tax. The result? The French (and the Brits, for that matter), end up LOSING tax revenue by raising rates to an intolerable level, and as a bonus, the French get to have foreigners (mostly Middle Eastern oil sheiks, it would seem) owning their historic French mansions - I'm not seeing this tax increase ending well for the French, either, no more than it has for the Brits before them.
Are you still feeling good about the current movement to "make the rich pay their fair share" in this country? I mean, after all, the 1 percenters in America only pay 40% of all federal income taxes - shouldn't that be higher? That's a trick question, so be careful how you answer it!
(Secret answer: see how the French and British higher earners reacted to tax increases, and then assume that the American rich are even smarter and more clever than their European counterparts, and you'll have your answer).
If you are still not convinced, look at what happens to regular old folks who win the lottery: usually, within a few years, they have lost it all due to bad decisions. The winners often wish that they had never won at all! Why, you ask? Well, because they don't understand money: both how to make it and how to manage it, and consequently, its like being given a Los Angeles Lakers jersey and getting to start for the team - despite your good fortune, you just don't stand a chance!
Here's is one of my favorite quotes (I'm NOT making this up) from the above article on Lottery Winners who ended up Losers:
"In 1998, William "Bud" Post III won $16.2 million in the Pennsylvania lottery, only to later wish it had never happened. That's because his brother hired a hit man to try to kill him and his sixth wife (and was arrested for doing so), other relatives made him invest in businesses that never paid off, a landlady made him give her a third of his winnings, and Post "spent time in jail for firing a gun over the head of a bill collector." He declared bankruptcy and, in 2006, at the age of, 66, "died of respiratory failure... at a Pittsburgh area hospital"
Are you still feeling good about the current movement to "make the rich pay their fair share" in this country? I mean, after all, the 1 percenters in America only pay 40% of all federal income taxes - shouldn't that be higher? That's a trick question, so be careful how you answer it!
(Secret answer: see how the French and British higher earners reacted to tax increases, and then assume that the American rich are even smarter and more clever than their European counterparts, and you'll have your answer).
If you are still not convinced, look at what happens to regular old folks who win the lottery: usually, within a few years, they have lost it all due to bad decisions. The winners often wish that they had never won at all! Why, you ask? Well, because they don't understand money: both how to make it and how to manage it, and consequently, its like being given a Los Angeles Lakers jersey and getting to start for the team - despite your good fortune, you just don't stand a chance!
Here's is one of my favorite quotes (I'm NOT making this up) from the above article on Lottery Winners who ended up Losers:
"In 1998, William "Bud" Post III won $16.2 million in the Pennsylvania lottery, only to later wish it had never happened. That's because his brother hired a hit man to try to kill him and his sixth wife (and was arrested for doing so), other relatives made him invest in businesses that never paid off, a landlady made him give her a third of his winnings, and Post "spent time in jail for firing a gun over the head of a bill collector." He declared bankruptcy and, in 2006, at the age of, 66, "died of respiratory failure... at a Pittsburgh area hospital"
Saturday, December 1, 2012
NATIONAL: Can Drowsy Drivers Sleep in their Vehicles?
Dear SLO Homeless People,
If you have been cited for sleeping in your vehicles, perhaps this is a way to prove your innocence and get out of the citation. Law enforcement has to decide whether they want you driving on the road while dangerously drowsy, or napping on the side of the street your in your vehicle or RV. If you are too tired to drive, then you should be able to sleep in your vehicle to prevent getting prosecuted by law enforcement for drowsy driving - a recognized illegal activity, according to law enforcement. Read on:
As newly licenses drivers, we were taught to pull off to the side of the road if we were too tired to drive and take a nap - that is, go to sleep. Drowsy drivers are finding themselves in the news, after some high profile criminal prosecutions of drowsy drivers have made the national stage. The most prominent case is that of bus driver Ophadell Williams, who crashed a bus on March 12, 2011, killing 15 passengers; you can read about it by clicking here.
When I have been too tired to continue driving, I have pulled off the road and slept in the back of my truck. Several times, law enforcement has harassed me for just this such activity, despite my protestations about being too tired to drive. I have now clipped out an article from today's San Luis Obispo Tribune Newspaper to keep in my car. In the article, it points out how driving while drowsy is a prosecutable offense, according to current law enforcement.
At the web site, DrowsyDriving.org, there are facts and statistics on the danger of driving while drowsy. I picked this selection from the Drowsy Driving web site to illustrate the benefits of pulling over to take a nap:
Sleep deprivation and fatigue make lapses of attention more likely to occur, and may play a role in behavior that can lead to crashes attributed to other causes.
If you have been cited for sleeping in your vehicles, perhaps this is a way to prove your innocence and get out of the citation. Law enforcement has to decide whether they want you driving on the road while dangerously drowsy, or napping on the side of the street your in your vehicle or RV. If you are too tired to drive, then you should be able to sleep in your vehicle to prevent getting prosecuted by law enforcement for drowsy driving - a recognized illegal activity, according to law enforcement. Read on:
As newly licenses drivers, we were taught to pull off to the side of the road if we were too tired to drive and take a nap - that is, go to sleep. Drowsy drivers are finding themselves in the news, after some high profile criminal prosecutions of drowsy drivers have made the national stage. The most prominent case is that of bus driver Ophadell Williams, who crashed a bus on March 12, 2011, killing 15 passengers; you can read about it by clicking here.
When I have been too tired to continue driving, I have pulled off the road and slept in the back of my truck. Several times, law enforcement has harassed me for just this such activity, despite my protestations about being too tired to drive. I have now clipped out an article from today's San Luis Obispo Tribune Newspaper to keep in my car. In the article, it points out how driving while drowsy is a prosecutable offense, according to current law enforcement.
At the web site, DrowsyDriving.org, there are facts and statistics on the danger of driving while drowsy. I picked this selection from the Drowsy Driving web site to illustrate the benefits of pulling over to take a nap:
Sleep deprivation and fatigue make lapses of attention more likely to occur, and may play a role in behavior that can lead to crashes attributed to other causes.
- According to NSF’s 2000 Sleep in America poll, when they are driving drowsy, 42 percent of those polled said they become stressed, 32 percent get impatient and 12 percent tend to drive faster.
- In the same poll, about one in five drivers (22%) said they pull over to nap when driving drowsy. Older adults are more likely to pull over and nap than younger drivers, who are most likely to drive when drowsy and least likely to pull over and nap.
- People tend to fall asleep more on high-speed, long, boring, rural highways. However, those who live in urban areas are more likely to doze off while driving compared to people in rural or suburban areas (24% vs. 17%).
- Most crashes or near misses occur between 4:00 – 6:00 a.m.; midnight – 2:00 a.m. and 2:00 – 4:00 p.m. are also peak times for crashes to occur. Nearly one-quarter of adults (23%) say they know someone personally who has crashed due to falling asleep at the wheel.
- In NSF’s 1999 Sleep in America poll, 60 percent of parents with children who drive living in the household said they have not discussed the dangers of falling asleep at the wheel. In the 2002 poll, nearly all respondents (96%) agreed that information about driving while drowsy should be included in tests for a driver’s license.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)