Good Businesses Respond to Facts, Not Ads by Lawrence W. Reed

“Move here, expand here, or start a new business here and pay no taxes for ten years!” So goes the slick, nationally-broadcast television ads on which the State of New York is spending a small fortune.

Sounds like an attractive offer but the devil is in two big details the ads omit: One, when the ten years are up, you’ll get socked with the highest tax burden among the 50 states; and Two, taxes are just one of many reasons New York is too costly and unattractive to many entrepreneurs. It’s also home to high rates of unionization and a hostile regulatory environment. In the most recent study of state-by-state economic freedom from the Mercatus Center, New York places dead last. Georgia ranked a very healthy #9.

This raises yet again a longstanding question about economic development: Which is better for business, a friendly overall environment with no special favors or an unfriendly environment offset by “incentives” for particular firms or certain activities? It ought to be a no-brainer but sadly, it isn’t. Count me in the first camp.

Imagine a bad restaurant with high prices, lousy service and an awful menu. What would you think if the owner decided that the solution to declining sales was not to fix anything but to go out in the street, cherry-pick passersby and offer them a discount? For every new customer he might get, who could blame any of the old ones who would resent the discrimination and leave in a huff? If the restaurant owner really wanted to put his business on a sound footing, he would cut his high prices, improve his lousy service and replace his awful menu—for everybody, not just a favored few.

Well, New York is a bad restaurant. Expensive television ads are the politicians’ cowardly way of saying they don’t want to make the tough decisions to actually fix their state’s problems. They either think business people are dumb enough to ignore the facts and be suckered by a TV spot, or they just don’t understand the most basic lesson of economic development: The really good entrepreneurs you should want are the ones attracted by economic freedom, not by short-term favors and empty political promises.

States can foster superior and sustainable growth if they spend less energy on a few trees and care instead for the forest as a whole. Subsidies, tax breaks and other targeted, discriminatory “incentives” are not good substitutes for fixing the fundamentals. They’re also unfair to those without the political pull to get them. The states that get it right don’t have to squander money on advertisements—whether true or deceptive—because any entrepreneur worth his salt will know where to go and what places to shun.

A version of this article appeared in the Atlanta Business Chronicle.

20130918_larryreedauthorABOUT LAWRENCE W. REED

Lawrence W. (“Larry”) Reed became president of FEE in 2008 after serving as chairman of its board of trustees in the 1990s and both writing and speaking for FEE since the late 1970s. Prior to becoming FEE’s president, he served for 20 years as president of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy in Midland, Michigan. He also taught economics full-time from 1977 to 1984 at Northwood University in Michigan and chaired its department of economics from 1982 to 1984.

FP&L – No “Choice” of Meters for 36,000 Floridians

By now many of you that refused the installation of FP&L’s smart meters have received a “Dear Customer” letter telling you that you have a choice of meters. The letter goes on to say that if you don’t take their smart meter that you will be charged $95 upfront and $13/month to retain your old meter. If you haven’t received such letter, you will shortly.

On January 7, 2014 the Florida Public Service Commission (FPSC) approved this deal. Although, it is being contested by two separate citizen petitions (one of which I am leading), the rules state that FP&L can continue as planned with the stipulation that fees collected are “subject to refund”. That is, if the FPSC Order is overturned, they must return the fees charged to the customers.

Why the fees? Well you resistors are “cost causers”. It is a long-standing principle that is invoked at will when they want to get you to comply with the game plan. In 1987/1988 they invoked the same principle when they transferred the ownership of meter enclosures and associated cost burdens (maintenance/replacement) to you the customer. The order (PSC Order # 18893) stated that:

“Since self-contained meter enclosures are not a part of the utility function, but simply house the meter itself, their costs should be borne by the customer when the structure is initially wired for electric service or when it must be replaced due to obsolescence or wear. The burden of maintaining and repairing the enclosures’ must likewise rest with the customer.”

As we all know by now, a smart meter is not “simply a meter” but contains lots of additional components that are part of the utility function. It establishes a wireless Neighborhood Network and sends messages back and forth amongst neighbor meters, remotely disconnects services and monitors your usage. In the future they will turn on the second transmitter to establish your Home Area Network to connect with your Home Energy Controller or Smart Thermostat and will give your smart refrigerator the ability to text you. It collects more data than is needed to bill you for your current plan. But why fuss over details!

If you don’t enroll in their plan, they will slap a smart meter on your home. If you think you got that covered (i.e. you already caged/locked your meter or have restricted access to your meter) think again. You will be automatically enrolled and charged the fee.

The process to fight this will be long and painful. If you don’t want a smart meter you need to:

Retain your analog meter. Once they take it, you will never see it again. (Remember you will get an undefined “non-communicating” meter in the future.) You may want to send a certified letter to FP&L stating that you do not consent and that you are enrolling under duress.

File a formal compliant with the FPSC.  Here is the complaint page http://www.floridapsc.com/consumers/complaints/index2.aspx

Write/call your Florida State Senators/Representatives. They are in session right now. Make your voices heard. Senate – http://www.flsenate.gov/Senators/Find, House: http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Representatives/representatives.aspx

Contact the Energy committees that oversee the FPSC. House Energy & Utilities Subcommittee – http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Committees/committeesdetail.aspx?TermId=85&CommitteeId=2724 and Senate Communications, Energy, and Public Utilities  http://www.flsenate.gov/Committees/Show/CU/

Contact Gov. Scott – http://www.flgov.com/contact-gov-scott/

For those who still believe smart meters save money, ask FP&L how much net operation and maintenance savings are in the current rates you pay.

What they said in the 2009 rate case:

2009 rate case schedule

What they reported in the 2012 rate case:

2012 rate case schedule

The lack of cost savings was confirmed by the Office of Public Counsel who said on October 12, 2012 “However, to OPC’s knowledge, no studies, analyses, or quantification of the benefits or cost savings from the implementation of smart meters exist at this time. OPC is still waiting on the promised cost savings benefits of smart meters to be realized and shared with the customers.” http://www.floridapsc.com/utilities/electricgas/smartmeter/09_20_2012/WorkshopComments/OPC.pdf

Think smart meters prevent outages? Check out Northeast Utilities initial comments in a recent Massachusetts Department of Utilities investigation – “Meters do not reduce the number of outages” (page 4) http://haltmasmartmeters.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/NSTAR_R12-76-Comments-7986-POSTED01172014_HIGHLIGHTED.pdf

And finally, how many of you run home from work or golf and check your FP&L energy dashboard each night? Apparently not many. The last annual report from FP&L showed that as of the end of 2012 with over 4 million meter installed, only about 15% accessed the dashboard about 2 times.

Ted Cruz: Ten Policy Changes To Fundamentally Transform America Back

We agree with all of what Senator Cruz is proposing, with two exceptions – Congress needs to enforce the Constitution, not defend it and the Flat Tax proposal. Congress needs to get out of the tax business altogether and should repeal the Sixteen Amendment and replace it with the Fair Tax (HB 25).

Senator Cruz did not directly address pro-family policies and national security in his remarks. These are two key areas that must be restored if America is to be fundamentally transformed back to its former greatness.

 reports, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)  today advocated “a straightforward and bold, positive agenda to inspire the young, to inspire women, to inspire Hispanics, to inspire everybody” during his speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference. Here are the ten items he called on Americans to do going forward:

1. “Defend the constitution. All of it.”

2. “We need to abolish the IRS. We need to adopt a simple flat tax that is fair [so] that every American can fill out his taxes on a postcard.”

3. “We need to expand energy in this country and create high-paying jobs all over America.”

4. “We need to expand school choice. Every child deserves an opportunity to have an excellent education, regardless of your race, your class, your creed, where you come from – every child deserves a fair chance at the American Dream.”

5. “We need to repeal Dodd-Frank.”

6. “We need to audit the Federal Reserve. Unaccountable power in Washington debasing our currency, driving up the cost of food and gas and the basic stuff of life is hurting Americans who are struggling across this country. And I’ll tell you what else it’s doing: It’s fueling the abuse of power by petro-tyrants like Putin.”

7. “We need to pass a strong balanced budget amendment. We need to stop bankrupting our country.”

8. “We need to repeal every single word of Obamacare.”

9. “We need to stop the lawlessness. This President of the United States is the first President we’ve ever had who thinks he can choose which laws to enforce and which laws to ignore. He announces just about every day one change after another after another in Obamacare. It is utterly lawless. It is inconsistent with our Constitution, and it ought to trouble everyone – Republicans, Democrats, Independents, Libertarians.”

10. “We need to end the corruption. We need to eliminate corporate welfare and crony capitalism. If you come to Washington and serve in Congress, there should be a lifetime ban on lobbying. And we need to pass a strong constitutional amendment that puts into law term limits.”

Allen West: Latest Obama budget is a “fiscal death sentence for America”

I remember being on Capitol Hill and receiving President Obama’s budget resolutions. I don’t think his budget received one vote in my two years there. And it seems that streak will continue with yesterday’s release of the next Obama budget.

Recently the Washington Post described Obama’s foreign policy as being based on fantasy — same for his budget resolution, ridiculous fantasy. Obama has proposed $3.9 trillion in his new budget, which reflects where his spending priorities lie. Obviously he doesn’t believe in fiscal discipline or responsibility and his budget proves it.

As reported by FoxNews.com, “President Obama unveiled a $3.9 trillion budget plan on Tuesday that drops earlier proposals to cut future Social Security benefits and seeks new money for infrastructure, education and jobs training — handing Democrats running for re-election a political playbook but angering Republicans who called the blueprint “irresponsible.”

There is no doubt this is nothing more than a campaign document to try and give Democrats a boost in this election year. It will be used to demonize Republicans once again – Saul-Alinsky style — as mean, rude, nasty, and uncaring. But how can anyone believe that Obama and the Democrats care about the fiscal future of our Republic?

Consider the following factoids; The President’s budget increases spending by $791 billion over the budget window and by $56 billion in 2015 above the Murray–Ryan spending agreement that he signed into law just two months ago. Just more of the typical beltway two-step.

Obama has said that we have been living in an “era of austerity” — well someone forgot to tell him that since 2009, the Obama era, we’ve added $6.8 trillion to the debt and spent $17.6 trillion. But that’s just for starters. Obama’s new budget adds $8.3 trillion more to the debt over the next 10 years and cumulative deficits would amount to $5 trillion, while gross debt climbs to $25 trillion in 2024.

And what will fuel all the new Obama spending? President Obama has already increased taxes by $1.7 trillion. Now, he wants another $1.8 trillion on top of that. Roughly half of the new tax hikes would be dedicated to new spending rather than deficit reduction.

Most damaging is the fact that the current net interest on the debt which is $223 billion a year will explode to $812 billion in 2024, ten years from now. Keep in mind, net interest on the debt is on the mandatory spending side of the US budget and cannot be touched. It is a reflection of increased fiscal borrowing. Lastly, the Obama budget NEVER balances, it just fiscally decimates these United States of America.

Obama’s budget is not worth the paper it’s written upon — it is a fiscal death sentence for America. All it provides are empty talking points for liberal progressives running for office. It is a blueprint of lies.

After 5 years this hasn’t worked which means we’re all clearly insane: continuing to do the same thing and expect different results.

EDITORS NOTE: This column with graphic originally appeared on AllenBWest.com. The featured photo is of President Barack Obama signing the Budget Control Act of 2011 in the Oval Office, Aug. 2, 2011.

A Quick Guide to Obama’s 2015 Budget

14ObamaBudget_V2_MBYesterday, Heritage experts dove into President Obama’s new budget proposal. Check out our infographic to see just a few of the disturbing things they found.

Watching Mt. Gox Collapse from the Inside

Editors’ note: A few months back, we interviewed a full-time BTC trader, who still wishes to remain anonymous. In the wake of Mt. Gox’s collapse, we reached out for comment. Here’s what he had to say:

I did lose some BTC on the collapse, enough to sting, but it’s something of a small price if it means Mt. Gox and Mark [Karpeles, CEO of Mt. Gox] are permanently out of the picture. It also seems the market has priced in the worst result, so it appears the community and markets are already moving on.

The situation is still developing and quickly, and it seems increasingly likely that Mark will suffer multiple lawsuits and potentially criminal charges. By some accounts Gox held over a billion in assets, and people with that sort of money don’t exactly roll over without a fight.

From the few discussions I’ve had, there have been/still are over-the-counter deals being struck between hedge funds and large players to buy out “Gox coins” at 10 percent or 15 percent, etc.—i.e., if I have 1,000 bitcoins on Gox, people are willing to purchase it for 100 bitcoins. A site was made a couple weeks ago that allowed people to trade on this, which was great because it helped alleviate the collapse and I believe softened the price crash.

People were wiring money to Gox to buy up until they stopped trading; I don’t imagine that being swept under the rug. There are ongoing rumors/speculation/etc. that people are interested in buying out the exchange, but it really depends on how much was lost: If Gox is out 750,000 bitcoin, no one is going to touch it, but if it’s much less, then there is still the possibility—either way the situation probably will not be resolved for some time.

Fraud occurs whether or not there is a law to say it’s illegal. I think what will be more important to see is how quickly market players adapt and change services to attract traders. When bad firms are allowed to fail, the pain can be immediate and severe, but it allows wounds to heal instead of having a prolonged uncertainty or a complex debt instrument weighing down the markets. Already, exchanges are looking into how to better broadcast their solvency; since the blockchain is a public ledger, it is easy enough to sign controlling addresses to show “proof” that an entity is in control of the bitcoins they’ve been entrusted with. The trickier issue currently is how to list liabilities (how many coins an exchange is supposed to have) without leaking too much personal information; for a more technical discussion you can start here.

The other thing to keep in mind is that a distributed network that is largely unregulated by governments does not necessarily imply a system that is chaotic and lawless. Enforceable contractual law is necessary for free markets to flourish, and I know we will see more sophisticated agreements form from out of this disaster, either insurance offers, multisignature bonds being held, or some other scheme. The power of a distributed network is in how decisions are made; there isn’t one central point of failure wherein a government regulatory body either makes good regulatory law or doesn’t. Instead many different actors create many different solutions which compete and serve different use-cases. When a thousand people all work independently on a solution, much better results are obtained. That’s the theory anyway; let’s see how it plays out. I’m betting bitcoin will continue to grow this year, see wider adoption, and likely reach new all-time highs.

Compare this recovery to the supposed 2008/2009 global downturn recovery. I suspect a dozen central bankers are a poor substitute for 10,000 innovators.

RELATED COLUMNS:

Tokyo Bitcoin Exchange Files for Bankruptcy – ABC News

Bitcoin Comes to Wall Street February 25, 2014 by Jeffrey A. Tucker

Bitcoin Exec Arrested January 28, 2014 by Michael Nolan

Bitcoin for Beginners April 02, 2013 by Jeffrey A. Tucker

Is Bitcoin a Viable Currency? It’s not a scam, but market actors will determine its staying power DECEMBER 11, 2013 by Steve Patterson

Integrity Florida calls for Investigation of Enterprise Florida

Dan Krassner, Co-Founder and Executive Director Integrity Florida, and Ben Wilcox, Research Director Integrity Florida, in an email state, “The lavish travel and wasteful government purchasing practices of Enterprise Florida, a taxpayer supported entity serving as the privatized commerce department for the State of Florida, was detailed in an investigative report by Michael Buczyner, WPEC/CBS 12 titled ‘State-run agency accused of abusing taxpayers dollars‘ on February 25.  The Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) is responsible for the state’s contract with Enterprise Florida, but it has clearly turned a blind eye to this waste and abuse of the taxpayers’ money.”

“Enterprise Florida travel guidelines do not comply with official state travel restrictions, even though the entity is using taxpayer funds allocated by the state legislature.  According to an internal audit prepared on March 15, 2012 by McGladrey, only three Enterprise Florida executives, Secretary of Commerce Gray Swoope, Chief Operating Officer Griff Salmon and Chief Marketing Officer Melissa Medley, all former employees of the Mississippi Development Authority, gained ‘unlimited signing authority’ on February 7, 2012, to execute contracts and make significant purchases of non-economic development goods and services,” note Krassner and Wilcox.

Since the new authority was granted to these top three executives at Enterprise Florida, here is a sampling of the organization’s questionable expenses:

  • Nearly $22,000 spent on New York Yankee Luxury Suites and related purchases.
  • More than $13,000 spent at the San Diego Zoo.
  • $12,000 spent on Texas Rangers baseball.
  • More than $7,000 spent at Cowboys Stadium.
  • More than $4,000 spent on Atlanta Braves baseball.
  • More than $4,000 spent on limousine services.
  • Nearly $3,300 spent at Truluck’s Seafood Steak & Crab House in Austin, Texas.
  • More than $2,500 spent at the 21 Club.
  • More than $2,000 spent at 4Rivers Smokehouse.
  • More than $1,300 spent on a charter fishing boat.
  • Roughly another $30,000 per month spent on American Express credit cards for unknown expenditures.
  • Thousands more on airfare, luxury resorts and hotels, expensive meals and limousine services.

The people of Florida deserve accountability and transparency within every aspect of our government.  Given the appearance of impropriety, an inspector general report is needed to determine whether the taxpayer resources that support Enterprise Florida are properly protected and whether corrective action is needed.  A company this large, supported by hard-working Florida families, must be held to the highest ethical standards.

Additional Resources:

Integrity Florida letter to Governor Rick Scott “Eliminate government waste at Enterprise Florida, investigation needed” (read more)

“State-run agency accused of abusing taxpayer dollars” Story by Michael Buczyner / CBS 12 NEWS (read more) (watch video)

Enterprise Florida Internal Audit by McGladrey – March 15, 2012 (read more)

Enterprise Florida, Inc. Vendor Payments – January 1, 2012 to August 28, 2013 (read more)

Enterprise Florida receives more than 97% of its funding from taxpayers (read more on page 24) (watch video starting at 1:00:20 about an hour into the video)

  • $57.4 million total 2012-13 budget for Enterprise Florida
  • $56 million (97.6%) in government/public/taxpayer-funded sources
  • $1.4 million (2.4%) from the private sector

Bipartisan efforts to hold Enterprise Florida accountable with bills filed for the 2014 legislative session:

  • Applies state ethics code to Enterprise Florida staff – CS/SB 846: Governmental Ethics GENERAL BILL by Senate Ethics and Elections Commission; Senator Jack Latvala (read more)
  • Strengthening Enterprise Florida disclosure practices and fiscal accountability SB 1270: Economic Incentive Programs GENERAL BILL by Senator Eleanor Sobel (read more)
  • Strengthening Enterprise Florida disclosure practices and fiscal accountability HB 1103: Economic Incentive Programs GENERAL BILL by Representative Jose Javier Rodriguez (read more)

Dick Cheney: Obama would ‘much rather spend the money on food stamps’ than military

Former Vice President Dick Cheney on Monday accused President Barack Obama of cutting the defense budget because “he would rather spend money on food stamps.”

[youtube]http://youtu.be/QMev7cfceG4[/youtube]

The Pentagon announced on Monday plans to shrink the U.S. Army to pre-World War II levels, in addition to eliminating the Air Force’s A-10 fleet and retiring the Cold War-era U-2 spy plane program.

“Absolutely dangerous,” Cheney told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “I, obviously, have not been a strong supporter of Barack Obama but this really is over the top. It does enormous long-term damage to our military.”

“They’re basically making the decision, the Obama administration, that they no longer want to be dominant on the seas and the skies and in space,” the former vice president added. “This notion that we no longer want to have a force that’s capable of any sustained occupation of a foreign territory, that’s a basic fundamental decision that drives — supposedly justifies this. But lots of times, you don’t get to make that choice. Circumstances will make that choice for you.”

Cheney said that his “old friends” in the Middle East had told him that they no longer trusted the United States to use military power when it was necessary.

“I think the whole thing is not driven by any change in world circumstances, it’s driven by budget considerations,” he insisted. “He would much rather spend the money on food stamps than he would on a strong military or support for our troops.”

“Pretty frightening,” Hannity agreed.

How Social Security Makes Us Poorer by Brenton Smith

When you read that Social Security lifts 50 percent of seniors out of poverty, keep in mind that it was largely the cost of Social Security that put them there. It’s the perfect example of government incompetence creating higher costs and misguided incentives—and delivering exactly the opposite of what it promised.

The contradiction stems from the cost of Social Security, which has exploded. In 1950 Social Security cost 2 percent of the first $3,000 of income (in 2013 dollars, that would be 2 percent of roughly $29,000, according to the BLS calculator).  In 2013, the retirement portion of Social Security cost 10.6 percent of the first $113,700. On top of this cost, the government now takes another 1.8 percent of your wages to cover the cost of disability benefits, which were added in 1958.

What’s more, you get a lot less bang for a lot more bucks. A couple retiring in 1960 expected to collect $8 of benefits for every $1 of contributions. Today the return for average Americans is actually negative.

The process of rising costs and declining returns has continued for 80 years. We are now at a point where the largest investment in retirement planning of the vast majority of Americans loses money. No one should be surprised to find that people who invest their retirement savings poorly wind up in poverty when they reach retirement.

The Urban Institute’s “Social Security and Medicare Taxes and Benefits over a Lifetime” projects what a hypothetical worker will contribute to Social Security versus what they expect to collect. The “lifetime value of taxes” shows what would have happened if the accumulated taxes had been put into an account that earned interest. The research projects that an average worker who retires in 2030 will have lost more than $400,000 in savings in order to collect about $370,000 in expected benefits.

Here is where the system gets really ugly. The $370,000 isn’t guaranteed. In fact, the Trustees project that in a good economy this worker will only get 77 percent of his scheduled benefits because he will retire after the trust fund is exhausted. Mind you, the 77 percent of scheduled benefits is completely dependent upon the willingness of future workers to commit 12.4 percent of their wages to this system as it falls into collapse. Basically this worker only collects provided another worker gets a worse deal.

The government has compounded the impact of the problem by feeding the systemic dysfunction directly through our labor market. Social Security is financed with a tax on labor—so it penalizes work even though the best cure for poverty is a job. This tax also creates a disincentive to hire people and creates an incentive to move work to countries with a lower tax burden. Social Security introduces incentives to work less, such as early retirement.

Nobody wants to be poor in their old age. If workers did not have to spend their entire careers burdened with Social Security taxes, fewer would face that possibility.

ABOUT BRENTON SMITH

Brenton Smith is the founder of Fix Social Security Now.

Pentagon Budget Slashes Military Personnel Benefits Again

The assault on the US military continues unabated.  The long term goal of the Obama administration has always been to reduce America’s military power consistently and systematically, and they are doing it at a time when China, Russia, Iran, and Al Qaeda military strengths are increasing.

In the below listed article you can read how the Obama administration continues its assault on military personnel who have repeatedly put their lives on the line in defense of the Republic, and many have been maimed for life.   The deepest and most draconian cuts in military pay and benefits in 40 years is being proposed by Obama’s civilian appointees at the Pentagon in their new budget.  It includes:

  1. Increasing healthcare costs for retirees & military families (Tricare deductibles and co-pays are being increased)
  2. Massive cuts in commissary benefits so the cost of food to military families will be increased
  3. The first ever cuts in basic housing allowance for families
  4. Draconian pay raises in 2015 will only be 1% which won’t keep up with inflation
  5. Moreover personnel costs will be reduced significantly by reducing the US Army below 1940 levels which is a extremely dangerous policy
  6. Hagel quote “Of course there is going to be risk”

All this is taking place at a time when there is serious concern in the US Armed Forces about many enlisted military families requiring food stamps because of their unusually low incomes.  Cutting their pay and benefits is underway while the Obama administration provides billions of dollars of free medical care, education, and food stamp benefits for Illegal Immigrants.  In addition, annually the IRS refunds billions of dollars in employer paid federal taxes to Illegal Immigrants who file for dependent benefits for their Illegal Immigrant’s children residing in Mexico.

Annually the Obama administration has been increasing the percentage of authorized expenditure on food stamps, which exceeds the increase in the authorized expenditures for the defense of the Republic (48 million people are now on food stamps with no requirement for verification of if they are truly eligible US citizens). “Common sense is not so common in the Obama administration.”

The way to prevent war is to maintain a strong military establishment—it should be “Peace Thru Strength,” not peace thru weakness.

Pentagon budget slashes benefits

By Kristina Wong

Benefits for active­ duty personnel and their families would be slashed under a budget proposal released Monday by the Pentagon.

The budget would dramatically reduce the Army’s size and trigger a new round of controversial base closures while cutting healthcare copays and deductibles and reducing the subsidies military families get for housing and low-cost goods.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel acknowledged the cuts would be controversial but argued they were unavoidable in a belt-tightening era following the end of wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

“Congress has taken some important steps in recent years to control the growth in compensation spending, but we must do more,” he said.

Lawmakers, as well as groups that represent veterans and the military, accused the Pentagon of balancing its pocketbook on the backs of soldiers and their families.

“We know the Defense Department must make difficult budget decisions, but these cuts would hit service members, making it harder for them and their families to make ends meet,” said Paul Rieckhoff, the founder and CEO of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA).

Coupled with a 1 percent ceiling on pay hikes and assuming a 5 percent annual increase in housing costs, the Military Officers Association of America estimated an Army sergeant with a family of four would see an annual loss of $1,400. An Army captain would lose $2,100, it said.

The group said those figures doesn’t account for other costs that would affect military families, such as increased prices at military commissaries because of another budget proposal and an increase in health care fees for military family members.

Hagel cast the cuts as unavoidable and necessary to avoid steeper cuts to military personnel.

He said payroll costs have risen 40 percent more than in the private sector.

While he said those hikes were the “right thing to do” during war, “today DOD faces a vastly different fiscal situation … We must now consider fair and responsible adjustments to our overall military compensation package.”

“This is the first time in 13 years we will be presenting a budget to the Congress of the United States that’s not a war-footing budget,” Hagel said.

Read more.

RELATED COLUMNS:

Budget cuts to slash U.S. Army to smallest since before World War Two

Increased domestic spending may be behind proposed military cuts, CBO report suggests

Susan Rice and the retreat of American power – The Washington Post

End of American Military Dominance | Washington Free Beacon

How Do We Cut Federal Growth and Spending?

Most Americans agree that the federal government is totally out of control, that it is too large, spends too much money, and should be reduced in size.  In fact, a recent headline for a Rasmussen Poll reported that “73% Think Federal Government Should Cut Spending to Help Economy.”

There are too many government agencies, too many regulations, too many federal employees, and too much waste. As new regulations are created, new employees are hired to enforce the regulations—then those employees expand their area with more regulations, which requires the hiring of even more federal employees—and the government grows and grows.  If we had perpetual motion it would be a government agency.  As Heritage Foundation budget expert, Romina Boccia stated, “you have so much waste in the federal government, it is really outrageous and we need to be cutting the federal budget, not increasing it.”

The Investor’s Business Daily reported:

 “A new study of government data says that since Oct. 1, federal workers, including bureaucrats and members of Congress, have worked less than three-fourths of the time… Compared to civilian workers, federal employees are underworked.  Rather than criticize them for working so little, maybe we should see this as an opportunity. If they can cut back on work with so little impact on the rest of us, why don’t we simply cut government employment by 25%?  If the country can survive the government working 25% fewer hours, doesn’t it make sense to cut an equivalent amount and make those still on board work full-time like the rest of us?”

How do we cut the federal budget?  First, we need to study all government departments/agencies and assure that none of them receive more funding than they received in the last fiscal year. To accomplish this, we must establish a commission similar to the Base Closure and Realignment Commission (BRAC), which has been effectively used throughout the Department of Defense (DOD).

I mention a BRAC-like commission because it could get much more done to trim government than any group within Congress.  Historically, Congressional legislation only adds federal agencies or increases their size.  We need a commission with a mission to review all agencies for current need, consolidation, efficiency, elimination, etc.  Otherwise, we’ll continue to have growing waste in an ever-expanding federal government.

Since BRAC was used successfully in the DOD, which is one of the most important and necessary of the many government agencies, it could be just as useful in other agencies that are less important to our survival as a nation.  Defense is a constitutional requirement, not some questionable freebie program that rewards citizens, and in many cases non-citizens, for not working.  Coming in second in defense of the nation is unacceptable!  And the survival of the nation and our Constitution is, or should be, the most important function of government.

The U.S. Postal Service (USPS) is a perfect example of the problem.  The USPS defaulted on its debt last year—after seven straight years of deficits. It’s saddled with billions owed in retiree benefits while its customers are sending less and less mail with each passing year. If it is to survive, the USPS realizes that big reforms are needed, and it has recommended some cost-cutting changes.  But in the omnibus spending bill, Congress blocked two money-savers: discontinuing Saturday delivery and closing some rural post offices.  BRAC would not be saddled with such Congressional politics and would have the authority to solve the problem as needed.

Our second step in cutting federal spending should be a Balanced Budget Amendment.  This would allow us to budget only what is needed and exclude unnecessary functions within the current government structure.

The nation wants to see action, not just rhetoric. In baseball, a base hit excites fans when it happens, but if it doesn’t result in a score, it is just another statistic. Likewise, the taxpayers were happy with all the proposals to reduce the federal budget, but the talk did not materialize into a serious reduction in the budget. The job is not done until we see these major reductions.

Congress must get aggressive in controlling government growth and spending by first establishing BRAC for all areas of the three branches of the federal government (except the DOD where it has already been used), and secondly, by passing a Balanced Budget Amendment. As the Rasmussen Poll shows, the taxpayers want government spending cut.

This is critical, and failure of the Congress to act accordingly is a gross neglect of its responsibilities to the taxpayers.

A Rogue IRS: Enough is Enough

 “On matters of style, swim with the current. On matters of principle stand like a rock.” – Thomas Jefferson

For over 10 years, the FairTax® campaign has warned about the politicization of the IRS. Events over the past nine months have only served to heighten this concern. Consider the following revelations:

  • The IRS admitted to and apologized for targeting certain conservative leaning groups.
  • The senior IRS official at the center of the targeting, Lois Lerner, pleaded the 5th during questioning by members of a House Oversight Committee.
  • The Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee released an email from another senior IRS official confirming the IRS had been “off-planning” this targeting as early as June 2012.
  • A senior Senator publicly requested the Executive Branch use the IRS and bypass Congress to weaken and curtail funding for certain conservative leaning 501(c)(4)’s.
  • The Chairman of Ways and Means stated the IRS has targeted established conservative 501(c)(4)’s for audits.
  • The IRS proposed new rules that would redefine political activities by 501(c)(4)’s and effectively extinguish their 1st Amendment right to free political speech. Thankfully, opposition has been swift and strong and is coming from the left and the right.

This cascading series of events should strike fear in the heart of every single American citizen.

Today, the IRS may target you for your political beliefs.Tomorrow it could be the color of your skin, your gender or your religious beliefs. Once you begin power sliding down the slippery slope, it’s impossible to predict where you might land.

There is a way out of this increasingly dangerous mess – a way in which citizens do not have to fear their elected officials or their government. It is the FairTax Plan.

The FairTax eliminates the income tax while defunding and disbanding the IRS. The FairTax institutes a progressive, national consumption tax that is simple, fair and ready to implement. It fully funds the federal government, including Social Security and Medicare, while stimulating the economy and generating desperately needed jobs at an unprecedented level!

The American Revolutionary War began because of colonists who were fed up with Britain’s increasing tyranny and taxation. Having had enough, they drew a line in the sand and declared  “no more taxation without representation”.

When a nation’s elected officials use government agencies for partisan political gain, suppress free political speech and target individual citizens for punitive action, that nation has effectively slid into taxation without representation.

Where is your line in the sand? When do you tell your elected representative, I’ve had enough, I want simple and transparent taxation without interference by special interests and a government that does not engage in punitive, partisan manipulation?

Finally, congratulations to Congressman Chris Stewart (UT-2) for becoming the 74th co-sponsor of HR 25! Please call Rep. Stewart and welcome him to the FairTax family.

EDITORS NOTE: The feature image is by Elvert Barnes from Hyattsville MD, USA. The photographer does not in any way endorse the author or the positions taken in this column. The image is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic.

NATIONAL DEBT: If Only a Snow Shovel Could Dig Us Out of This

Amy Payne writes, “Thanks to Congress, the U.S. now doesn’t have a debt limit for the next year. Let two Heritage experts put this into perspective.”

“President Obama, after less than five years in office, has already increased the debt limit by more than any other president in U.S. history, including President George W. Bush over eight years in office,” report Romina Boccia and Michael Sargent, authors of the newly updated Federal Budget in Pictures.

For the next year, now that Congress has given Obama a blank check, we’ll be following the borrowing and the spending and all the debt Washington is piling on Americans. The national debt, at $17.3 trillion, already exceeds $140,000 per household.

140ksnow_v2-600px

Sargent and Boccia, the Grover M. Hermann Fellow, teamed up with Heritage’s Senior Data Graphics Editor John Fleming to bring us 20 charts that will convince you the country’s in trouble.

There are some scary fiscal times ahead.

Imagine all of America and all of the taxes people pay to the federal government every year. Do you have an overwhelming idea in your mind? Just 16 years from now, ALL of that money will pay for just two things: entitlement programs and interest on the debt.

All of it.

The entitlement programs include Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Obamacare’s new entitlements. So if you think anything is important besides these mammoth entitlement programs—like national defense, a real constitutional priority—Congress needs to get going on some major reforms.

These are just a few of the mind-boggling facts you can see and share—if you dare—in this visual resource. Find out where your tax money went and get the latest on Obamacare’s tax hikes.

See & share the charts—and embed them on your website.

RELATED COLUMNS:

Dirty Dozen: 12 Senate Republicans Who Voted to Silence Ted Cruz

Miller Blasts Begich, Big-Government Republicans for Surrender on Debt Ceiling

Yellen: I Helped Blow Up The World

The most-destructive terrorists do not use guns or bombs.  They use their power and influence to lie in public, backed by force of law, destroying people, industry and even entire nations and their governments.  They are found in the halls of finance, and the more-powerful they are the worse they are.  Today, the head of same is found in the Federal Reserve, seated before Congress in the form of ChairSatan Janet Yellen.

First, let me acknowledge the important contributions of Chairman Bernanke. His leadership helped make our economy and financial system stronger and ensured that the Federal Reserve is transparent and accountable. I pledge to continue that work.

Uh huh.  The man who first claimed subprime is contained, who in fact invented and promoted the policies that led to the housing bubble in the first place (people seem to forget that) and then who invented and promoted the policies that have now led to the largest global asset bubble in history (second only to the one he built first, and which exploded in his face.)

The unemployment rate has fallen nearly a percentage point since the middle of last year and 1-1/2 percentage points since the beginning of the current asset purchase program. Nevertheless, the recovery in the labor market is far from complete.

There has been no recovery in employment rate of the population.  At all.

Since anyone driven from the workforce by Fed policy doesn’t count as “unemployed” Yellen’s statement is akin to arguing that the natural death rate has not gotten worse over time which may well be true but if you’re shooting people by the busload there are still more people dying — and you’re responsible for their deaths.

Among the major components of GDP, household and business spending growth stepped up during the second half of last year.

Uh huh.  All of it borrowed, I might add.  Median household income adjusted for inflation is not rising.  Therefore all of this increased spending must be borrowed money, which is not an improvement in the common man’s situation.

The same is true with businesses; they never saw their indebtedness decrease — not even in the depths of the recession.

We have been watching closely the recent volatility in global financial markets. Our sense is that at this stage these developments do not pose a substantial risk to the U.S. economic outlook.

The Fed caused that volatility.

Our current program of asset purchases began in September 2012 amid signs that the recovery was weakening and progress in the labor market had slowed.

There has been no recovery.  Not in inflation-adjusted incomes nor in the employment rate of the population.  Neither has improved one iota since 2009.  Borrowing more money is not an “improvement” as incomes must rise net-net to service the new debt.  They haven’t.

The Committee has emphasized that a highly accommodative policy will remain appropriate for a considerable time after asset purchases end.

Of course you have.  The government is blowing more money than it takes in too, and you know full well that this can’t continue forever either, but you won’t take the candy away from the baby – even when told, point-blank as Bernanke was on multiple occasions over the last few years, that Congress is incapable of rational fiscal management on its own without being forced to do so by market-based borrowing costs.

Regulatory and supervisory actions, including those that are leading to substantial increases in capital and liquidity in the banking sector, are making our financial system more resilient. Still, important tasks lie ahead. In the near term, we expect to finalize the rules implementing enhanced prudential standards mandated by section 165 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. We also are working to finalize the proposed rule strengthening the leverage ratio standards for U.S.-based, systemically important global banks. We expect to issue proposals for a risk-based capital surcharge for those banks as well as for a long-term debt requirement to help ensure that these organizations can be resolved. In addition, we are working to advance proposals on margins for noncleared derivatives, consistent with a new global framework, and are evaluating possible measures to address financial stability risks associated with short-term wholesale funding. We will continue to monitor for emerging risks, including watching carefully to see if the regulatory reforms work as intended.

This is the biggest lie of all.

Derivatives are nothing other than a scam intended to get around margin requirements that would otherwise be imposed by the market in the absence of government bailouts and guarantees.  The “financial system” has repeatedly demonstrated that it has both, with the most-outrageous example of same being when Paulson and Bernanke literally corralled Congresspeople into a room and threatened them with economic nuclear winter if they didn’t get a $700 billion blank check.

That “need” came about due to The Fed and Congressional willful blindness toward the outright fraudulent declarations of “adequate” margin supervision and reserves against said positions.  What 2008 laid bare on the table was that these claims were outright lies, that is, public frauds, and yet none were either prosecuted nor were the firms that had made such outrageous and false statements allowed to fail, with only a couple of exceptions.

The fundamental reality is that The Fed believes, despite decades of proof otherwise, that it can successfully “manage” the business cycle and continually pump up asset bubbles without consequence. The problem with such an assertion is that every time The Fed has done this to date throughout history the balloon has found a pin and popped with dramatic consequence, and what’s worse, the severity of those excursions in terms of real-world economic impact has risen with each successive attempt and failure.

The Market Ticker

The Great Housing Boom and Bust: Lessons Relearned

The Great Housing Boom and Bust: Lessons Relearned was a presentation made at last week’s Eastern Secondary Mortgage Conference sponsored by the Florida Mortgage bankers Association.

Below are three slides from The Great Housing Boom and Bust: Lessons Relearned.  The take-aways include:

  1. Real estate leverage (both nominal and intrinsic) are at historically high levels.
  2. The National Mortgage Risk Index remains at a higher level than is conducive to long-run market stability.

image001

 

image002image003 (1)

To learn more visit the AEI International Center on Housing Risk.