FREEDOMU.COM
Next: OBAMACAR and every American's right to transportation.
This is a repost from another blog I posted to...
Hello everyone. I have given some serious consideration to the health care problem and am warming up to the idea of Obamacare. In fact, I think we can use the blueprint to solve our Healthcare woes and apply them to other problems, too. Take transportation, for example. Did you know:
PROBLEMS WITH CARS IN AMERICA
1. Over 12 Million Households have no vehicle!
2. While average Americans struggle to afford a car, the CEOs of the big 3 are taking home millions of dollars. In 2007, the Ford CEO made $12 Million and the CEO of GM made $25 Million over 5 years! We're getting ripped off by more greedy CEOs!
3. We're killing our planet and gas mileage from 1990 to 2005 on passenger cars improved by only 8.2%, from 28 MPG to 30.3. Shameful!
4. The cost of car in 1929 was only $310 and now the average cost for a new car is over $20,000!
5. In 1920, there were DOZENS of car manufacturers and now we have almost a monopoly in the US.
6. There were 41,057 motor vehicle deaths in the US in 2007. Nobody should die in a car accident in the US!
Cars are no longer a luxury in America. Cars are critical to get to work, to school, and to soccer practice yet we have priced the cost of new cars out of reach for many Americans. Cars are also much more complex than they used to be and it is difficult for the Average American to compare vehicles sufficiently. We can fix this. At the same time, we must recognize that some people like their car and we wish to preserve their ability to keep their current car if they wish.
We need a new plan to:
1. Make cars affordable for all Americans.
2. Improve the gas mileage for all new vehicles.
3. Improve the safety of vehicles and eliminate fatalities.
4. Not allow evil car manufacturers to rip off the public anymore.
This is a problem that has gone on way too long and one that we should solve IMMEDIATELY! I'd like to propose the OBAMACAR plan. Here's how the OBAMACAR plan will work.
1. We will establish essential vehicle standards.
2. We will establish a CAR CHOICES committee to oversee the plan and a CAR CHOICES exchange for purchasing new cars.
3. We will shift the cost of cars from those who can afford more to those who cannot and shift the cost from senior citizens to our children and grandchildren.
4. We will implement our plan through employers and require compliance.
ESSENTIAL VEHICLE STANDARDS
The OBAMACAR plan will establish GM (now Government Motors) as a Public car manufacturer to compete with Ford and Chrysler and the foreign manufacturers. This will increase competition in the industry. Next, the federal government will set up a CAR CHOICE EXCHANGE where every American can shop for their new vehicle. Every new vehicle will eventually be sold through the exchange. Recognizing that prevention is the best cure for accidents, every vehicle sold through the exchange will have minimum features at no extra cost, including:
1. All wheel drive
2. Front and side curtain airbags
3. Anti-lock brakes
4. Lane-departure warning/wake-you-up safety
5. Breathalyzer ignition switch (No more drinking and driving EVER!)
6. Govtrack GPS that tracks your speed at all times and issues tickets automatically
7. Tire-pressure monitoring
8. Adaptive cruise control/collision mitigation
9. Blind-spot detection/side assist/collision warning
10. Rollover prevention/mitigation
11. Occupant-sensitive/dual-stage airbags
12. Adaptive headlights and/or night-vision assist
13. Rearview camera
14. Emergency response satellite system
15. GPS navigation
16. Active head restraints
17. Built-in government standard child safety seats
18. Bluetooth for cell phones (to prevent handling cell and texting while driving)
19. Air conditioning -No American should drive in the heat without AC!
20. Minimum MPG of 50. Drastic improvement is needed in this area for our planet to survive.
We know we can build a car with all of these features cheaper than a normal car is built today by those private companies. The only reason that the private companies don't do that now is because they're really, really greedy. They want to sell you a car for a lot of money but they don't want to spend any money building the car. They're evil and greedy and they're all in cahootz with each other. The Obama adminstration is looking out for you with our CAR CHOICES COMMITTEE. We're not exactly sure how we're going to add all these features in cars and reduce the weight so that gas mileage improves and lower the cost at the same time, but by golly, if we can put a man on the moon, we can do this. Yes, we can! If the private companies had wanted to, they could've too. It makes me angry how greedy those guys are.
CAR CHOICES COMMITTEE
Four levels of cars will be permitted to be sold through the CAR CHOICES EXCHANGE. The essential package will include the features above. The level two package will include color choice. The level three package will include a stereo with a port for an IPOD. Level four vehicles may include features that any car company decides upon but each feature must be individually priced and approved by the CAR CHOICES COMMITTEE and the COMMISSIONER OF CAR CHOICES.
The COMMITTEE will be made up of 24 government appointed individuals and should fairly represent the following areas:
1. Relevant government agencies
2. Consumer representative
3. Car manufacturers
4. Car dealerships
5. United Auto Workers
6. Experts in Racial and Ethnic Diversity
It's important to point out that car design can be very complex. Our ObamaCAR plan will require that at least one representative will need to be a practicing automotive engineer. We know it's important to have at least one automotive engineer on the car design committee. That's why we're mandating that at least one engineer be on the committee. This group of 24 elite appointees are smarter than the thousands of people running the automotive industry today, and the give and take of the free market. It's those ideas that got us into this mess. We're very fortunate to be able to find 24 people who can completely run this industry better than the industry has done for themselves for the last century.
NO COST TO THE TAXPAYER/Participation
Best of all, this plan will not cost the taxpayer anything! It will be deficit neutral. We will achieve the improvements in affordable car design by achieving economies of scale and obtaining savings in the manufacturing process. One of the advantages we have is that Government Motors does not negotiate with suppliers. Government Motors will stipulate to parts suppliers what will be paid for each individual part. Suppliers will not be able to rip off Americans any more and drive up the cost of car manufacturing! Government Motors will pay suppliers approximately 85-90% of their costs of the goods and cause them to create efficiencies. While we understand this will require suppliers to pass higher costs onto the negotiated rates of the private car manufacturers, we are confident that the private manufacturers can handle his challenge and stay in business... for a while anyway. Cost containment of parts is an essential component of driving down the cost of car manufacturing. Also, some of our cost improvements rely on the economies of every American owning a vehicle and so we will mandate that every American buy one who does not already own a car. If somebody chooses not to own a car, that is unacceptable. We want to provide access to cars for all Americans and it is their obligation to take what we give. It's not just a right to be able to get an affordable car; it's an obligation to buy one darn it! We know these people have to get around somehow and will probably be using government-subsidized transportation or will be using the FREE roads and sidewalks that government pays for. Since we are counting on everyone owning a car, we will place a 2.5% surcharge on income when somebody chooses not to buy a car.
On another note, we haven't really thought about what we'll do if car parts manufacturers claim they can't stay in business, after the private manufacturers disappear, and because of our cost containment policy of stipulating prices below their cost. We'll cross that bridge when we come to it. Maybe we'll just take over their companies. Imagine what good we could create if we owned the parts suppliers, too!
(Special Note to Detractors: For those of you who claim that the federal government has never produced a long-term plan that's worked and stayed financially solvent, like Medicare and Social Security, we'd like to point out that we've learned a lot from those lessons and this time it's different. We've got it all figured out this time and we'd like to remind you that we will pay for this plan with the savings we achieve, and I just explained how we were going to get the savings. So stop being so negative! We know you're just trying to create fear so that we can't implement the ObamaCAR plan. But we have a lot of support for this and know that Americans want change in transportation options. We're going to give it to them even if our solution is worse than the problem. You guys are evil for trying to stop us and their must be something wrong with you if you don't want every American to have an affordable car.)
Tackling Affordability
Even when we drive down the cost of car manufacturing, we know that some Americans will still not be able to afford a car. We're going to do two things to address this problem. First, we are going to issue affordability credits based on income so that if your income is less than 300% of poverty, the cost of your car will be reduced by a formula determined by the COMMISSIONER. The affordability credits will be supported by general taxation. While the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office projects that this would increase our deficit by $1 TRILLION over a ten year period, we believe we can eliminate that through the cost savings, but we're just not sure how the math works out yet. Have faith. We do.
Next, we know that it's very difficult for senior citizens to afford cars and that's not fair. Therefore, like our health care plan, we will shift some of the cost to younger people who have longer to pay for their car. We will increase the cost of the car for anyone under 49 years old by $1000 and we will reduce the cost of the car for anyone over 60 by $1000. This makes the cost of owning the car more fair for everyone.
Joint Responsibility and Compliance
The plan will be cleat that it is the responsibility of the individual for handling their Car Choice Selection. However, it is clear that some people might need extra help and encouragement. Since over 90% of able adults are employed in this country, we believe the best way to ensure compliance is to make sure that employers help out. Employers will be required to payroll deduct for the cost of a car for any vehicle purchased through the exchange and to pay a portion of the vehicle. Employers who do not voluntarily help in this manner will pay up to an 8% tax on payroll to make up for their share.
Summary
We'd like to remind citizens that one of the important things to remember is that we want to preserve your right to choose and we want to increase competition. We expect that private companies will have to raise their costs because the parts suppliers will be losing money on the govenment plan and we know this will eventually mean that more people will choose the ObamaCar. More than likely, that means that more and more ObamaCars will be sold, proving the effectiveness of our plan. And while we know the demand for cars will go up becasue they'll be "cheaper" to buy and that the private manufacturers will go out of business after a while, we think that this could be good because then we'll have one car manufacturer and we can really achieve some economies of scale and build even a better car cheaper at that time. That's really our long-term goal anyway. But in the meantime, we want to be clear that we want to preserve the right to choice and let you keep the car you have if you really want it. We don't know why you'd want to have that car since ours will be cheaper and better... In fact, there's really probably something wrong with you if you want to keep that old car, but it's ok if you want to. Just remember, when you go to buy a new car, you have to buy a new car through the exchange and can pick from any company that's left in the exchange at that time. Wink wink.
We also know more people will buy cars under this plan and we know the private companies will stop making them eventually. We do not believe that we'll ever run out of cars even though other countries who have gone to a national car system run out all the time. We're way smarter than those guys! However, if we do ever run out temporarily, we still have the CAR CHOICE COMMITTEE who can decide how the cars will be rationed even though that's not why they're there and we don't ever expect that to happen. They're really there to make sure every American receives a car with minimum essential features.
In closing, we are confident that the OBAMACAR plan can ensure that every American has the best transportation at an affordable cost. Please encourage your legislative representative to implement the OBAMACAR Plan today! Next on the list: OBAMA-U: Providing guaranteed college education for every American... It's the new American way!
Do you have permission to work?
If you don't have special government permission to work, get ready, you may need it!
One of the tenets of freedom, I believe, is the ability to utilize your mind and your body to create an income for yourself and your family. Yet, there is a protectionist movement in our fine country that is lobbying for increased license requirements of almost every single occupation and profession. A license, of course, is permission to do something that you do not automatically have permission to do. The Declaration of Independence declared that we each have a right to liberty and pursuit of happiness! Doesn't that include the right to earn a living without special permission to do so?
The licensing advocates and lobbyists (i.e. protectionists) claim that state licensing is necessary to protect the public from incompetence and potential harm. The protectionists also claim that license requirements maintain quality in the marketplace.
However, neither of these claims are true. In fact, licensing can actually provide a false sense of security to the public who fail to evaluate their provider on their education, experience, ratings, etc because they're licensed and therefore, meet the required standards of their profession.
The real reason that industries lobby for licensing requirements of their own industry are simple to understand. (Key point: The public is not clamoring for new licences; The industries themselves claim that they need to be licensed. This point says it all.) Obtaining a license requires a person to invest time and money in order to obtain the license and requires ongoing annual tributes to their state government to maintain their license. This investment of time and money reduces competition by keeping more people from entering their profession. Licensing requirements is protectionism at its best.
Of course, the state governments are satisfied with adding more licensees under their umbrella because in most states, the license fees cover the increased bureaucracy and provide a net profit to the state. As an example, the small state of Connecticut earns a $21,000,000 net profit each year from their licensing operations, according to the WSJ.
Can the public be safe without overly-burdensome licensing requirements?
Without a doubt, certain professions require a minimal education. With that said, the private sector excels in creating certification, education, and quality assurance programs. Businesses use these programs to stand out from their competition. In order for a certification program to be relavent and relied upon, private programs must market and advertise the benefits of their program and the quality of their certificants. The certification programs must ensure that their certificants meet designated requirements on an ongoing basis. Standards of quality are greatly stressed versus a minimal standard that is typically required to obtain a license.
In addition to private certification programs, one of the best "checks and balances" is insurance companies! If a person or company is insured, you can be sure that an insurance company has evaluated the company for various things. First, insurance companies evaluate a person/company on their experience. Second, insurance companies look at past claims history as an indication of future claims probability. Third, insurance companies evaluate a person/company's qualifications. All of this occurs before a policy is issued. After all, it's in the self-interest of insurance company that the public is safe from harm lest they pay claims!
Government bureaucrats do not have the time, resources, or inclination to manage the quality of businesses and protect the public from harm. Licensing requirements simply establish a minimum barrier of entry that make it difficult to enter a profession and an ongoing expense that makes the profession less appealing to enter. Over-burdensome licensing hurts the public in three ways:
1. Creates a false sense of security
2. Keeps entry level workers out of an industry
3. Raises the cost of services in the licensed industry by creating costs that must be passed on and by limiting and reducing competition.
According to the Wall Street Journal, Mr. Kleiner of the University of Minnesota estimates that the increased costs of goods and services in the Unites States is at least $116 BILLION. That's rediculous. Also according to the WSJ, 23% of workers now require a license to work as opposed to 5% in 1950 and in the mid-1980s one state licensed 800 professions and now license over 1100!
Some occupations that now require licenses are insane! The WSJ cites several insane examples:
* Texas requires "shampoo specialists" to take 150 hours of classes!
* Connecticut is the only state to license glass installers and requires two tests, over $400 in up front fees, and $150 per year!
* California requires barbers to study FULL-TIME for 12 MONTHS at a cost of around $12,000!
* Louisiana requires floral arrangers to pass a test and obtain a license! Really!
* Michigan considers it a felony to massage a person without a license (which requires 500 hours of classroom)
* Alabama requires 750 hours of schooling to become a manicurist! (My note: This is the equivalent of about 12 full-time college courses! Absurdity!)
* Oklahoma requires locksmiths to pay $350 per year for a license.
If we're going to be free, let's start with a freedom to work and a reduction of over-burdensome licensing requirements. Virginia probably has some of the fewest licening requirements, but is it necessary to require a license of hair-braiders? boxers? wrestlers? fight promotors? Interior designers?! Home inspectors? Martial artists? Auctioneers?
If so, why not license every occupation? Wouldn't the public be safer if dog-walkers were licensed? Wouldn't we be protected from poor aesthetics if cat groomers were licensed (this movement in underway in Ohio)? Wouldn't we be better off if car salespeople were required to pass a test before letting us test drive their new model? Could we eliminate poor service (and weak drinks) if we required licenses of waiters and bartenders? Shouldn't every auto mechanic have to pass a state test every year before touching our vehicle? How about produce handlers at the grocery store? If they don't know how to pull rotten produce or understand that it's important to wash their hands before putting it in the bins, we could be in big trouble. Shouldn't the cashiers have to pass a proficiency test that they can identify iceberg from green leaf lettuce, and pay an annual government tribute? Seriously, if believe that hair braiders and interior designers should be licensed, is there ANYBODY who shouldn't have a license to work? As absurd as that sounds, that's where we are headed.
NO- Overly-burdensome licensing, without a doubt, benefits incumbent providers at the expense of the public and those who would like to take up work in a new profession. Let's stop the madness! We need people working; we need new jobs- We need less licensing!
Conclusion: Not only can the public be safe without overly-burdensome licensing requirements, we'll actually be safer because insurance companies and buyers will not rely on a false sense of security and a license as a proxy for quality assurance! And we, the public, will benefit from lower costs and increased employment opportunities. We need less bureaucracy and less licensing and we need it now!
One of the tenets of freedom, I believe, is the ability to utilize your mind and your body to create an income for yourself and your family. Yet, there is a protectionist movement in our fine country that is lobbying for increased license requirements of almost every single occupation and profession. A license, of course, is permission to do something that you do not automatically have permission to do. The Declaration of Independence declared that we each have a right to liberty and pursuit of happiness! Doesn't that include the right to earn a living without special permission to do so?
The licensing advocates and lobbyists (i.e. protectionists) claim that state licensing is necessary to protect the public from incompetence and potential harm. The protectionists also claim that license requirements maintain quality in the marketplace.
However, neither of these claims are true. In fact, licensing can actually provide a false sense of security to the public who fail to evaluate their provider on their education, experience, ratings, etc because they're licensed and therefore, meet the required standards of their profession.
The real reason that industries lobby for licensing requirements of their own industry are simple to understand. (Key point: The public is not clamoring for new licences; The industries themselves claim that they need to be licensed. This point says it all.) Obtaining a license requires a person to invest time and money in order to obtain the license and requires ongoing annual tributes to their state government to maintain their license. This investment of time and money reduces competition by keeping more people from entering their profession. Licensing requirements is protectionism at its best.
Of course, the state governments are satisfied with adding more licensees under their umbrella because in most states, the license fees cover the increased bureaucracy and provide a net profit to the state. As an example, the small state of Connecticut earns a $21,000,000 net profit each year from their licensing operations, according to the WSJ.
Can the public be safe without overly-burdensome licensing requirements?
Without a doubt, certain professions require a minimal education. With that said, the private sector excels in creating certification, education, and quality assurance programs. Businesses use these programs to stand out from their competition. In order for a certification program to be relavent and relied upon, private programs must market and advertise the benefits of their program and the quality of their certificants. The certification programs must ensure that their certificants meet designated requirements on an ongoing basis. Standards of quality are greatly stressed versus a minimal standard that is typically required to obtain a license.
In addition to private certification programs, one of the best "checks and balances" is insurance companies! If a person or company is insured, you can be sure that an insurance company has evaluated the company for various things. First, insurance companies evaluate a person/company on their experience. Second, insurance companies look at past claims history as an indication of future claims probability. Third, insurance companies evaluate a person/company's qualifications. All of this occurs before a policy is issued. After all, it's in the self-interest of insurance company that the public is safe from harm lest they pay claims!
Government bureaucrats do not have the time, resources, or inclination to manage the quality of businesses and protect the public from harm. Licensing requirements simply establish a minimum barrier of entry that make it difficult to enter a profession and an ongoing expense that makes the profession less appealing to enter. Over-burdensome licensing hurts the public in three ways:
1. Creates a false sense of security
2. Keeps entry level workers out of an industry
3. Raises the cost of services in the licensed industry by creating costs that must be passed on and by limiting and reducing competition.
According to the Wall Street Journal, Mr. Kleiner of the University of Minnesota estimates that the increased costs of goods and services in the Unites States is at least $116 BILLION. That's rediculous. Also according to the WSJ, 23% of workers now require a license to work as opposed to 5% in 1950 and in the mid-1980s one state licensed 800 professions and now license over 1100!
Some occupations that now require licenses are insane! The WSJ cites several insane examples:
* Texas requires "shampoo specialists" to take 150 hours of classes!
* Connecticut is the only state to license glass installers and requires two tests, over $400 in up front fees, and $150 per year!
* California requires barbers to study FULL-TIME for 12 MONTHS at a cost of around $12,000!
* Louisiana requires floral arrangers to pass a test and obtain a license! Really!
* Michigan considers it a felony to massage a person without a license (which requires 500 hours of classroom)
* Alabama requires 750 hours of schooling to become a manicurist! (My note: This is the equivalent of about 12 full-time college courses! Absurdity!)
* Oklahoma requires locksmiths to pay $350 per year for a license.
If we're going to be free, let's start with a freedom to work and a reduction of over-burdensome licensing requirements. Virginia probably has some of the fewest licening requirements, but is it necessary to require a license of hair-braiders? boxers? wrestlers? fight promotors? Interior designers?! Home inspectors? Martial artists? Auctioneers?
If so, why not license every occupation? Wouldn't the public be safer if dog-walkers were licensed? Wouldn't we be protected from poor aesthetics if cat groomers were licensed (this movement in underway in Ohio)? Wouldn't we be better off if car salespeople were required to pass a test before letting us test drive their new model? Could we eliminate poor service (and weak drinks) if we required licenses of waiters and bartenders? Shouldn't every auto mechanic have to pass a state test every year before touching our vehicle? How about produce handlers at the grocery store? If they don't know how to pull rotten produce or understand that it's important to wash their hands before putting it in the bins, we could be in big trouble. Shouldn't the cashiers have to pass a proficiency test that they can identify iceberg from green leaf lettuce, and pay an annual government tribute? Seriously, if believe that hair braiders and interior designers should be licensed, is there ANYBODY who shouldn't have a license to work? As absurd as that sounds, that's where we are headed.
NO- Overly-burdensome licensing, without a doubt, benefits incumbent providers at the expense of the public and those who would like to take up work in a new profession. Let's stop the madness! We need people working; we need new jobs- We need less licensing!
Conclusion: Not only can the public be safe without overly-burdensome licensing requirements, we'll actually be safer because insurance companies and buyers will not rely on a false sense of security and a license as a proxy for quality assurance! And we, the public, will benefit from lower costs and increased employment opportunities. We need less bureaucracy and less licensing and we need it now!
Be Free to Grow Oysters!
My friend Greg Garrett is working hard to grow oysters and create a healthier bay but he is facing legal challenges in his effort. State Senate Bill "SB1190" will resolve his legal challenges which will allow him to grow his own oysters, at his own expense, on his own property. It's amazing to me that he should have to go to such an expense and effort to utilize his own private property to help himself and the Chesapeake Bay. This is a no-brainer! You'd think that with the legal challenges Greg is up against that he was trying to do something that would harm the bay, like build an asphalt plant or fertilizer plant or garbage dump next to the bay. No he wants to grow oysters for Pete's sake... maybe even create an extra job or two along the way... and even increasing the supply of Chesapeake Bay oysters in our local restaurants! All I can say is Go Greg Go! I'll write my senator to support SB1190. I hope you will, too.
Here's the information that Greg has shared:
Here's the information that Greg has shared:
please pass this on..... so we can help save the Bay by saving the oyster !!
This NEW study on oyster reefs says:
1. Asia is ahead of the USA in oyster aquaculture
2. Natural oyster reefs are threatened more than coral reefs or wetlands
3. Harvesting natural/wild oysters should be banned, including a ban in the Chesapeake Bay waters(This is not GG's opinion or agenda)
4. The oyster is in "striking decline" worldwide.... (GG's footnote: this contributes to the water quality's horrific decline)
5. Oyster reefs are threatened more than ANY OTHER shallow water, structured habitat
6. 90-99% of the Chesapeake Bay's oyster reefs have disappeared
7. advances in aquaculture are the only positive action mentioned that has "eased the pressure on oyster reefs"
8. sustainable seafood, like oyster aquaculture, is needed
9. Every single Chesapeake Bay oyster can filter up to 50 gallons of seawater per day
Please come over one day and see my underwater oyster reefs, called oyster cages(l will have to pull one up for you to see)..... you won't believe all the different species of fish, crabs, eels, etc that live in them. WHY WOULD ANYONE WANT TO LIMIT THEM?
Why turn back the clock and allow every City and County the "flexibility" to ban aquaculture when they are not chartered to Save the Bay or Save the Oyster.... Leave this with the Commonwealth of Va authorities(the Va Marine Resources Commission or VMRC) where it has been since the inception of seafood industry regulation. They have the best perspective and expertise on what laws, rules and regulations are needed to monitor this vital industry. In my personal situation, l have 7 permits, licenses, leases, or certifications already issued from the Commonwealth of VA for our family oyster farm..... isn't that ENOUGH REGULATION? The last thing the Bay needs is one more layer of government stopping our citizens from growing oysters !!
Click here to read the Daily Press article published 2/5/11 and see why we NEED SB 1190 to pass in the Senate of Va
http://www.dailypress.com/news/newport-news/dp-nws-oyster-reefs-20110204,0,1982278.story
The study, "Oyster Reefs at Risk and Recommendations for Conservation , Restoration & Management", can be read by clicking here :
http://www.aibs.org/bioscience-press-releases/resources/Beck.pdf
Greg Garrett
www.greggarrettrealty.com
Cell: 757-879-1504
Preventing Your Personal Catastrophe (on a budget)
Preventing Your Personal Catastrophe (on a Budget)
In the insurance business, an agent like me has to get used to the fact that I provide a product that most people aren’t very fond of. I get passed this disappointment with the confidence that if I do my job right, then I’ll have truly made a difference in somebody’s life. To me this means that my client is not left in a financial ruin after a major catastrophe. However, I don’t believe, nor do I recommend, covering every single contingency life can throw at a person. Therefore, I have established a five step process to help clients remain financially catastrophe-free and do so on a budget. You can use this process yourself.
First, identify personal risks. Everyone’s risks are different. Understanding your risks is the first step towards putting together a comprehensive, sensible plan. In my experience, many people piece together various protections and have never looked at the big picture to understand what their risks actually are in totality. In the process of identifying your risks, consider the impact of all four types of losses including life, health, property and liability. Property risks are generally simple to quantify. Life, health and liability risks require more thought and consideration.
Second, prioritize personal risks. Once you understand the big picture, the second step is to identify what’s important to you. For example, a person without dependents generally won’t need to be as concerned about financial risks from dying. A person who is retired won’t need to be concerned about losing income due to an illness, but might be concerned about the financial implications of requiring nursing care.
Third, establish a budget to protect yourself from the risks that could upend your life. Most people can’t afford to cover every contingency in life. It’s important to strike a balance between monthly expense and potential disaster.
Fourth, establish a plan that ensures that your catastrophic exposures are covered while you are self-insuring risks that you can absorb. This is accomplished by doing things such as carrying adequately high liability coverage while raising deductibles to the maximum threshold.
Finally, put the plan in place. The best laid plans are worthless if they’re not put in place. However, once you have created a plan and put it in place, you can sleep soundly knowing that your catastrophic exposures are covered. You’ll be the exception to the rule and one of the few people who can say that. Furthermore, knowing that you’re properly structured affords you the freedom to use your remaining financial resources to pursue your passions in life. Everyone should be so fortunate.
Richard Braun is the founder and President of The Braun Agency. Richard holds his Certified Financial Planner designation and is a business graduate from Old Dominion University. The Braun Agency covers Hampton Roads better than anyone with offices on both the Southside and Peninsula and nine licensed agents with over 160 years of insurance experience. To reach the Braun Agency, call 757-INSURANCE (757-467-8726) or go to 757insurance.com.
Nazi Germany vs Patriot USA
America is the land of the free and the home of the brave! We are freedom-seekers and abhor intrusions into our privacy and liberty. "Give me liberty or give me death!", said Patrick Henry, and a birthing nation rallied behind him!
And yet, today things are different.
We now permit ourselves, our women and our children to be virtually strip-searched in airports. We permit our Orwellian "Internal Revenue Service" to confiscate our PCs without a warrant so they can evaluate whether or not we have paid our proper tributes. We have turned every employee in the financial services industry into an army of financial police who are responsible for reporting broadly defined "suspicious behavior". We allow our nation to be one of only a few in the world to tax our citizens on earned income, regardless of where on Earth we earn it. As of 2008, we confiscate the wealth of Americans who renounce thier citizenship, just like NAZI Germany confiscated 90% of the wealth of fleeing Jews in the times leading up to WWII. Now, we even have a smartphone app that will allow us to turn in our neighbors to the FBI, the Department of Defense, Department of Justice, the FAA, the EPA and more!
On 9-11-01, I sat with my wife, a month after our oldest daughter was born, eating lunch in a Boston Market, and I exclaimed that this would mark the day that everything in our nation we change. I told her on that very day, and I remember it like yesterday, that our citizens would sacrifice liberty for the perceived notion of safety. Yet, not even I could have imagined the transformation that would occur in less than ten years.
Adolf Hitler was able to achieve the complicit sacrifice of freedoms through the use of fear and Patriotism. Hitler even had neighbors turning in neighbors to the Gestapo for both of these reasons. Citizens complied with the state because they feared arrest and potential death. In addition to the use of fear, Hitler instilled NAZI German pride into his subjects. He promised his citizens greatness, and that he would solve inflation and unemployment, and protect his country from the greatest threat at the time, communism. In exchange for these commitments, and combined with threats for non-compliance with the state, the German people became complicit and even co-conspirators. We conquered Hitler and crushed his evil regime. And now we're taking some plays out of his playbook.
Today, Americans are promised solutions to unemployment. We're promised protection from today's greatest threat, terrorism. We're promised greatness. We're promised the best health care in the world. We're promised solutions to the greatest financial calamity since the Great Depression. We're fed a big plate of horrible fears and then told that government has the solutions. In exchange for the government solving our greatest problems, we're sacrificing our freedom and our privacy. I am not suggesting that our administration is going to begin sending US citizens to detention camps, but I am absolutely making the observation that our govenment is using the same tools as NAZI Germany to obtain compliance from you and me.
It's not completely our fault. Every program has a great name. Every solution sounds fantastic on the surface! However, the "Affordable Health Care for America Act" is the act that is driving up health care costs. The "Patriot Act" is the act that has given our government a legal right to spy on its citizens and turned every financial services employee into a money-cop. The "Heroes Earnings Assistance and Relief Tax act of 2008" is the law that confiscates the wealth of every American who chooses to leave America, like the NAZIs did to the Jews. We allow the Transportation "Security" Administration to intrude into our lives in the name of protection. And now, you can even download the "Patriot App" to report your neighbors, employers, co-workers, and others of suspicious behavior. Yikes! Heroes. Patriots. Security. Affordable. All lies.
The titles should be the "Government takeover, IRS expansion and Expensive Health Care Act", the "Anti-privacy and traitor act", and the "Confiscation of assets act of 2008". The TSA should stand for "Take and Search Authority". And this new "Patriot App" should just be called the "Turn in your neighbor app". These evolutions are frightful and pose a direct threat to our future way of life.
What made our nation great was opportunity and freedom. We need to restore these notions into our populace. We need to be proud of our history, our republican form of government, and our capitalist economic system. We must reject the growth of facism and socialism in America and return to the ideals that foster prosperity. We must not trade freedom and opportunity for safety and equality. In the words of Benjamin Franklin, “Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.” Unless we change course, we will lose all that we have loved about our nation.
And yet, today things are different.
We now permit ourselves, our women and our children to be virtually strip-searched in airports. We permit our Orwellian "Internal Revenue Service" to confiscate our PCs without a warrant so they can evaluate whether or not we have paid our proper tributes. We have turned every employee in the financial services industry into an army of financial police who are responsible for reporting broadly defined "suspicious behavior". We allow our nation to be one of only a few in the world to tax our citizens on earned income, regardless of where on Earth we earn it. As of 2008, we confiscate the wealth of Americans who renounce thier citizenship, just like NAZI Germany confiscated 90% of the wealth of fleeing Jews in the times leading up to WWII. Now, we even have a smartphone app that will allow us to turn in our neighbors to the FBI, the Department of Defense, Department of Justice, the FAA, the EPA and more!
On 9-11-01, I sat with my wife, a month after our oldest daughter was born, eating lunch in a Boston Market, and I exclaimed that this would mark the day that everything in our nation we change. I told her on that very day, and I remember it like yesterday, that our citizens would sacrifice liberty for the perceived notion of safety. Yet, not even I could have imagined the transformation that would occur in less than ten years.
Adolf Hitler was able to achieve the complicit sacrifice of freedoms through the use of fear and Patriotism. Hitler even had neighbors turning in neighbors to the Gestapo for both of these reasons. Citizens complied with the state because they feared arrest and potential death. In addition to the use of fear, Hitler instilled NAZI German pride into his subjects. He promised his citizens greatness, and that he would solve inflation and unemployment, and protect his country from the greatest threat at the time, communism. In exchange for these commitments, and combined with threats for non-compliance with the state, the German people became complicit and even co-conspirators. We conquered Hitler and crushed his evil regime. And now we're taking some plays out of his playbook.
Today, Americans are promised solutions to unemployment. We're promised protection from today's greatest threat, terrorism. We're promised greatness. We're promised the best health care in the world. We're promised solutions to the greatest financial calamity since the Great Depression. We're fed a big plate of horrible fears and then told that government has the solutions. In exchange for the government solving our greatest problems, we're sacrificing our freedom and our privacy. I am not suggesting that our administration is going to begin sending US citizens to detention camps, but I am absolutely making the observation that our govenment is using the same tools as NAZI Germany to obtain compliance from you and me.
It's not completely our fault. Every program has a great name. Every solution sounds fantastic on the surface! However, the "Affordable Health Care for America Act" is the act that is driving up health care costs. The "Patriot Act" is the act that has given our government a legal right to spy on its citizens and turned every financial services employee into a money-cop. The "Heroes Earnings Assistance and Relief Tax act of 2008" is the law that confiscates the wealth of every American who chooses to leave America, like the NAZIs did to the Jews. We allow the Transportation "Security" Administration to intrude into our lives in the name of protection. And now, you can even download the "Patriot App" to report your neighbors, employers, co-workers, and others of suspicious behavior. Yikes! Heroes. Patriots. Security. Affordable. All lies.
The titles should be the "Government takeover, IRS expansion and Expensive Health Care Act", the "Anti-privacy and traitor act", and the "Confiscation of assets act of 2008". The TSA should stand for "Take and Search Authority". And this new "Patriot App" should just be called the "Turn in your neighbor app". These evolutions are frightful and pose a direct threat to our future way of life.
What made our nation great was opportunity and freedom. We need to restore these notions into our populace. We need to be proud of our history, our republican form of government, and our capitalist economic system. We must reject the growth of facism and socialism in America and return to the ideals that foster prosperity. We must not trade freedom and opportunity for safety and equality. In the words of Benjamin Franklin, “Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.” Unless we change course, we will lose all that we have loved about our nation.
Central Bank Fraud
Quantitative easing. It sounds sophisticated. Complicated. Important. Even critical. The term is thrown around by the fed and the treasury as if it is the highly intricate concept that they are implementing to save the economy, and perhaps, our government from bankruptcy and collapse.
It's not complicated, though. "Quantitative easing" is a fraud that is being perpetuated by our government and the private banking organization called the Federal Reserve. If you or I participated in "quantitative easing" we could literally be given the Death Penalty.
Quantitative easing is quite simply the act of printing money. Lots of it. Our government permits the federal reserve to "print this money" (actually pushing enter on a keyboard and creating electronic currency) because there is no market to borrow the funds in the form of bonds. There is no market because interest rates are near 0%, which is the primary lever that the Fed uses to push money into or retract money from the economy.
So when you don't have enough money and you can't borrow any money, just print it! Hey, it's our government which means it's for us, so why should we care? Here's why. Every dollar that expands our money supply beyond the growth rate in goods and services creates inflation.
Inflation is the biggest tax that our government charges us. And it's hidden. In fact, our annual inflation rate reported by our trusting federal government as recently as October, 2010 was 1.2%. Are we really supposed to believe that? Does anyobody from the federal government fill up their car or go to the grocery store? In 2009, the federal government reported that costs decreased. Not in my house, they didn't. Our government tells us how they calculate the CPI , but because everyone's individual purchases are different, your own inflation rate can be quite different. Inflation's obscurity is what allows our government to tax us in this manner without complaint, and quite frankly, without representation. The last time I checked, my Congressman didn't vote on our inflation rate.
In just over 20 years, at an average inflation rate of 3%, every dollar you have in savings is worth half. Every dollar you earn working at your job will buy 50% of what it bought. Think back to 1985. Remember 29 cent hamburgers at McDonald's? I do. First class postage was $.20. A gallon of gas was $1.20. A gallon of milk was $2.26. Now we pay $.42 for a stamp, $2.70 for a gallon of gas (and we're glad about it), and $3.50 for the milk. Here's the thing. Inflation is not a natural phenomena as we're led to believe. It's a tax perpetuated by our government through their expansion of the monetary supply.
And it's a fraud.
Ron Paul is one of our few leaders who understands the fraud and wants to do something about it: End the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve is not a government entity, nor is it necessary for a sound financial system. The Federal Reserve system is a private banking organization permitted to operate by our federal government because the federal government is its greatest beneficiary. If we eliminate the federal reserve and return to sound monetary policy, we can resolve one of the greatest threats to our personal prosperity.
It's time to act.
It's not complicated, though. "Quantitative easing" is a fraud that is being perpetuated by our government and the private banking organization called the Federal Reserve. If you or I participated in "quantitative easing" we could literally be given the Death Penalty.
Quantitative easing is quite simply the act of printing money. Lots of it. Our government permits the federal reserve to "print this money" (actually pushing enter on a keyboard and creating electronic currency) because there is no market to borrow the funds in the form of bonds. There is no market because interest rates are near 0%, which is the primary lever that the Fed uses to push money into or retract money from the economy.
So when you don't have enough money and you can't borrow any money, just print it! Hey, it's our government which means it's for us, so why should we care? Here's why. Every dollar that expands our money supply beyond the growth rate in goods and services creates inflation.
Inflation is the biggest tax that our government charges us. And it's hidden. In fact, our annual inflation rate reported by our trusting federal government as recently as October, 2010 was 1.2%. Are we really supposed to believe that? Does anyobody from the federal government fill up their car or go to the grocery store? In 2009, the federal government reported that costs decreased. Not in my house, they didn't. Our government tells us how they calculate the CPI , but because everyone's individual purchases are different, your own inflation rate can be quite different. Inflation's obscurity is what allows our government to tax us in this manner without complaint, and quite frankly, without representation. The last time I checked, my Congressman didn't vote on our inflation rate.
In just over 20 years, at an average inflation rate of 3%, every dollar you have in savings is worth half. Every dollar you earn working at your job will buy 50% of what it bought. Think back to 1985. Remember 29 cent hamburgers at McDonald's? I do. First class postage was $.20. A gallon of gas was $1.20. A gallon of milk was $2.26. Now we pay $.42 for a stamp, $2.70 for a gallon of gas (and we're glad about it), and $3.50 for the milk. Here's the thing. Inflation is not a natural phenomena as we're led to believe. It's a tax perpetuated by our government through their expansion of the monetary supply.
And it's a fraud.
Ron Paul is one of our few leaders who understands the fraud and wants to do something about it: End the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve is not a government entity, nor is it necessary for a sound financial system. The Federal Reserve system is a private banking organization permitted to operate by our federal government because the federal government is its greatest beneficiary. If we eliminate the federal reserve and return to sound monetary policy, we can resolve one of the greatest threats to our personal prosperity.
It's time to act.
Health Care Reform
I can't take credit for this but it's funny because it's outlandish but true. However, I hope the humor does not mask the significant and underlying problem with the actual legislation and its significant unintended negative consequences. Did you know that already the legislation has caused a primary health policy on a minor to go from under $100 per month to over $500 per month for worse coverage?
The reason: Minors must be accepted by an insurance company. Sounds good on the surface, right? However, now insurance companies will only write actuarily-sound guaranteed-issue (i.e. expenseive) policies that provide less coverage OR they won't write a primary policy on a minor. I can hear the accusations from the left, already, that the insurance companies are just trying to rip people off. The reality is that if insurance companies don't receive an actuarily sound premium, the companies go bankrupt. (Perhaps that IS the intended consequence of the administration.)
This is a direct result of the new legislation. This is serious stuff, and while the following makes light of the circumstance, we will not be laughing in a couple years. Instead, we'll be looking back and saying, "How did this happen? Why did we think this was a good idea?" Unfortunately, like EVERY preceding Government program/expansion/intrusion, our legislators will promise they can fix it with an expanded program because now "they know" what went wrong. Of course, the new solution has new, unintended consequences. I hope we don't fall for this bogus logic. Now is the time to stand up and reverse this madness. Soon, it will be much more difficult to reverse and probably won't happen.
90% of the health care problem has been caused by government intrusion in health care with tax incentives for group plans, health plan mandates, class-action law and the lack of loser pays legislation, and Medicare and Medicaid. The solution has always been and still is THE FREE MARKET. Competition creates innovation and efficiency which drives better care at lower costs. What little free market we still have in the US is what has provided our citizens the highest quality of care in the world. It is the reason people come here from other places. We need more Freedom not more government.
Stop the madness!
The reason: Minors must be accepted by an insurance company. Sounds good on the surface, right? However, now insurance companies will only write actuarily-sound guaranteed-issue (i.e. expenseive) policies that provide less coverage OR they won't write a primary policy on a minor. I can hear the accusations from the left, already, that the insurance companies are just trying to rip people off. The reality is that if insurance companies don't receive an actuarily sound premium, the companies go bankrupt. (Perhaps that IS the intended consequence of the administration.)
This is a direct result of the new legislation. This is serious stuff, and while the following makes light of the circumstance, we will not be laughing in a couple years. Instead, we'll be looking back and saying, "How did this happen? Why did we think this was a good idea?" Unfortunately, like EVERY preceding Government program/expansion/intrusion, our legislators will promise they can fix it with an expanded program because now "they know" what went wrong. Of course, the new solution has new, unintended consequences. I hope we don't fall for this bogus logic. Now is the time to stand up and reverse this madness. Soon, it will be much more difficult to reverse and probably won't happen.
90% of the health care problem has been caused by government intrusion in health care with tax incentives for group plans, health plan mandates, class-action law and the lack of loser pays legislation, and Medicare and Medicaid. The solution has always been and still is THE FREE MARKET. Competition creates innovation and efficiency which drives better care at lower costs. What little free market we still have in the US is what has provided our citizens the highest quality of care in the world. It is the reason people come here from other places. We need more Freedom not more government.
Stop the madness!
|
O'Reilly- Pinhead or Patriot?
Open Letter to Mr. Bill O'Reilly, Fox news Channel
Dear Mr. O'Reilly:
I watched your show last night, as I often do. I enjoy both your commentary and your guests, but I have to ask you... Really O'Reilly?
You claimed last night in your Willie Nelson segment that anytime somebody purchases a marijuana joint they support Killers and criminals in Mexico. And yet, you remain vehemently against the legalization of marijuana which would, at least for marijuana, eliminate the black market and criminal importers literally overnight. If you know that legalization would fix the criminal problem, why not consider the issue with an open mind?
On one hand, you believe that Americans speciifcally, and people in general, should have opportunity to live their life as they choose. You support the notion that we each should also be accountable for our actions. You seem to believe in freedom.
However, your stance supports the idea that people need to be protected from themselves. Your notion of freedom ends when a person's choices violate your sense of sensibility. To that I say, Really O'Reilly?
To be clear, people should be accountable for their actions. The moment that somebody hurts another person because they are drunk or high, the person should receive maximum punishment. But is it government's role to protect us from ourselves? Can we have a policy of freedom that ends when such freedom permits acts that aren't acceptable to you or some lawmaker?
Or, does the Libertarian philospohy represent the only pure, logical freedom philospohy? Put simply, live and let live until and unless a person violates the rights of another. Government's role should be limited to enforce laws that protect us from others. Isn't any other policy simply inconsistent with itself and therefore hypocritical?
All the best Bill,
R Braun
O'Reilly- Pinhead or Patriot?
Dear Mr. O'Reilly:
I watched your show last night, as I often do. I enjoy both your commentary and your guests, but I have to ask you... Really O'Reilly?
You claimed last night in your Willie Nelson segment that anytime somebody purchases a marijuana joint they support Killers and criminals in Mexico. And yet, you remain vehemently against the legalization of marijuana which would, at least for marijuana, eliminate the black market and criminal importers literally overnight. If you know that legalization would fix the criminal problem, why not consider the issue with an open mind?
On one hand, you believe that Americans speciifcally, and people in general, should have opportunity to live their life as they choose. You support the notion that we each should also be accountable for our actions. You seem to believe in freedom.
However, your stance supports the idea that people need to be protected from themselves. Your notion of freedom ends when a person's choices violate your sense of sensibility. To that I say, Really O'Reilly?
To be clear, people should be accountable for their actions. The moment that somebody hurts another person because they are drunk or high, the person should receive maximum punishment. But is it government's role to protect us from ourselves? Can we have a policy of freedom that ends when such freedom permits acts that aren't acceptable to you or some lawmaker?
Or, does the Libertarian philospohy represent the only pure, logical freedom philospohy? Put simply, live and let live until and unless a person violates the rights of another. Government's role should be limited to enforce laws that protect us from others. Isn't any other policy simply inconsistent with itself and therefore hypocritical?
All the best Bill,
R Braun
O'Reilly- Pinhead or Patriot?
