Once Again

Once again, the responsible are taking responsibility for the irresponsible. The government announced Sunday that we, the American taxpayers, will be bailing out Fannie and Freddie. So congratulations, America, you now own a majority of the nation's mortgage debt. I don't recall getting a call or an email or a personal letter asking my opinion on the matter, so I thought I'd take it to the blog. So here it is:

I have some sympathy for people who have lost their jobs or have some health issue that is draining their bank accounts. As for the people who just over extended themselves ZERO sympathy. I understand the argument that possibly the third-party lenders and some banks should have taken a little more precautions when deciding to loan the money in the first place, but they are a business. They are in business to make money lending people money. The responsibility ultimately falls to the person filling out that application.

My wife and I have been married for a little more than six years. We both have a bachelor's degree and my wife has a master's degree that she earned last August. So we have been out of school for just a little more than a year. We have two boys and a stupid cat (trade off for an iPhone, not my best call). For the first five-and-a-half years of our marriage, we rented or leased places to live. Why? That's just throwing money away, right? I mean who in their right mind would rent/lease for that amount of time? Answer: A person or couple who can't afford to make the payments on a house. We wanted to buy a home. And man did we find and look at a bunch of houses that would've been great. But when we sat down and looked at the inflow vs. the outflow of money, it couldn't happen. So we kept on doing what we could (not what we wanted to).

I took the liberty to write my Senators and Representatives a letter expressing my opinion. I'm sure you can guess how that worked out for me. In the letter, I didn't ask for a bail out, I didn't ask for my entire or even half of my mortgage to be removed from my debt record. I simply asked for them to pay my house note for two months. For personal reasons, I won't disclose what that amount would be, but I explained that if I was allowed relief from my mortgage for two months, I could take my family on a nice vacation, I could jump start my kids' college funds or I could invest it. I thought those were reasonable uses of that money. I didn't say I want to buy a new car or TV or make some McDonald's really happy with a big purchase from the dollar menu.

I still have yet to understand what this bailout or any bailout for that matter affords anyone. It doesn't teach responsibility in business or personal finance. It furthers the welfare state that the other side of the aisle has worked so hard to create. It breaks my heart to think of children who may not get to sleep in their own bed because their parents were irresponsible. But someone must be held accountable and I don't feel as if it should be those of us who have taken our responsibilities as a citizen, parent and homeowner seriously.

Hey, Remember Capitalism, Part 2

Well, apparently members of Congress aren't reading my blog. Or perhaps they are embarrassed that a 26-year-old has a better understanding of our constitutional economic principles? Probably the former.

Regardless, the Senate tried again today to readdress the issue of oil companies making too much money. Fortunately, enough of our Senators had their wits about them today to defeat the bill. Here are a couple of links to spark your interest:

Story on the Senate...(Fox News)

See how your Senator voted...(Senate.gov)

One of my favorite quotes of the day was from the number 2 Democrat in the Senate, Richard Durbin of Illinois, he said, "The oil companies need to know that there is a limit on how much profit they can take in this economy." I may be mistaken, but that seems to be the exact antithesis of a free market economy.

Just for fun I did a little check on the gas taxes that we pay. For every gallon of gasoline that we purchase we pay 18.4 cents in Federal taxes, and in the great state of Arkansas, we pay an additional 21.5 cents. (Gas Price Watch). According to the CIA World Factbook, 64% of our population here in the states is between 15 and 64 years of age, which is 203,987,724 people (CIA Factbook). Just taking this group of people, assuming that each of them drive a car, I came up with the following data:

I am fairly average, so I'm basing all of this data on my personal buying habits, which I openly admit may be higher or lower than the national average, but the point of this exercise is to provoke thought. On average, I fill up once a week (17 gallons of unleaded gasoline at $3.85/gallon). This means that each week I pay the Federal government roughly $3.13 in taxes. This doesn't seem that much, but when we multiply this by the 64% of Americans in our example, it turns out that the Federal government collects $638,481,576 in gas taxes weekly. Or $33.2 Billion each year. And this doesn't even include the 18-wheelers or mass transit fuel expenses.

Perhaps the time has come to start identifying areas where the Congress should realize that "there is a limit on how much profit they can take in this economy." Maybe the Congress should hold itself to the same fiscally responsible standards to which they want to hold businesses. Just as corporations are accountable to their shareholders, our representatives should be held accountable to the oath they took to "well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which" they hold.

Hey Remember Capitalism?

Once again Congress has seen it fit to conveniently forget the concept of capitalism and of a laissez faire economy. It was a noble concept founded on the principle that hard work leads to rewards for the individual who has worked hard. It is, in fact, the exact opposite of the concept of Communism.

I can understand everyone's concern about rising oil prices and higher gas prices than we've ever seen before. I can also understand Congress' need to find a scapegoat during an election year. But at some point Americans are going to need to realize that Congress has better things to do than to question the profits of the oil companies.

For years now, Congress has been subsidizing the oil companies through tax breaks. In order for the oil companies to remain profitable, the government has given tax breaks to cover the costs of research and development. I don't know if these tax breaks extend to more local oil companies or if they only apply to the global competitors, but it seems to me that they are creating an unfair advantage for these big players in the oil market. Now they want to question the fact that they are making money? It's almost as if they are surprised that something they were throwing money toward is actually making money without them. It is yet another example of the liberal philosophy that nothing can function on its own without the help of the government.

But I digress...As we all know from basic economics oil is a commodity like every other consumable product we buy. And like its counterparts, it follows the basic trends of supply and demand. For those forgetting this economic principle, here's the short version: when supply is high and demand is low the price is low, and when supply is low and demand is high the price is high. It goes like this, if Hollywood announces that a diet of only eggs will make you lose weight then everyone will want some eggs. However, the number of egg farmers will probably remain the same for a while, thereby driving up the price of eggs. The only way to combat this is to find another egg farmer to start supplying the need of more eggs or get your own chicken.

Oil follows the exact same model. OPEC has determined that they are keeping up the supply up enough to meet the global demand, so they are not going to increase production. Translated "We like the huge profits we are getting from huge demand." So until the oil guys bring their wares to the table, we find a new place to drill (ALASKA) or until you get your own oil well like this guy, we are at the mercy of the global demand and prices of oil.

I find it oddly ironic that less than a week ago the Congress passed the farm bill which would subsidize farmers who are going to be selling their crops on a global market which is experiencing higher prices than normal. Yet this week they are raking the oil companies over the coals for doing exactly what their subsidies were designed to do. I am not at all saying that their legislation for the farmers is a bad thing. My father-in-law is a farmer and I know they work very hard for their profits which don't come close to that of oil companies.

It still amazes me that we have elected people to spend their time questioning the very fruits of the economic design of our founding fathers. While all the issues that the candidates are yelling about are left unattended. I don't see Congress asking auto makers why the price of vehicles has gone up since the 1920s. Or why don't we find out why every year the salaries of professional athletes goes up? Or better yet, why don't we ask the dairy farmers why we are paying $4 a gallon for milk? The fact is, people are still buying cars, they still buy tickets to baseball games and nobody likes cereal with water in it. So the government should just get over it and enjoy the tax revenue that pays their salaries.

Please Congress, perhaps its time to start remembering the basics of our Republic's founding documents. Laissez faire means "let do" so please let us do. Allow us to be entrepreneurs or literally "risk takers." Let us start businesses and fall flat on our faces. The lessons we will learn will make us a better country and better stewards of our liberty. Instead of making another generation of government dependents, why not create the next generation of American citizens capable of governing ourselves.

If you want to read a few of the quotes from today's hearing click here.

The Irony of Election Speeches

As I sit here tonight watching the victory speeches of both Clinton and Obama I am amazed at their inability to recognize the duties of the job they now hold. I took time this evening to read the Constitution (I haven't done it in a while and I think it's just a good practice). In doing so, I read the roles and responsibilities of the offices of the President and Senators and Representatives.

I find it utterly ironic that the three major candidates as of now are Senators and they can't find a kind word to say about the economic policies that (here's the kicker) THEY APPROVED IN THE SENATE. In the Constitution, I found no mention of the President having any responsibility in regards to taxes, commerce or the well-being of the citizens of the United States. However, I did find that it is the responsibility of the Senate and House for all of these things. I find it odd that each of these candidates have forgotten the genius that our founding fathers instituted when creating our government with Checks and Balances. The President can't do anything without the approval of the Congress, the Congress can't do anything without the approval of the President and the Courts make sure that each of them operates within the law. It's not that hard of a concept.

Both Clinton and Obama mentioned the need to give tax breaks to the middle class and provide a tax break for gasoline for the summer. Because as they say "the middle class of America don't deserve to be unfairly taxed by our government." Yet every aspect of their speeches seemed to reflect what they will do when they become President. If I were their constituent I would ask "Why aren't you doing this now as my Senator?" They have held a majority in Congress long enough to have accomplished the promises they are making on the campaign trail. Why should I think they are going to accomplish them during their term as President?

It seems to me that by this point people have pretty much made up their minds in regards to how they will vote in the remaining primaries. Would it not be a better show of accomplishment or commitment to the people to leave the campaign trail for a little while and introduce some legislation to take care of the tax burden of the middle class tomorrow? It seems like neither of them will ever have more of an opportunity to address these issues than when they hold the office of Senator.

The people in Washington speak on camera as if they know who I am. As if they really feel the pain that we feel at the pump. I seriously doubt that today at lunch Hillary said, "maybe we can just do the dollar menu at McDonald's because that last tank of gas really hurt my budget for the week." They make it seem as if we cry every time we fill up our cars. I have personally just accepted the fact that gas is a little higher so I cut spending elsewhere. Which means I don't go shopping as much, I don't eat out as much. But the simple fact is I have to work to earn money and I have to drive to get to work. So I deal with it and adapt my budget as necessary.

So I would like to take another opportunity to plead with you to realize the importance of electing good Constitution-following Senators and Representatives. Although as previously mentioned the Congress can't do anything without the approval of the President, the Congress has more of a role than any member of our government in shaping our present and future. It still amazes me how little the members of Congress seem to represent my views as a Constitution-embracing American. It is time that we as citizen of the United States start realizing our responsibility in letting our representatives know that how they represent us is not in our best interest. We do this by getting involved and more importantly voting. Get involved by learning the issues, learning the proper roles in our government and writing your representatives to express how they can best represent you. If they don't listen, find a candidate during the next election that will listen and tell everyone you can to vote for them.

I disagree with those running that our future is going down the tube. I truthfully feel that the future of our country has more potential to be great than ever before. But it will only be great if we as citizens do our part and get off of our couches and take control of our country. Despite what the Democratic Party wants us to believe, we can reshape our country without them.

If you would like to read the Constitution click here.

Double Standard

So I know this is sort of a lame first post, and I, by no means, wanted to start things off this way. However, I couldn't pass this story up. I would also like to note as a disclaimer that I am in no way a proponent of anyone aside from an elected or appointed official having any meetings with terrorists.

If my memory serves me correctly a president of the United States is in no way above the law. He is, however, a person responsible for foreign relations. And when he leaves office, he is just a normal citizen like you and me (except he has guys following him around ready to take a bullet).

Let's have a hypothetical here. Say I was to make plans to go overseas and visit Khaled Meshal, the exiled head of Hamas now living in Damascus. I would fully expect that the FBI, CIA and other unnamed government organizations would be at my doorstep the next morning. And I would probably end up in Gitmo the day after that.

And yet, when another ordinary citizen of the United States, who just happened to be a former president, decides to go it's ok. And Jimmy Carter at that. The world renowned negotiator with terrorist nations (I would like to bring to your memory 1979-1980 when around 70 Americans were taken hostage in Iran for 444 days). I also remember a few years ago that Jesse Jackson visited Lybia. Both countries on the State Department's "foreign terrorist" list. Must be nice, I guess, to be an unelected official to represent our nation.

What are they even going to discuss? The Nobel Prize? I'm certain if that were the case Al Gore would have to be on the same trip.

click here for the story