Somehow, for many people, it’s stopped being sexy and new.  And, sadly, in this world, sexy and new is what sells.

Of course, it’s all understandable.  Can someone who was just fired from a job really care about impoverished people in a foreign country, thousands of miles away?

Not really.

Sure, some people will give to aid agencies, and some of those agencies will be legitimate, but other agencies will not be, and a large percentage of their funding will go off to pay salaries for NGO “Executive Officers” and the like.

And then come the politicians.  At the moment, they are the only ones with the tools to change the planet.  Despite what U2 may want people to believe, the only power that individuals have to create large-scale change is through putting pressure on politicians.

The only pressure that individuals can exert is through the power of the vote, a power that is extremely significant in the United States and in Western Europe, and increasingly in Eastern Europe and South America.

But politicians rarely feel that pressure.  After all, they speak to voters about taxes and the economy and they talk about winning wars in foreign lands, but too often they shrink from the act of doing something to legitimately alleviate global poverty.

Too often, they stop at only words and far-off goals.

And, with a small exception, there is no one to make tem go beyond words and far-off goals.

The United Nations, currently assembled for the Millenium Development Goals summit in New York, is one of the few that has any power to bring about radical change.

Of course, the UN has its wings rather effectively contained due to a Security Council that has as permanent and veto-wielding members some of the nations that have done the most, historically to exacerbate global poverty.

And any nation that joins that elite group within the Security Council will not use the power for the global good.

Let’s be realistic.

So, what solution is there for the global poor?

The UN Secretary General is asking for solid steps and for legitimate action as the world’s leaders meet in the world’s foremost international body.

His words will be digested by the intended recipients, and then they will be ignored because of a multitude of excuses that, even now, the world’s leaders are already drumming up.

The economy is still a solid reason and the foremost nations will argue that they lack the funds to help alleviate global poverty unless they are allowed to do so by adding in extremely high interests to their loans.  But right now, when even the United States is not too far removed from looking into loans as a legitimate option, even loans are not a great remedy (as if they ever were).

But to this excuse, and to the countless others that can be thrown at the question of “why won’t you help?,” there is one powerful reason for why everyone should take part in alleviating global poverty, whether by donations or loans or by support on politicians.

Terrorism and security.

Radical Islam. Maoist Communism. Drug violence. Street gangs.

Central America is currently being held hostage by street gangs.  Mexico’s violence spread into Texas and Arizona long ago, and there is nothing that a puny little fence will do to stop it.  Communist-inspired terrorists continue to be a threat in South America.  Religiously-inspired terrorists are still a major presence in Africa and in the Middle East, and through that, around the world.

Some of these terrorists and criminals are wealthy men and have always been wealthy men.  The eradication of global poverty will not eradicate terrorism and criminality.

But it will be a major boost toward that goal.

The foot soldiers of terrorist and criminal organizations around the world are almost inevitably poor.  Men (and women) without hope for advancement in the legal and legitimate realm of society who listen to a deranged message of violence and hate which explains why they are hopeless and poor in the first place will be the first group of people to seek revenge.

That’s the explanation for the terrorists.

For the criminals, it’s a lot easier.  The would-be criminal is poor and is offered an easy job, or sees an easy opportunity, and then realizes that crime can pay (albeit for a short period of time), and a criminal is born.

Some people will say that these things don’t matter, that these explanations are a waste of time, a vague effort to humanize the demonic and the criminal.

But they fail to realize that ignoring these explanations and rationales for violence and criminality is more costly in the long run, both in terms of monetary costs and, far more importantly, in terms of human costs.

Sure, a government can go all Rambo and try to take out every terrorist everywhere on Earth, but that plan doesn’t really work in a real-world setting (just ask George W. Bush).

As we learn and progress as a species, we must learn to accept that to end the effects of violence, we must attack not merely the person committing the violence, but the very thing that turned them toward violence in the first place.

It is only the logical next step in the progression of human thought and rationality, and it is the only thing that will do anything significant to quell global terrorism and global crime.

Politicians will never admit it, whether from the right or the left or the center or wherever else one can look for to find a politician one agrees with, but it is the truth.

They will never admit it because the plan is long-term, and politicians need easy-to-digest results for voters who think that the universe is small just because their world-view is miniscule.

Voters, however, can make them accountable for the long-term.  Voters can expand their world-view.

Today is the opportunity.  With a Democratic president in power (and, let’s face it, the Democrats do a lot more to alleviate poverty than their Republican counter-parts) and with an economic state that makes every incumbent politician fear the up-coming election, the United States is in a situation wherein pressure on politicians will actually work.

And where the United States goes, the EU will follow, especially on the issue of fighting global poverty, and if the actions taken are serious actions, then South America’s risen global powers will throw in their weight and assistance.

The question, of course, remains as to what can be done.

Education is one starting point, but not necessarily the best one.  After all, what good is a university degree if there are no jobs?

At which point, companies should be given stronger incentives to build plants in developing countries at wages above the miserable rates that the companies are currently offering in economic zones in places like India and Mexico.

Next would be for the old Security Council system to be thrown out in the United Nations, and for voting rights to fairly represent GDP and population size in the IMF, wherein tiny nations like the Netherlands control more votes than economic heavy-weights like Brazil.

These changes, and countless more, are being debated already in councils around the world, and they will likely be raised in this year’s General Assembly summit that started today in the United Nations.

In some nations, there are already active political campaigns to bring them about.

Other nations are even lucky enough to be having elections this year.

In those nations, there are politicians running for office and they come from every political background imaginable, but in some cases, the messages of hatred and of populism are winning the day, as was recently the case in Sweden wherein far-right candidates reached Parliament for the first time ever on a platform of intolerance and economic fear.

In the United States, there are movements in place that seek to do the same as was just done in Sweden.

To the citizens of those nations, assailed by the representatives of resentment and intolerance, under-cut by small-world opinions and short-term goal-setting, there are only two messages that can be given:

Expand your world-view and think in the long-term.

Vote responsibly.

To the delegates and presidents and prime ministers currently at the United Nations who are committed to making this world a better place instead of throwing into the air high-sounding words about change and hope:

Good luck and may you be successful in the Herculean task that awaits you.

To the global poor who are looked down on by aid agencies as things to be baby-sat and who are looked down on by the ignorant as drains on economies:

May it be that one day soon, we shall be able to say to you, “Fear not, for help is finally on the way.”

By: Jorge Vargas

Read more editorials at www.allmediany.com!

-
About the Author:
Jorge Vargas is the Editor-in-Chief of AllMediaNY.com.
Article Source

By The Fruit Collectivism Bears, We Know Our System’s Better

by Michael D. Hume, M.S.

When I was 15, I worked part-time for the local small-town weekly newspaper. The owner of the business, my editor, became one of the most important mentors in my life. I could write dozens of pieces about the lessons he taught me; one of them concerned the value of competition. We had a rival newspaper, one town over, and I muttered once that I wished they’d go out of business. “Well, some days I think that’d be nice,” said the boss, a sigh in his overworked voice. “But really, I don’t wish it. We are one of the best papers in the state because we have to be. The competitor keeps us on our toes, and forces us to do our best work.”

In a geopolitical sense (or more appropriately, in a global-economics sense), our system of free market capitalism has had one serious competitor: communism. Communism exists at the far end (the left end) of a continuum, the other end of which is a completely free and unfettered market, and intermediate steps along which include regulated markets, socialism, and collectivism.

Though many so-called progressives would love to separate them, from my point of view there are two other continua which march more-or-less in lockstep with communism-capitalism. These are statism-liberty, and atheism-faith. If I correctly remember my eighth-grade history (a subject which is, due to the progressivism currently under discussion, no longer much taught), capitalism has as its running-buddies individual liberty and faith in God. Communism’s pals, in stark contrast, are authoritarian control of individuals by the state, and denial of the Almighty in favor of an allegiance to the state that amounts to idolatry.

I do remember eighth grade. That’s the second year I took Russian (it was my best school subject) and announced that I would be a Bible-smuggler in the Soviet Union when I grew up. I dreamed of a life of danger and intrigue! See, the Bible, or any other religious scripture, was seriously frowned-upon by the Soviet authorities. You got more than a ticket for peddling The Good Book in their state-controlled socialist Utopia.

I ended up pursuing other dreams, thank God.

America was founded by people who came here looking, first, for religious freedom. They had to hack an existence out of a brutal wilderness; but if they could, they got to keep the fruits of their labor. Their government was far away and distracted by more important things for many decades; these colonists enjoyed a high degree of autonomy to worship, work, and grow their communities. They worked together, but made their fortunes through plucky individualism and by having the guts to take chances and make those chances pay off. Capitalism grew up with faith in God and individual liberty… whenever any one of the three was threatened, all three were threatened.

The Soviet experiment showed that communism grows up with atheism and totalitarianism. In the Soviet Union, you weren’t allowed to worship God, and you weren’t allowed to do just about anything else your individual spirit moved you to do, either. Have we forgotten how things work out when you “progress” a society to communism? My kids, who were in high school not that long ago, didn’t learn about what the word “defect” meant, as a verb, in the 1970s. You weren’t allowed to relocate from the Soviet Union… they needed all their “workers” because, after all, you were not a citizen. You were property of the state.

Note how our current American progressive government continues to pick away at the Big Three. Culturally, socially, and politically, there is a “correct” way to think and behave… and it isn’t cool to be a business owner, a church-goer, or a person so concerned about individual rights and liberties that you’d go so far as to attend a (gasp) Tea Party rally. Seeking evolution instead of revolution, they “progress” one little step at a time… a tax hike here, a president with no discernible religion there, a government takeover of an industry over there. Some progress.

You’ve heard me say there are two types of us out there: the Entrepreneur, who is likely to roll up her sleeves, take risks and make things happen, and the Victim, who’s sitting around waiting for others (notably the Entrepreneurs) to take care of him. This country was founded, defended, and maintained for more than two centuries by Entrepreneurs who cling to the Big Three because they – God, Liberty, and Free Market Capitalism – are the things that define and drive this nation. Victims seek to pull us all into the sort of “entitlement” that ends up more resembling “entrapment,” and they want us all marching one progressive step at a time toward collectivism, statism, and denial of any Being Supreme to the national government.

But here’s today’s message of hope: we’re starting to get it. Especially the generation of my kids, the young adults who’ll ultimately bring us back to ourselves. These kids are seeing through the bull of “Hope and Change” progressivism with all its substantial dangers, and are quietly starting to move the country back away from the edge of the cliff. They are educating themselves on the real global conspiracy against private wealth, they’re starting their own businesses, and they’re keeping themselves healthy and strong for the struggle that is to come. They believe in the markets, they believe in liberty, and they believe in God.

If there hadn’t been such a dramatic demonstration case of what happens when progressivism fully progresses, this awakening might not be possible without a repeat of the disasters of the early part of the last century. Remember the words of my editor-mentor: we are the best because we have to be.

-
About the Author:
 
Michael Hume is a speaker, writer, and consultant specializing in helping people maximize their potential and enjoy inspiring lives. As part of his inspirational leadership mission, he coaches executives and leaders in growing their personal sense of well-being through wealth creation and management, along with personal vitality.
Those with an entrepreneurial spirit who want to make money “one less thing to worry about” can learn more about working with Michael at http://oneyearplan.net/michaeldhume
Anyone wanting to jump-start their vitality can browse through the best (and most travel-friendly) nutraceuticals on the market at http://shop.enivausa.com/239824
Michael and his wife, Kathryn, divide their time between homes in California and Colorado. They are very proud of their offspring, who grew up to include a homemaker, a rock star, a service talent, and a television expert. Two grandchildren also warm their hearts! Visit Michael’s web site at http://michaelhume.net
Article Source

WHAT IS PORNOGRAPHY

By Michael R. Sears

3-12-08

Why should the government spend valuable time and resources trying to rid society of such a mundane and innocuous objection as pornography?

It is, in fact, art and helps society. It far more behooves the halls of justice and government to remove such valid evil and wickedness as the 10 commandments. From all the courts, schools, and public places they must be removed. No limitations of money or time are to be spared to hunt down and shoot like a dog every tablet with any jot or tiddle or hint of these wicked words. Every judge with even a thought of these perversions in his or her mind will be removed from the bench. How can a judge properly judge with this bias?

But back to the question: What is pornography?

Well, you know it when you see it, Reagan once said. I think he was right. It’s kind of like the nose on your face. Of course, the pornographist will argue that the nose on your face really is not the nose on your face. It is merely a front of some kind that is innocuous and irrelevant to anything you are concerned with. When confronted with the fact that one must use it to smell with, the pornographist will inevitably say that smell is not needed. It is only one of the five senses and you still have four other perfectly good ones to use; besides no one has ever proved that one needs an actual nose to smell with, since the sensory nerves for smelling are deep within the sinuses and therefore the nose is just a vestigial organ anyway. Besides, how do you know, they say, that your nose is actually a nose? It could be an extension of your forehead or a protrusion of your face and not actually a nose indeed as some have wrongly speculated.

When confronted with the fact that pornography is evil and should not be allowed in our society, they argue that it has great artistic benefits and is of great benefit to society and that perhaps there is a nose on our face after all and it can be used for good, but only if they are allowed to describe it and define its use and tell us what good it is. It is also actually good for women and men and does not degrade them in any way whatsoever, but puts them upon the highest pedestal of honor. It is their choice, they say, just like abortion. We should be free to choose whatever we want, they rabidly defend with white spit foaming from their mouths as their red faces hold back the violence they would do to you were we not in public. This freedom of choice, of course, does not extend to Christians praying in school, teaching the record backed facts of creation instead of the far fetched theory of evolution, or judges posting the 10 commandments in his or her court room or things like that. These things are so evil that they must be controlled by the government to protect us stupid people from ourselves.

So we have it. pornography and the pornographist walking hand in hand down all of America’s highways and byways, freely exploiting and perverting our children and grand children and us, while all the while singing anthems in our churches and proclaiming that sex with children and animals, violence, perversion, snuff flicks, and homosexuality of every kind is well within the norm of human behavior and is oh so very good for each and every one of us that we should all embrace it with great glee. How dare any of you Christians to come against our great bastion of strength and good for humanity. How dare you to interfere with our freedom of choice! What would your children and grandchildren say?

So, what is pornography?

According to the pornographist and those who are fed by its filthy money, it is art and some of the finest examples of humanity. If the public demands it, it must be good.

To the Christian it is perversion, violence, exploitation, evil, lawlessness, and a cancer in our society. It is kind of like the nose on your face!

Where are all those politicians, judges, and lawmakers when you need them?

Probably in the whorehouse, taking a break from their job, enjoying some art and getting some religious counsel from all the priests and preachers there.

-
About the Author:
Web site: http://www.theinventions.com Freelance writer for HVACR News for two years with regular column. Inventor with several patented inventions. Writing for many years. http://www.icr.org http://www.exodus-international.org
Article Source

To allow that each one can express their opinions and ideas, “and that they are taken into account!”… in what about that 50% of the I.B.P it is distributed among the total population; guaranteeing to all: Personal, Social, Economic and Juridical security; it is the best Competitive Democracy Altruist system for their inhabitants and the best form of making more efficient “The Democracy”… 

The Best Political Talent, ¡Is that which allows the inclusion of all!  

The incompetent,  politics only achieved states financiers and paternalistic that only they will be governed by the mediocrity and the hypocritical and interested servility in receiving gifts and flatteries of power, Assigned to Authoritarian and partisan Finger;” Only the voice of the people, as the voice of the population’s 100%, is the true one  ”Competitive Democracy Altruist “ 

If a democracy only benefits to the population’s 20%, it is incompetent, inefficient and ineffective in 80% of its idealistic constitution.

 If the democracy benefits to 100% of the population of the nation “Really and indeed!” it is a true Altruist, and competitive Democracy for all the inhabitants and Citizens.

 “Not to allow Incompetent and Inefficient Democracies, it is the moral duty, of all town that is considered intelligent, penetrating and solidarity.

 Because an ignorant or arrogant and smug, folk, will be able to be the menial object of his tyrans, and they will receive with drams and flute; to the one that oppresses them and it eats away theirs or it ruins in its bowels but become intimate, like they are:  ”The Purchasing power of their Work!”, and “The Family Patrimony!” that it inherited of their parents and primordial native heroes.

 Of anything it serves the economic growth of the state to their inhabitants; if the insecurity grows and camped to its wide ones, the same as the unemployment and the runaway inflation.  

Of anything they serve the words but beautiful and solidarity fantasies;If they are only to benefit to a small percentage of the people, while the 80% or the populations,  suffer of high-priority basic necessities. 

The Political and Democratic competitiveness; it is the one that allows that the best talents that benefit to all the people´s town, will be those that lead and guide to the town toward the, moral, economic and juridical prosperity goals.            

                                                           “Miqueas 2; 1 to 11.” 

Creating inclusion forms that arrive to all! But there of their partisan, cultural, political or ethnological preferences .

                                                       ”Miqueas 3; 1 at the 11.”

 The Competitive Democracy search to strengthen the purchasing power of the work; in the fairest and equal way, to avoid “that 10 men make the work that one can carry out!”;and “that one doesn’t have to make the work that they should carry out 10!”; achieving the best equal distribution in the labour day and to strengthen, “The value hour man!.” To also strengthen the Value of the Personal Patrimony, as well as that of the Relative and Social in grams, with the investment  of it in gold certificates, witch increase it´s value 300% during the last years…

Equallying the personal, Social, economic and juridical security, with the Identification Intelligent Golden Card; as a system to integrate to the all population’s national identified 100%, with The Banking Virtual Social Bag and “The Bank of the Identity” 

So that we can live in good social coexistence; “One for all and all for one!”  

Basing the good Minimum wage, With the percentage of the division of 50% of the I.B.P among the population’s 100% identified and The Participative Administration ;

Guaranteeing this way: Feeding, Social Attendance, Housing and education of maximum quality, to the people…

 It promotes The American integration with “The Virtual Multinational State Alpha Omega”  

And a Common Constitution  with The same education, basic, diversified and superior universal, as well as the Military, police and hospital integration; to create this way a New people and The Homo ludens as:

“The Universal Citizen!”.                                

                                                                                      Jose A Guevara M

-
About the Author:
Born in Caracas in 1952 and was primary studies in Caracas and Maracay 1959, 1969, 1970 with parasistems, automotive brake system, mechanics secondary 1965. Artistic and Advertising Drawing.1972 music appreciation, oboe, and guitar. Then in 1977 travelled to U.S.A. and Europe; in Sweden where I lived and study for four years, the Swedish language, mechanical workshop, percussion, and English too.
Then I went back to U.S.A. and work as animator, during for 3 years and then return to Venezuela, where I continued studies of computing, tourism and action; to work in the areas and contraction and advertising for other years.
I currently live in Maracay Venezuela, married with my wife where we work in our own Gardner. Love to write songs and play the guitar, also paint and draw.
Love the ancestral Arquelogy and swimming and do yoga.
Article Source

Something worth dreaming about. Worth chersihing, worth relishing. But it seems impossible, improbable to materialise even in the distant future.

Keeping desires or hopes for a better tomorrow than the present one is always good, worth emulating. Flames of hope everyone must keep close to his/her mind. Whenever these flames or sparks die down one mulls ending his/her life sometimes reel under depression or frustrations often taking refuge in mental asylums.

Tomorrow, Monday 20th September, the second Summit to be attended by more than 140 nations across the world under the auspices of United Nations begins to discuss and to find out solutions for the biggest threat the world faces as part of the Millenium Development Goals in NewYork, USA. Adherents of divergent views and outlooks including nations like US and Iran who are at loggerheads on nuclear issue converge there. Yes, poverty transcends national barriers and hence it always remains topic of discussions across the nations. It remains a perennial headache to almost all of them including developed, developing and least developed nations in the face of various threats in the form of terrorism, wars, ehtnic clashes, conflicts, communalism, xenophobia, all are one in striving to lessen the number of poverty-stricken citizens in their respective countries. In addition to it many other poverty related subjects like malnutrition, particularly affecting under five year old, health, education, empowerment of women – all are believed to come up for heated discussions among the participants.

In 2009 the number of poverty-stricken people around the world was estimated to be 1.2 billion. A minor decrease of 1.2 percent brought down the numbers to 924 million as per FAO (Food & Agricultural Organization) reports, owing to good monsoons, resulting in bumber harvest around the world in 2010. But in 2011 the numbers once again are feared to go up due to a massive drought in Russia, a massive flood in Pakistan devastating a large area under cultivation. Lack of good monsoon, massive droughts, devastating floods across the world the climate continues to remain volatile hence apprehensions always haunt all especially agriculturists like the proverbial sword of Democles. Nature ventilates its fury depending upon its whims and fancies causing large-scale destruction as a result of exploiting it since decades by vested interests ignoring the shape of things to come or all that waiting to be in the wings. Ecological plunder is a bane of our times causing unexpected floods, droughts, rising sea-levels threatening the very existence of countries like Mauritius and if we are threatened with such hardships sit and ponder over the fate awaiting Generation X. Besides all these facts keeping a deaf ear to the cries for disaster management adds to the woes. Poverty and climate change are always inter-related.

Heated discussions and also debates are certain to surface in the course of the summit especially at a moment the US, world’s most developed country and the European community remaining in the grip of recession and the developing nations and least developed nations demanding generous international aid and other aid agencies. Ban-Ki-Moon, UN Secretary General will have a tough time persuading all parties to reach a consensus on the most sensitive matters like poverty and nuclear issue and I don’t know whether under pressure from the big brother US, he is going to be forced to discover or arrive at a face-saving device like the one he arrived at the historic Copenhagen – Denmark Summit 2009 which was a ‘historic failure’. The only difference being the Copenhagen summit was on Climate Change and on the present one relating to poverty. Is it possbile to halve the number of poverty-stricken by 2015. Let’s dream so. Let’s hope so.

-
About the Author:
Please visit my website : www.reflectnews.com At the very outset,let me introduce myself to you. My name is K.R.Surendran,hailing from a village called Pulluvazhy near Perumbavoor.Five books in Malayalam are there to my credit now,and they are “Pooviriyumkunninte- Santhathikal”(Stories),Gloriyayude Dinarathrangal”(Stories), “Mumbai- Sketchukal”(Novelettes), and “Indiayude Bhoopadam” (Novel) and “Pulluvazhy”(novel). Please visit my website: www.reflectnews.comAt the very outset,let me introduce myself to you. My name is K.R.Surendran,hailing from a village called Pulluvazhy near Perumbavoor.Five books in Malayalam are there to my credit now,and they are “Pooviriyumkunninte- Santhathikal”(Stories),Gloriyayude Dinarathrangal”(Stories), “Mumbai- Sketchukal”(Novelettes), and “Indiayude Bhoopadam” (Novel) and “Pulluvazhy” (Novel).  An English novel penned by me -”Some Grassway Realitites With A Romantic Touch”- has been published recently.
Article Source

- It seems forever that politicians have been telling us what a great financial idea the Social Security program is and why it is stupid to allow mere mortal citizens to handle their retirement affairs by, gasp, investing their retirement funds in the stock market. Well, I did a little math work in this area and put together some elementary math models to determine if this myth was true. I got my historical Social Security salary history from the Social Security Administration, I researched the historical Social Security tax rates which enabled me to compute how much money was sent to the government for my retirement based on my wages, I found the historical S&P 500 annual returns for the stock market over the years, and put all of these numbers into a simple spreadsheet. The basic assumption of the model is that I would have been allowed many decades ago to keep all of that money that was being sent to the government (and political class) and invested it in an S&P 500 taxfree/IRA-like, low fee mutual fund. The results indicated that if the world had been like my spreadsheet, I would have been able to retire with a monthly check that was about two and half times what I will get from the Social Security Administration. This estimates takes into account the drastic reduction in stock market values from the “Great Recession.” If I had played it more conservatively and invested in one year Treasury notes over that time I would have been able to retire with 50% more that what I will get from Social Security. Thus, I am tired of the political class telling me how great their program is and how dangerous it would have been if I had managed my retirement wealth, the math proves them wrong.

- Of course, we have constantly heard how the Obama stimulus package saved the economy and how many jobs it saved and created. Forget the fact, that unemployment is much higher than anyone in the Obama administration said it would be if the stimulus package was passed, let’s do some simple math using only the administration’s numbers. In a series of articles in late October, 2009, the Associated Press took a look at what effect the stimulus package was having. At that time, the Obama administration was claiming that 650,000 jobs had been created or saved. The AP and Reason magazine were relatively close in their estimates of how much of the stimulus package had been spent up to that point, about $180 billion. If you do the simple math of dividing the number of jobs created and saved, Obama’s own numbers, and divide that into how much was spent to create and save them, you come out to about $277,000 per job. You cannot solve a recession when your policies cost over a quarter million per job. Didn’t anyone do the math at the White House, these are not good numbers.

- Forget math, how about basic counting skills. The 650,000 jobs at that time should have been considered a best case estimate. Subsequent Associated Press reports found that in many, many cases, jobs saved/created were double counted, in some cases stimulus money was given to people as raises but those people were counted as saved jobs, and it the best example of bad math skills, a Georgia day care center said its stimulus money saved 129 jobs – that is one big day care center. If the political class cannot even count, how can we expect them to fix anything and fix it efficiently and with integrity?

- Back to math skills. The Obama administration has claimed from day one that it must incur large spending deficits and higher national debt in order to drag the country out of the recession. So far, results have certainly been lack luster with high unemployment persisting and GDP down to less than 2% a year. Apparently, no one in the administration took a look at what happened to the economy during the 1940s or if they did, they did not understand the math of the U.S. economy during that time. Between 1945 and 1948, the budget of the Federal government shrank by almost 68%, unemployment never got above 4% and the size of the U.S. economy grew by almost 21%. These are official U.S. Government figures. These good economic things happened despite the fact that over ten million Americans came home from the war and assimilated into the domestic U.S. economy. Thus, relative to the 1940s, the Obama administration is doing the exact opposite of everything that worked to transition the U.S. economy from a war time footing to a peace time economy. Just look at the math.

- In the first two years of the Obama administration, 2009 and 2010, and likely for 2011 also, his administration will incur a Federal deficit in these three years of over four TRILLION dollars, running an annual deficit of between $1.4 and $1.5 TRILLION. Now for the silly math. The President has this irrational obsession of raising the taxes on those Americans that make more than $250,000 a year by 4%, the levels before the Bush tax cuts, insistently saying that these people need to pay more in taxes to get the deficit under control. Good math or silly math? I went to the IRS website where I was able to get the official income levels by income bands for 2008. Using some simple, elementary math, I was able to construct a spreadsheet model that accurately predicts what the incremental tax hike would generate in additional taxes and the impact it would have on the deficit. The result is less than Mr. Obama would have you believe. The math shows that raising the taxes on these American would generate an additional $70 billion a year in tax revenue, or reduce the annual Federal deficit by a whopping 5%. The math just does not support Obama’s deficit reduction assertion: ignorance of the math or arrogant in his assumptions that we are too dumb to figure it out? The problem with the deficit is that this administration spends too much, not that the rich are not taxed enough. [Note: this $70 billion estimate is a solid estimate, at least in the government's mind. According to a recent Associated Press article, Congressional analysts estimate that that the incremental amount of tax revenue from raising taxes on the rich would be about $700 billion over the next decade or... $70 billion a year, our estimate.]

- Another Federal deficit/tax the rich exercise. About six months ago, Fortune magazine estimated the total wealth, not the income, of the richest 400 Americans. If you added up their total wealth, you found that the richest 400 Americans were worth just under $3 TRILLION. Thus, if the government could somehow confiscate the wealth of these richest Americans as a one time tax levy, their total wealth would not even cover the Federal budget deficit that Obama will ring up during just his first two years in office, never mind the deficit already in place or predicted for the future. Do the math, you cannot tax the rich enough to eliminate the deficit even if you took everything they owned, the math just does not work. Given that the rich pay the vast amount of the government’s budget anyway, once you took their wealth, you would still have to raise taxes on everyone else to cover the shortfall from the rich who are unlikely to try and become rich again if the government is just going to take it. The Federal deficit is a spending problem, not a government income problem, the math does not lie.

- More about deficit spending math. An Associated Press article form September 13, 2010, quoted Congressional analysts’ estimates that if the Bush tax credits were allowed to expire for ALL Americans, an additional $400 billion a year would flow to the Federal government. However, even if everyone paid more in taxes, we would still be a TRILLION short relative to the Obama administration’s annual spending history and plans. Thus, even this math proves we have a spending problem, not a taxing and income problem.
Earlier this year, the President publicly claimed that for every dollar the government spent on pre-school education, the country gets back $10 in value. I wondered at the time how anyone could come up with that kind of math calculating how a dollar spent today will turn into $10 worth of benefit decades later. Before I went too crazy trying to figure out that math, the President’s own HHS Cabinet Secretary released a report that showed the benefits from the Headstart pre-school program and other similar Federal programs had no lasting effect at all on the children involved with the programs. Thus, the 10-to-1 ratio the President talked about was obviously faulty or deliberately deceiving math. In either case, the administration’s own people proved his math to be wrong.

- Talk about ridiculous math, consider a September 12, 2010 Associated Press article about the earthquake clean up process going on in Haiti. According to the article, the United States has spent $98.5 million of U.S. taxpayer money to clear out 1.2 million cubic yards of ruble. Now, to the math deficient, 1.2 million yards seems like a lot. To the math capable, if you divide the cost ($98.5 million) by the amount of rubble removed (1.2 million cubic yards) you quickly find out that the American taxpayer spent about $82 to move each cubic yard of rubble, or about $3 to move each cubic foot. Two shovelfuls would probably move a cubic foot, how in the world does it cost us $3 to do that? Just do the math.

- One last tax the rich scenario. The President recently tried to sell his tax the rich (those making over $250,000 a year) by claiming that if you allow these Americans to keep their earning they will not spend it and stimulate the economy. The example he gave is that Warren Buffet will not spend his saved taxes and stimulate the economy. But from a math perspective, how many Warren Buffets are there in the country? This is a pathetic example of politicians demonizing a group of Americans, which in this case really do not even exist. 76% of the taxpayers that would be affected by the Obama “tax the rich by 4% more plan” make less than $500,000 a year, hardly Warren Buffet territory. On average, these Americans will retain just $5,000 more in taxes if the Bush tax cuts are kept in place. They are likely to spend it and stimulate the economy if allowed to keep it. 91% of the people affected make less than a million dollars a year, again, hardly Warren Buffet territory. And finally, if you look at the 2008 IRS data, only about 630,000 Americans made over a million dollars that year. If you do the math and divide these 630,000 tax filers with the number of U.S.households, about 115 million, you find that the people most affected by the Obama obsession is about .5% of the country. Contrary to Mr. Obama’s position, the math shows that you cannot balance the budget on about .5% of the population.

Getting back to the original question. are politicians that deficient in math that they cannot see what their policies and programs are really worth or are they so arrogant that they know their programs do not work but assume we are too ignorant to understand the basic math of their reality? When you think about it, it does not matter. By denying the reality of the math, the political class continues to under serve or misserve the country with programs that are incoherent with the reality of our times, as defined by simple math concepts.

Until we can elect competent math people for Washington, we will continue to be fed lies and wrong information which is no way to run any entity, especially one that controls what happens to our tax dollars. Two steps need to be implemented to address this math ignorance or arrogance. First, we need to reduce the size of the Federal government by 10% a year for the next five years. Given that the political class does not know how to accurately count or does not want to accurately count how our tax dollars are spent, the only real solution is to give them less tax dollars to deal with. We also need to institute term limits, preventing the currently math deficient political class from staying in office longer than necessary.

Mark Twain popularized the saying: “there are lies, damn lies and statistics.” If that was updated for our current day government it would probably read like: “there are lies, damn lies and politicians.” In any case, keeping our current politicians in office does not add up.

-
About the Author:
Walter “Bruno” Korschek is the author of the book, “Love My Country, Loathe My Government. – Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom and Destroying The American Political Class,” which is available at www.loathemygovernment.com and online at Amazon and Barnes & Noble. Our daily dialog on freedom in American can be joined at www.loathemygovernment.blogspot.,com.
Article Source

I really hope Australian’s don’t get ‘girl power’ and vote Gillard just because she is female – it seems more of a popularity contest than an actually political debate. Liberals have followed Labor in tactics in this 2010 election with high profile Australian tennis champion John Alexander who is contesting John Howard’s old seat of Bennelong.

This follows high profile Labor Federal politicians Peter Garrett (lead singer of Midnight Oil and high profile environmentalist and indigenous rights activist), Maxine McKew (former newsreader), Justine Madden (former AFL star) and Kirsty Marshall (ski jumper). Is it a good move the Liberals are following; only time will tell, but in the previous names mentioned, there have been some large blunders such as Garrett and the pink batts. I hope people vote on policies based on who they were in their past life and whether they were/are famous or not.

So, Abbot or Gillard. Well, I really don’t like how Abbott brings religion into his politics. Australia is a multicultural society and politics based on religion should not exist. Abortion is one topic where he has lost a lot of votes. My housemate (female) said to me today that she was voting Gillard because she heard at work that Abbott was against abortion.

-
About the Author:

Article Source

Healthcare reform is the most obvious of those political minefields. So far, it is the key accomplishment of President Barack Obama’s domestic policies–but that is at least as much of a downside as it is a positive. Support for the law, passed in March, has wavered over the past several months. In general, half or less of the public has expressed their support of the law. At the same time, opposition to the legislation is far more feverent.

The newest poll, conducted by the National Journal Congressional Connection and the Pew Research Center, shows that only 38 percent of respondents were in favor of healthcare reform. Democrats in the Senate or House of Representatives who voted for it risk their seats, while even Democrats who voted against it are not safe.

What is the Obama administration planning to do to combat these problems? Another full-blown publicity campaign will begin soon. Democrats across the United States are pinning their hopes on promoting the measures that take effect shortly, on September 23rd. On that date, several of the most popular regulations will go into effect. They include banning any health insurance plan from rescinding coverage to policy holders who get sick, or denying coverage to children with pre-existing conditions. Another provision that becomes effective soon will prevent health plans from charging co-payments for preventative care, which often results in people avoiding it.

The promotional campaign will have several aspects, including speaking engagements from top administration officials and dedicated web sites. One, created by Democratic allies, is the Health Information Center. They aim to use that “war room” to combat accusations from Republicans.

-
About the Author:
Yamileth Medina is an up and coming expert on Health Insurance and Healthcare Reform. She aims to help people realize that they can find a quality health insurance plan right now. Yamileth lives in Miami, FL.
Article Source

Setting the tone, Singh said the government was ready to talk with anyone or any group that adopt peaceful means, but asserted that it can not happen until the end of violence, some of which was “orchestrated by some groups.”
A statement issued at the conclusion of the meeting that the leaders agreed that the marathon of the Indian constitution provides ample room “to accommodate any demand for a political project, through dialogue and civil discourse and peaceful negotiations.”

Accordingly, it was decided that he will send a delegation that includes all parties of Jammu and Kashmir, and dates, which was not announced immediately.

“Leaders agreed that the delegation should meet all segments of the population, and all the trends in public opinion, and the visit by the delegation of each party can be facilitated by the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the state government of Jammu and Kashmir,” said the statement.

“The government is taking into account the deliberations that took place at today’s meeting, while considering the adoption of measures and initiatives to reach the people of Jammu and Kashmir,” it said, adding that the feedback received from the delegation of each party would make an important contribution in the government to evolve in response on various issues relevant to the situation.

During the meeting, leader of the People’s Democratic Party in favor of Mehbooba Mufti, who is the main opposition party in the state of Jammu and Kashmir, and immediate termination of the AFSPA and the withdrawal of armed forces from civilian areas and the release of political prisoners and “détenues innocent people.”

National Conference, which was represented in the Farooq Abdullah, the President, also sought the abolition of AFSPA, at least in part, or modify it to make it a “humanitarian”. And endorsed the request of the parties of the State by the left-wing parties and LJP. However, parties opposed such as the Bharatiya Janata Party, Shiv Sena, Samajwadi Party and Rashtriya Janata Dal any such move, he must do something to weaken the morale of the troops.

-
About the Author:
Latest Article Tips: Where you can get all kind of Article Tips, Which is very informative and successful for your bright future
Read All About Forex Fun & Entertainment
Article Source