Presidential Election

Not that anyone cares what I think; they probably don't. I mean, elections are over, so what is there to talk about? "I'm excited!" or "I'm disappointed" in the various spectrum of emotion. But I want to Blog about it anyway.

Statements bouncing around in my head...

"6 billion dollars spent on the 2012 elections, to maintain the status quo." -KSL News

"90% of Germans supported Obama. They are happy with the results. They support his healthcare plan. They are socialists." - Aunt Emmalou (visiting in Germany during election day)

"Now Obama can blame the president of the last four years for leaving the country in a horrible economic situation with more debt than he will have a clue how to handle. Oh, wait the president of the last four years WAS Obama. Nope can't blame him. Yes, he will blame Bush because it's not Obama's fault!" -Facebook user

A husband on Facebook: "I wasn't sure we were going to survive either way, At least now no one will be able to blame the collapse on Mormons."
A wife on Facebook: "Haha. Very level-headed doomsday predictions, dear."

"A stark difference between President Obama and Governor Romney is that Romney is eager to take responsibility while Obama repeatedly pledges to take responsibility and then fakes it. ...But does Obama truly take responsibility or fake responsibility? We’ve had four years of Obama shooting messengers (including Fox News) and blaming others (before it was Romney it was President Bush, Republicans and the Tea Party). We’ve had four years of Obama insisting that he knows best and that anywhere there have been “bumps in the road” it is because of potholes and craters made by others—never by him. The president can’t have it both ways. With leadership responsibility comes leadership accountability." -Fox News

"Obama will bring 'more of the same.'" -Mitt Romney, among others

"Romney will undo everything we've worked towards in the last 4 years." -Barack Obama

"One wonders if ObamaCare's mandate is a good idea, why it was delayed? Obama and those Democratic Senators and Congressmen who voted for ObamaCare appear to think you might not be happy with what happens in 2014 and they prefer you come face to face with the non-negotiable mandate after you vote in 2012." -Fox News

"Why would anyone vote for Obama?" -Dave Allred

"Because he's bought them off and bribed them. He did it with "affordable" health insurance, mandatory coverage, Obama-phones, a new car with the 'cash for clunkers' stimulus; new appliances and windows in the name of 'energy saving' and 'green.' He saved some people's jobs by bailing out banks and car companies that deserved to fail. 

He's the "favorite parent" who bails out their kid and then spoils them. These problems are not our fault, he says. It's not his fault. It's some dead guy's fault. Or your old babysitter's fault. 

Of course people voted for him. They like parents who buy things for them... things they want and don't need. He promises to take care of everybody so that you don't have to put the effort into doing it yourself. He'll make all the hard decisions for you." -Keshia Allred (me)

---------------------------------------

I've got an idea! Lets divide this country into 3 Nations - Republicans, Democrats, and 3rd party/moderate/"I hate politics" people. Then lets see who goes bankrupt first! And see if anyone actually survives! In fact, we should make this into a simulated computer game or an app first... how would that work? Any suggestions? Then, whichever nation survives, bails out the other two nations and unites them under a working and stable government. Any takers? 

Property Tax Update

After I had posted my previous blog and my husband had read it, he came home and asked me a few questions about it. After some thought, I decided I needed to clarify a few things.

First off, I do realize that this is likely a borderline extreme view.

Secondly, my 'newly formed' opinion is not a super solid one, as this was the first time I'd brainstormed about the idea of property tax. I would not at all be offended if after the general population had put thought into it, decided that property tax was still justified for the purposes of firefighting, police, trash, water, snow removal, road maintenance, etc.

I also realize that there are very likely some technical issues on how this could or would be executed. I have, what I consider, an elementary understanding of politics, and therefore, I am more so in the stage of learning how it all works, and discovering my personal values as far as politics go.

This post was really meant more for bringing up topics that perhaps are not usually considered, and trying to stretch myself and my readers to do some critical thinking about how perhaps their 'ideal' government would work. I feel that if the wider American population put more thought into the basic principles and values of what government's role is, we would have a more diverse selection of candidates that had a fighting chance in each office.

I also think that the republican-democrat power struggle would be less of an issue if every American was researching all candidates of all affiliations, rather than voting for the guy that's most likely going to win the incumbent... or voting exclusively for one party. I feel that there are a far greater diversity of values, opinions, and morals than could possibly be represented by Republicans vs. Democrats. I would like the American people to discover their base values and then vote more on an individual basis rather than along party lines - which rarely does anyone 100% align with.

Property Tax

I have been working on filling out my ballot today about who I want to vote for in the coming November 2012 election, when I got side tracked on the question about Constitutional Amendment B - found on the following website: http://elections.utah.gov/racepdf/208528135/race/217170798.pdf

It asks if military personnel serving 200 days out of a year, can pass on paying property tax that year on their primary residence. The other property owners would make up the difference.

I started researching what property tax pays for. This list is as follows (with some variation between states):

- public education (elementary/middle), admins, teacher salary, state education (HS and college)

- city and county government salary and operations

- firefighters, police, outreach programs, library, trash, water, snow plowing

- infrastructure maintenance and improvements for roads, parks, buildings, community/senior centers, athletic fields, museums and shelters.

At first, I listed 'definitely charge property tax' as things that everyone would use or wants access to - police services, firefighting services, trash, water, snow plowing, road maintenance, etc... and then labeled the rest under 'definitely', 'maybe', and 'no.' But then I realized, renters don't pay property tax, but they use all of those services. And furthermore, my landlord does not live in the state, but she pays for these services which she does not use, on the renter's behalf. Theoretically this is reflected in our rental price agreement, however, I think that it would be well for renter's to realize that they DO PAY for government services, and it's NOT FREE nor is it an ENTITLEMENT. Therefore, I have decided that these services should be taxed to every person residing in America, no matter their property ownership status.

Secondly, an illegal immigrant will receive the same firefighting, trash, water, snow plowing, and road maintenance help that everyone else does, and therefore, they should also share the bill. 

In theory, we could just charge all USA residents a flat fee for government services, but it would do two things - cause undue financial stress to those who didn't have a job or income for a period of time; and two, favor the wealthy because it would feel like a small bill in comparison to their entire income.

So, in my opinion, the best way to pay for these services is through a flat income tax. Every working individual will be able to share the bill in a way that they can afford and that they can budget for. For example, if the federal government charged a 5% income tax, and so did the state, all working people would know they need to set aside 10% of each paycheck to pay towards taxes. A percentage of income does not encourage or discourage anyone to be rich or become poor. It would encourage a more transparent, simplifed tax and spending system. 

If any of my readers are freaking out about paying 10% of their income in taxes, I encourage you to add up how much you pay in federal tax, state tax, income tax, property tax, investment taxes, etc etc etc. Several newspapers and studies in the last year or so have reported that most Americans send about 50% of their income to taxes, when it all comes down to it. 

So, what about property tax? What would that cover? I sat thinking for a good 20 minutes about what property tax should cover - services for only property owners and not renters... and the only thing I could come up with is property/homeowner insurance. But the problem with charging for that, is that, for a rare person, who owns their property outright, having no loan or mortgage on it, why should they be required to pay property tax? A proper response might be, "so if there's a fire or mudslide or natural disaster, etc, they won't have lost everything." But what if that homeowner has the money to outright replace that property with the cash they've got saved up? Why pay someone else to insure your home if you've got it covered? Especially when disaster is an 'if'? Why pay insurance for years and years if the likelihood you'll ever need to use it is 1%? And you've insured yourself? 

So, I've come to the conclusion that property tax is 100% a way for government to tax citizens for services they don't want, need, or that fund services that more than just homeowners use. 

Secondly, I've decided that Homeowner's Insurance should be strongly advised for all those who do not outright own their homes (and some who do, whom do not have enough savings to replace it). Anyone who opts out of homeowner's insurance should be VERY AWARE that in case of Natural Disaster, etc, Nobody owes you anything. You are not Entitled to receive aid regarding Losing your House. I think if you can afford to purchase or make payments on a house, you should also be able to afford homeowner's insurance. 

Lastly, I don't believe in property tax because I can imagine an 80-year-old woman who lives in the mountains, 100 miles from the nearest grocery store; milks the cow, grows a garden, and lives 95% off of her own land - - sells only enough produce, etc, to buy a minimal of supplies (sugar, canning jars, etc) - - doesn't even use currency, and loses her home and property simply because she doesn't have a money-based paying job to pay the stupid property taxes. 

Funny BUT True... HA HA HA!

The $50 Lesson

KYLE BECKER OCTOBER 8, 2012 8:30 AM

An unknown author’s story:

Recently, while I was working in the flower beds in the front yard, my neighbors stopped to chat as they returned home from walking their dog. During our friendly conversation, I asked their little girl what she wanted to be when she grows up. She said she wanted to be President some day.

Both of her parents, liberal Democrats, were standing there, so I asked her, “If you were President what would be the first thing you would do?” She replied… “I’d give food and houses to all the homeless people.”

Her parents beamed with pride!

“Wow…what a worthy goal!” I said. “But you don’t have to wait until you’re President to do that!” I told her.

“What do you mean?” she replied.

So I told her, “You can come over to my house and mow the lawn, pull weeds, and trim my hedge, and I’ll pay you $50. Then you can go over to the grocery store where the homeless guy hangs out and give him the $50 to use toward food and a new house.”

She thought that over for a few seconds, then she looked me straight in the eye and asked, “Why doesn’t the homeless guy come over and do the work, and you can just pay him the $50?”

I said, “Welcome to the Republican Party.” Her parents aren’t speaking to me anymore.

http://www.ijreview.com/2012/10/18386-the-50-lesson/

Life, Liberty, and YOUR FUTURE

The Philosophy of Liberty

I ran across this YouTube Video on a Facebook page called "Can this Goat get more fans than Barack Obama?" This video has got a lot of ideas packed into a short space... and I truly wish more people in the United States understood these concept(s). Specifically, that government should not have the right to tell people what to do concerning personal preferences. The government is only there to create order, safety and peace.

Some of the things that I thought of while watching this was the recent law that was passed in New York, where people decided it was a good idea to legally prohibit soft drink cups over (20 oz?) to be sold... to prevent people from "getting fat."

I thought about the Healthcare debate... if you own your own life... don't you own the decision as to whether you want to take care of your life and your body? Or to decide not to? To take it to the doctor? To put cigarette smoke in it? To exercise it? To feed it good food? Or tasty junk food? 

If the Supreme Court were to decide that Obamacare is legal, then the next steps, naturally, would be to start creating laws that people purchase an ongoing gym membership; not be allowed to sell or buy cookies, ice cream, or anything with too much sugar/calories; Smoking and all damaging drugs would be outlawed. They could consider banning all dangerous sports such as rock climbing and sky diving. Perhaps they could even go as far as dictating that you have no more than one sexual partner per year, to prevent the spread of sexual diseases and un-wanted pregnancies.

All these laws would be in the name of making Health Insurance more affordable for everyone. Premiums would go down if more people took care of their bodies by exercising, eating healthy foods, and not participating in dangerous activities. 

How free would you feel if all those laws were passed?

Creamy Honey

Storing creamy honey in a cupboard above the stove is unwise, if you 1. use your stove, and 2. want your creamy, whipped honey to remain in a creamy, whipped state. 

Secondly, microwaving honey is never good for anyone. Use warm water. 

Speaking of accidents, it's important to know that when pickling cucumbers, not to let any vinegar mixed with mustard seed touch your kitchen counter. Apparently it's a permanent yellow stain. Unless it first leaks through a blue towel; then it's a permanent blue stain. 

Third, spraying spider spray along the floor where the sun constantly shines through the sliding glass window-door onto your white linoleum floor, could lead to a permanently DARK yellow stain. 

Forth, having a hand-me-down clothes dryer that can't do "low heat" (vs. high heat and no heat) can lead to permanent stains and problems with your clothes. Always check to see if your second-hand dryer is capable for functioning properly. 

Caulking the handle that's constantly falling off the toilet leads to more problems when you need to replace anything attached to that handle. 

Consider the other side of the wall before drilling a hole in your shower to fix the handles. 

These are just a few things I'm grateful to have learned before I ruined something important. (I'm not saying I learned all of these the hard way; I did not. Just the honey ones, the pickling ones, and the clothes dryer - I got lucky.)

Facebook

Recently Facebook has been made public to the stock-market. But there's constant debate about the value of Facebook for businesses.

What is the value of a 'like'? If someone 'likes' it, does it mean they're willing to buy its services? Will they use ad links to purchase services?

If a company is nationwide and has 4,000 'likes' vs. a local hamburger joint that has 40 'likes' does it reflect the company's popularity or determine its likely success? What if there was a 'dislike' button on Facebook? And that national company had 4,000 dislikes, while that hamburger joint had 2 dislikes? Would that be a more accurate description of its popularity?

Would 'likes' increase or decrease if any given company did/did not post updates about their business? If I 'liked' 40 different businesses, and each one had an update each week, would I feel bombarded with ads on my homepage? Personally, I would. And I'd go 'unlike' most or all of them. If this is the case, the value of a 'like' would go up. But the downside, is every business would have far fewer 'likes' than is possibly accurate.

Personally, as a young adult and from a technology-savy generation, I think the value of Facebook is minimal. I've clicked on ads on the side maybe 5 times in 5 years, and 3 of those times, it was spam that lead me to a completely different site. As a rule, I don't click on ads.

Secondly, I prefer to research companies from other sites to determine their quality of service. I don't get recommendations from Facebook friends hardly ever, and even when I do, I still do my research elsewhere.

Third, the biggest reason I use Facebook is because it's like an online address book. I don't have to try to keep up with my friends changing addresses, phone numbers and email addresses, and even if I loose all 3, I can still contact them via Facebook.

The second reason I use Facebook is to find out what my drifting away, or super busy friends are doing, without trying to get hold of them during their busy life, and making them recap their life for the 20th time. We can all keep up with each other's lives without making it impossible for everyone to get anything done. There are seasons in life where one is too busy to be social and other times, when it's time to strengthen old friendships.

And the last reason I use Facebook, is to try to determine the wide-spread opinions of people, particularly friends, on different topics... some political, some domestic, and to find out how informed my friends are on different subjects. This, however, has been disappointingly ineffective because even when I put a question in poll format and email it to 400 friends, I get a minimal number of responses. Not that I blame them; if everyone has 400 friends and a busy life with a finite amount of time, there will likely be fewer responses than hoped for.

For this reason, I've come to believe that Facebook is a place where many people tend to be slightly more self-centered; talking about their life, soapboxes, and complaining about little things... and only checking the status of their close friends and family... most of the time. I have nothing against that, and it has its place, but it definitely does nothing for the value of Facebook towards companies.