Someone emailed me this image yesterday. It is entitled “Government Snow Plow” and includes the caption “Designed by the same people designing the health care reform” below the image.

I think this picture cleverly depicts the often staggeringly inefficient results of non-market-based interventions within our economy. Over time a truly free market weeds out most waste and excess. Conversely, politicians like to hand out favors (our Founding Fathers called it largess) using our money and thus perpetuate, and expand, government waste.

I don’t know who to attribute this image to but it sure is clever. I also feel the email’s health care analogy is pertinent. Think about this: how can we trust our federal government to manage the entire nation’s health care system for 300+ million people when they can’t even take good care of a few million veterans? What think you?

I wish I knew who to credit with the following idea but I do not. It is, however, so simple and yet so profound that I wanted to share it with everyone. Friends, this is something we should do. I quote:

Like most folks in this country, I have a job. I work, they pay me. I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as it sees fit. In order to get that paycheck in my case, I am required to pass a random urine test (with which I have no problem). What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who don’t have to pass a urine test.

So, here is my Question: Shouldn’t one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare check because I have to pass one to earn it for them?

Please understand, I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet. I do, on the other hand, have a problem with helping someone sitting on their a** — doing drugs, while I work. . . . Can you imagine how much money each state would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a public assistance check?

I guess we could title that program, ‘Urine or You’re Out’.

Now that’s some good thinking and would save far more than it costs! What do you think?

I read where another guy expanded this concept a bit and proposed that all college students receiving government aid should likewise be required to take a random urine tests if they received public money. Hey, let’s expand it further and say that all financial executives getting bailout money should also have to pass random urine tests. Oh, and don’t forget — let’s urine test the guys in Washington who are handing out our money! They really must be high on something to think we can borrow our way out of the mess they created.

Beware, the Obama Administration is trying to bypass Congress and nationalize the United States banking system! This unconstitutional scheme is being done through financial maneuvering efforts that don’t make sense to most of us. In short, the Obama Administration is seeking to convert government loans into equity stakes of common shares of stock (with full voting rights) that are owned by the federal government — particularly the Treasury Department which is under the Executive Branch. This scheme would immediately make the government (i.e. the Obama Administration) the largest shareholder in several of our nation’s largest banks. It appears banks will have not a choice in this loan for stock conversion scheme.

This maneuver was done to Citigroup in January when up to $25 billion in preferred stock (which was basically a loan) was converted to common stock. This gave the government equity ownership including full voting rights. This move is a done deal!

Some think of this as a “backdoor to nationalization” approach. Whether it’s backdoor or frontdoor, the result is banks that are essentially owned and/or controlled by the government. Such a move allows the federal government to control everything from the printing to the supply to the flow of money within our economy. Bank ownership would mean the government would be directly responsible for setting rules and policy regarding creditworthiness, lending terms, qualification for mortgages, interest rates and so much more. That is a very, very scary thought.

Furthermore, the federal government seems to be actively seeking this position of power and is  putting conditions on the repayment of bailout funds that make it impossible for banks to repay these loans unless the government decides that their repayment is in the “national economic interest” whatever that means.  Sounds to me like the federal government is putting a stranglehold on the banks. Remember the federal government “borrowed” the bailout money that they received to inject into the banks. In effect, they are taking the banks over with nothing but paper.

A free people must have control over their own money. Any government that takes this power from their people enslaves them and controls their destiny. As Americans, we must never allow this to happen to our banks. We cannot give this up.

While it is true that our401Ks are worth less now than they were last year, they are not worthless. If the government gets their hands on them they will have even less value — the value will be whatever the government and not the market says it is. Remember, this is the same government that runs the Social Security system which is already worthless for most of today’s workers under the age of 45.

Beware, lest the fear of losing our money lead us to turn it over to the greedy hands of government. Instead, let us fear the loss of our money (and our freedoms) to the government. I urge you to contact your members of Congress and demand they stop this power grab from the Obama Administration controlled Treasury Department (which is headed by a tax cheat — learn more [28 page .pdf document]).

Take Action Now:

• Write your Representative
• Write your Senators

American Solutions, in partnership with the Nationwide Tea Party Coalition, is sponsoring nationwide Tax Day Tea Parties for April 15, 2009. The purpose is to “communicate our anger and opposition to the irresponsible policies of politicians in Washington who have failed to solve problems.” American Solutions continues: “More importantly however, this is our opportunity to clearly define a bold, new agenda and to tell our elected officials that they can either work with us, or find new jobs.”

I’m very concerned about our incredible national borrowing and spending. I’ve been concerned for decades about the size of the national debt; however, the almost exponential rate of increase seen over the past few weeks is staggering and unsustainable. We cannot spend our way out of debt but we can spend our way into slavery.  We’re rapidly approaching the point of national bankruptcy with debt accumulation patterns that resemble a third world dictatorship. This simply must stop.

I’m also very concerned about the erosion of our rights. Companies are being nationalized. Private corporate leaders replaced. Banks have been forced to take federal money and then not allowed to pay it back (which allows the federal government to exercise direct control).

As for my reaction, I’m slow to anger and don’t want to knee-jerk into protest mode. However, I’m not sure what else will get our leaders attention in Washington. I smell a rat when they pass legislation without allowing anyone to read it first. When they ignore minority party input and play hardball even with dissenting members of their own party, I know something is wrong. When our tax cheating Treasury Secretary and bowing to the king of Saudi Arabia President force businesses to remove their own leaders and nationalize banks, I know we’re losing our freedoms quickly.

The bottom line is something needs to be done while we still have the resources and freedom to do something. After studying the successes of the Civil Rights Movement, I feel that non-violent protests are in order. In any protest, though, I feel it is wise to offer a clear and reasonable alternative to the situation being protested.

So, with that in mind, I offer some solutions for the American Economy in 2009.  I first share the 12 American Solutions for Jobs & Prosperity offered by American Solutions as a start and then add 8 more of my own (which in a few cases somewhat overlap with the first 12).

1. Payroll Tax Stimulus. With a temporary new tax credit to offset 50% of the payroll tax, every small business would have more money, and all Americans would take home more of what they earn.

2. Real Middle-Income Tax Relief. Reduce the marginal tax rate of 25% down to 15%, in effect establishing a flat-rate tax of 15% for close to 9 out of 10 American workers.

3. Reduce the Business Tax Rate. Match Ireland’s rate of 12.5% to keep more jobs in America.

4. Homeowner’s Assistance. Provide tax credit incentives to responsible home buyers so they can keep their homes.

5. Control Spending So We Can Move to a Balanced Budget. This begins with eliminating Congressional earmarks and wasteful pork-barrel spending.

6. No State Aid Without Protection From Fraud. Require state governments to adopt anti-fraud and anti-theft policies before giving them more money.

7. More American Energy Now. Explore for more American oil and gas and invest in affordable energy for the future, including clean coal, ethanol, nuclear power and renewable fuels.

8. Abolish Taxes on Capital Gains. Match China, Singapore and many other competitors. More investment in America means more jobs in America.

9. Protect the Rights of American Workers. We must protect a worker’s right to decide by secret ballot whether to join a union, and the worker’s right to freely negotiate. Forced unionism will kill jobs in America at a time when we can’t afford to lose them.

10. Replace Sarbanes-Oxley. This failed law is crippling entrepreneurial startups. Replace it with affordable rules that help create jobs, not destroy them.

11. Abolish the Death Tax. Americans should work for their families, not for Washington.

12. Invest in Energy and Transportation Infrastructure. This includes a new, expanded electric power grid and a 21st century air traffic control system that will reduce delays in air travel and save passengers, employees and airlines billions of dollars per year.

In addition to the above 12 solutions, I offer the following:

13. Cut payroll taxes now. To provide immediate relief to working Americans, I propose immediate payroll tax cuts. On their very next paycheck Americans would receive tax relief. Additionally, tax relief should be available to all employers paying additional taxes on behalf of their employees (which, on top of withholding taxes, amounts to additional tax payments of more than 7% of most employee’s wages — if an employer pays an employee $2000, it really costs the employer more than $2140 for that employee). Cut both of their taxes and there’s more left for both to spend and stimulate the economy.

14. Require a two-thirds super-majority vote of Congress to borrow money (or deficit spend). To be safe, that would require a Constitutional amendment to institute since Congressional rules can be exempted and overturned easily. Such a requirement would go a long way towards the goal of a balanced budget while allowing emergency spending and borrowing for widely-accepted capital investments to proceed.

15. Strengthen our national currency. If we do not dilute our currency through inflationary expansion, then it will remain high and investments will flow into this country as other nations’ currencies weaken relative to ours.

16. Allow companies to fail and/or be reorganized through bankruptcy. Stop propping up failures and bad leadership. Instead of infusing failing companies with public money taken from taxpayers, let them suffer the consequences of their bad decisions and fail. Let the market innovate with new and better replacements. The assets don’t disappear with bankruptcy, the ownership of them changes. If there was demand for the product before bankruptcy, there will be demand after bankruptcy and somebody creative will meet that demand.

17. Overturn regulations and accounting rules that restrict innovative market solutions. I’m not an accountant but I know that most mortgages are sound. There is no reason for the massive declines in values that we’re seeing when only a single digit percentage of most assets are bad. There are billions of dollars to be made by creatively insuring “toxic assets.” The government needs to provide enough oversight to prevent fraud but not so much that creative solutions are stifled and rejected. Furthermore, the government should not nationalize companies, period.

18. Rebuild trust in the American people. Our leaders in Washington are largely responsible for this problem. For one, they set up the environmental parameters in which the problems occurred and they allowed it to happen under their watch. Most did nothing until it happened and their response has been to throw new money at the problem and into the hands of the same governmental and other entities that created the problem. That’s like paying the fox that ate the chickens to do a better job next time in guarding the hen house. Crazy!

19. Cut government spending. Everybody knows there’s so much waste. Yes, jobs are lost when government spending is cut but jobs are also lost when taxes are raised. Government does not have anything that it doesn’t take from somebody else first. If government takes money from employers, then they cannot hire as many workers or pay as high a wage. We’ve got to stop taking so much money out of the economy to “stimulate” the economy as the government sees fit. The best stimulus for the economy is the people. Let them keep their money and use it as they see fit.

20. Return power to the States. Many things are better done at the local level. Where the Federal government has encroached on the States’ Constitutional prerogatives, the Federal Government must be required to back down. The states provide 50 laboratories of innovation and competition. That’s good for our country and usually costs far less.

These 20 items would make a good start in addressing these trying economic times. There are many more items that could be added to this list and I invite your suggestions. In all, I argue that the principles of freedom, capitalism and individual responsibility should remain supreme and trump any attempt at collectivism, socialism and bailouts.

Note: Photo courtesy of http://patriotpost.us/images/broadcasts/humor/040609.htm

The woman speaking in the 26 second video below, Peggy Joseph, is shockingly honest in her thoughts about what a Barack Obama Presidency means to her. Peggy Joseph is convinced that she will not have to worry anymore about putting gas in her car or paying her mortgage because Barack Obama is going to help her. Watch for yourself.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Sadly, Peggy Joseph believed Barack Obama’s spread the wealth thinking and now believes, not in earning more money through work, but in government transfer payments from the “rich” to those with less. This Marxist mentality amounts to legalized stealing. Thanks to Barack Obama’s two-years of campaigning and his promise to give tax cuts to 95% of Americans when only about 65% pay any income taxes, millions of Americans now believe they are entitled to a share of other people’s wealth. Sadly, many of those who currently pay no income taxes now expect a socialistic government check to cover their gas and mortgage.

It’s true, Obama is about change. However, it’s not the kind of change most people think they will be getting. Peggy Joseph is in for a surprise when her government check disappears after there are no more rich people to tax into poverty to pay for her gas and mortgage.

Barack Obama already told us his plan for bankrupting coal power plants. Now with his spread the wealth gone wild way of thinking, a more likely scenario, I fear, will be bankrupting the whole nation.

Let me clearly state that I don’t like or approve of the recent federal intervention in the United States economy. Government policy over the past three decades, pushed to extremes by left-leaning and radical groups like ACORN and using the Community Reinvestment Act, created the corrupt lending environment that was exploited by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to produce the toxic mortgage situation in which we find ourselves. So, since government is primarily responsible for this crisis, why should we then trust government to fix the problem they created?

This unfavorable economic environment is not a shortcoming of capitalism. It is a direct result of government manipulation within our economy for the benefit of a few people. Sometimes manipulation gives an unfair advantage to the rich and sometimes the poor. In this current environment, those who should not get a loan it were encouraged to borrow beyond their means.  While historically no bank would loan money under such terms, Fannie and Freddie created an unnatural market for banks to offload risky mortgages. The result was the poisoning of our entire financial system.

Unfortunately, as is often the case, the federal government stepped in and removed even more of our individual freedoms and made our economic system less of a capitalistic one and more like a planned economy under socialism. To give you an idea of the extent of the change, we’re now talking about the government owning or nationalizing large portions of our banking system. We’re also talking about government confiscating taxpayer money to buy up and refinance failing mortgages. We’re also talking about government, not shareholders, owners or investors, telling companies how much they can pay their employees and how to run their businesses. Sounds more like the old Soviet Union than what the Founding Fathers set up, doesn’t it?

This is an extremely dangerous precedent that will severely damage our economy in the long run. It makes the American taxpayer the ultimate holder of risks that the market should allocate to willing investors. It also gives government enormous control over our economy, our money and our everyday lives. In effect, a government bureaucrat will soon be deciding who can borrow, how much they can borrow and under what terms. In the name of fairness and environmentalism, other factors will probably be imposed later like how large our house can be and whether we really need what we can afford.

Instead of the massive bailout that was adopted, I wish government had essentially stepped out of the picture and removed as many of the artificial market distortions imposed on our economy as possible. True, those who foolishly risked assets would go bankrupt but those assets would not disappear (yes, all those over-mortgaged houses would not evaporate into thin air and people would still have places to live). Instead, those assets and failing institutions would be transferred to their creditors who would carry on the business of finding renters and owners for them. The system would have adjusted and done so relatively quickly compared to this permanent fix imposed by the government.

Furthermore, such a capitalist move would have injected more fairness and rational decision-making into our economic system instead of advancing our nation down the slippery slope of socialism. Power corrupts. Whether power is concentrated in the hands of government or unfair markets, it still corrupts. The best fix would have been for government to ensure that free markets existed and then to step back and let the incredibly creative innovations of the American people solve the crisis.

In conclusion, the current economic crisis was caused by government intervention in the first place and will not be fixed by yet another bigger government intervention. It is utter foolishness to grant government more power to tinker with our economy. It is especially dangerous to further empower those same forces who pushed the radical agenda that first took our government down the destructive path of socialism decades ago. Furthermore, I’m also very troubled by the lack of real resistance to this massive erosion of our precious American freedoms.

I’m tired of hearing Democrats say we should raise taxes on the rich or the rich should never receive a tax cut. To make matters even more frustrating, they often state this sentiment as if there’s something evil about being rich. Here are three things to consider before embracing the “tax the rich” notion.

1. Only people who earn more money than they need can afford to hire others.

Excessively taxing the rich kills the economy. Have you ever seen somebody barely scraping a living from paycheck to paycheck start a business and hire employees? Can poor people offer health insurance plans and pay benefits? Of course not. They don’t have any extra money to risk or invest. Excessive taxation of the rich takes their investment capital away which harms the economy.

2. The rich enlarge the economy by their consumption.

Let me illustrate this point by an example. Following the 1993 Clinton tax increase a large surcharge on the sale of new luxury yachts was imposed. That luxury tax almost put the the American yacht construction industry out of business. Who builds the yachts? The rich? Of course not. So guess who was laid off when nobody was buying yachts? The lower class yacht construction workers suffered for that tax (and from the government’s point of view it raised almost no revenue because domestic yacht sales dried up).

3. Who decides what qualifies as rich and how much to confiscate?

Taxing the rich is a Marxist income redistribution scheme. It punishes work, risk and capitalism. It deprives poeple of their individual freedoms and personal property rights. In a free society government has no right to decide who needs how much money and what amount they get to keep.

In conclusion, excessive taxation of the rich is like killing the goose that lays the golden egg. It’s also like poisoning the village’s only water well just to get even with one person. As in both of these cases, the greed and jealousy inflicted via excessive taxation on a select few ends up hurting everyone.

More than a month ago I asked if Barack Obama’s “Robin Hood” tax plan would redistribute wealth. Based on the fact that only about 65% of Americans pay any income taxes but Obama was promising a “tax cut” to 95% of Americans I knew something was fishy. Because those numbers are mathematically impossible to compute I suspected he was calling an income redistribution scheme a “tax cut.”

My fear that such a scheme could be in the works went from speculation to reality when Obama answered a simple question from a business owner about taxes. We now have proof positive that Obama plans to take from the haves and give to the have nots. Watch Obama in his own words tell that he plans to “spread the wealth around” (about 4:45 into the video):

Click here to view the embedded video.

You can read more about this specific Marxist admission here. I say Marxist because it is just that — income redistribution from those with “wealth” to those who are “poor.”

Karl Marx wrote the following in 1875 in his Critique of the Gotha Program: “In a higher phase of communist society, … – only then then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!”  The bourgeois, according to Marx, is the elite with wealth. Their wealth is to be confiscated and redistributed to those without.

Obama won’t tell you this but his economic plan embraces the redistributive economic philosophy of Marxism. On that point alone it is easy for me to see that Obama is dangerous for America. Obama is change we can believe will enslave us. He is only qualified to lead a communist or communist-leaning nation like Russia, China, North Korea or Cuba. Now we know why leaders in those nations like him.

Updated: Apologies to the real Robin Hood who loved freedom and did not share Barack Obama’s “spread the wealth” mentality. Robin Hood fought the corrupt and oppressive ruling class who abused the poor. At that time it was “tax the poor to pay the rich” which is likewise a bad system.

Yesterday the NRCC (National Republican Congressional Committee) released a new web video showing why Democrats, in their own words, are responsible for the failure of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Interestingly, conservative Internet broadcast network Hotair.com called this video “awesome.”

I appreciate the video and think it’s a great start. In the future I want to see more names named including why, at more than $125,000, Barack Obama was the #2 recipient of all Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac campaign contributions from 1989-2008 (and he made that position after less than 3 years in the Senate!).

Watch for yourself:

Click here to view the embedded video.