Archive for the ‘Economy’ Category

An Alternate Health Plan Idea
More Freedom, Less bureaucracy

Monday, August 31st, 2009

I must say I am not too pleased with the ill conceived health care the Congress is trying to force upon America, so I thought I would see if I could create a better plan.

My objections to the current proposals are:

  • Too much potential power to the government to make life and death decisions
  • Health care may be arbitrarily rationed.
  • Competition is stifled
  • Taxpayers are expected to pay for illegal alien’s health care
  • Excessive bureaucracy is created.
  • As I have written before, insurance itself is one of the reasons health care is so expensive. See my previous post for an explanation. On the other hand, a single payer system would help lower the costs.

    Here is what I would propose:

    Every Citizen would be issued a health account, and initially funded or charged with a one-time credit based on age at inception. For the sake of argument, lets say that people over 60 would be funded with $200,000, and newborns with $300,000 credit to their health accounts.

    This account would be used to pay all health related expenses for the patient, with no restrictions on exactly what treatments would be paid for. This would allow the patient to choose whatever treatments the patient thought best. If the patient believed a heart bypass operation served him best, it would be paid from his account. If he believed that the alternative chelation therapy best served his health, it also would be paid from his account. This would allow the ultimate in health freedom.

    All drug costs could be paid from this account if the patient chose to do so. A small copay could be instituted to make the plan less expensive for the country.

    The catch is of course; once the account was depleted, there would be no more taxpayer funded health care for that individual. If the patient wanted additional coverage, he would have to purchase it privately and would be encouraged to do so. This may sound bad, but the fact is, most private insurance policies carry a maximum lifetime benefits restriction; so this is no different than a private plan.

    In addition, health care providers would be required to advise each patient up front of the cost of their services and of any recommended treatments, including any optional treatments available. This would allow the patient to make better choices, knowing that their own health care account was a limited resource. This alone would greatly reduce the cost of health care, as presently patients have no idea what a procedure or test is going to cost, and if they have insurance they generally do not care as long as the insurance company is paying.

    The cost of child-birth would be born by the mother’s and father’s accounts, and the cost of post-natal child care by the child’s own account. In the case of a missing or unknown father, the cost would be born solely by the mother’s account.

    In the case of an illegal (no health ID card), any emergency health care costs would be billed to the illegal’s government, and the illegal could be deported to his country of origin.

    All cosmetic surgeries would not be covered except in the case of a disfiguring accident. Lets face it, people should not expect the taxpayer to pay for their nose job.

    All pre-existing conditions would of course be covered.

    The government’s basic duties in this system would be:

  • Perform the appropriate accounting
  • Pay the health providers for treatments rendered.
  • Audit providers to prevent fraud.
  • Provide patients with semi-annual statements of their account
  • Provide patients additional statements on demand for a small fee
  • Provide patients with information regarding alternative cost effective treatments
  • Under this system, there would be no need for Medicare/Medicaid, so that system would be disbanded. There would be no need for VA health care, so that system could be disbanded also. There would be no need for prescription drug plans. All state plans could likewise be disbanded if states chose to do so as they would be unnecessary. The elimination of all of these redundant systems would provide a large cost savings to the taxpayer.

    How much would this cost? All health care is expensive, and over the course of a lifetime can reach astounding amounts. A bypass operation can cost $100,000, and chemotherapy can easily exceed that several times over. However, let us assume that on average, a person will only use 1/4 of their allotment. For newborns, this would mean $75,000 would have to be paid into their account over their lifetime. Assuming a working life of 45 years, that would require $1700 per year in taxes for each person. Since not everyone actually works and pays taxes, that means the amount of tax burden an actual worker would have to pay would be much higher, probably twice that amount.

    I believe this would still be cheaper than our current system, and would provide incentives to not waste medical resources. It would bring down hospital costs because under the current system, the cost of non-payers using hospital services is born by those that do pay. Since the amount of free-loaders would be greatly reduced, hospital costs would come down. However, there is no such thing a free lunch. Somebody must pay, and that means the taxpayer through some sort of payroll tax perhaps similar to the Social Security scheme.

    This system would be easily augmented by:

  • Allowing people to add credits to their own accounts at a discount, extending the plan to include health savings account features. IE: buy a dollars worth of health care for 80 cents.
  • Allowing employers to add to their employees health accounts as an employee benefit.
  • Reimbursing military or civil service personnel’s accounts for service related injuries. This would be fair to those facing above average dangers working in hazardous jobs.
  • Allowing a person to transfer a portion of his own benefits to his/her spouse.
  • This system would not:

  • Arbitrarily decide who gets what treatments.
  • Prohibit private insurance.
  • Discriminate against any class of citizen.
  • Require 1000 pages of legalese to describe.
  • Stifle medical research.
  • Reduce services available.
  • Prohibit private payment for medical service.
  • Restrict patients to any specific providers.
  • Make any medical decisions for the patients.
  • Stifle competition between technologies or providers
  • Would this work? I think so, and I would happily live under such a system.

    Diagnosing America’s Society
    The Haves and Have Nots

    Wednesday, August 5th, 2009

    Many think modern American society and its economy is sick, ill, and broken. I continually hear about the divide between the Haves and the Have Nots. Is our society really sick, and if so, whats to blame? Lets see if we can make a diagnosis of the real problem.

    Some people like to talk about the Haves versus the Have Nots. While there is truth to this classification, it is not the whole truth. It is a symptom, not a disease itself. In reality, there is also the Can Dos versus the Can’t Dos, the Able Class versus the Unable Class and the Want to Do versus the Don’t Want to Do classes.

    In discussing the Haves, we must ask why there is a class of people who seem to have plenty and the opposite class which seems to have little. Also, why is the Have Not class increasing. This cannot be done honestly without discussing the Cans and Can’ts.

    In any society, some people have more value to that society than others. While some think they can legislate a person’s value to society through welfare payments and minimum wage laws; in fact that is erroneous thinking. Only society can determine the worth of the value of functions and vocations and an individuals worth to it. If an attempt to make some job more valuable through legislation occurs, it can only end in failure if society as a whole does not see any value to that job. In the end, those jobs disappear. How many buggy whip makers do you see around you? How many lawn cutters do we need? How many window washers? Only society as a whole working through the economy can make these decisions, and government can not decide. Society makes these judgments every day by its choices in what it buys and what it doesn’t.

    Most people seem to think that they get paid for putting in the hours for their labor. At one time this was mostly true. Just 100 years ago, 90% of the population of the USA were farm laborers. It is not true any more. In actuality, people draw a salary for a combination of 4 basic things: Labor, Creativity, Knowledge (skill), and Risk taking. However, the advent of the machine age has replaced much of the need for actual labor, and increased the need for knowledge and creativity. Of course this creates a problem of what to do with all the people in society who are not creative, do not have any specialized knowledge, and are only capable of physical labor, and to a lesser degree, people who cannot contribute any of these commodities at all. While technology has changed the relationships between Labor, Creativity, Knowledge and Risk; it has done little to change the capabilities of the populace in general.

    There are those who think the answer is more education, making people more knowledgeable. The Ph.Ds who are flipping burgers at Mickey D’s will tell you that there is a limited demand for knowledge, and simply having a better degree does not guarantee that the recipient will have any more value to society. In fact, the more education you have in a specific area, the fewer are the chances of actually being employed in that area. Look through the help wanted sections of any newspaper or a job site like Monster.com and note how many job openings there are for Psychiatrists, or Philosophers, or Chemists. Compared to the size of the population, not very many.

    Suppose everyone was actually able to obtain at least a bachelor’s degree. Would this create additional jobs, or increase the value of those jobs to society? Doubtful at best. It would disappoint a lot of graduates though who believed they were going to get the cream of the jobs only to find out that they were not.

    Then of course, there is a pretty large segment of the population who simply are not capable of higher education endeavors even if handed to them. A large portion of the population is below average in intelligence, and this fact must be realized. I do not say this to degrade anyone, its just the way it is.

    That leaves creativity. Can creativity be learned? My experience says no, but maybe the right techniques have not been discovered yet. Bill Gates of Microsoft fame got where he is because he is a very creative individual, not just because he worked 18 hours a day.

    As a result of a large segment of the population believing they are simply entitled to whatever they want, government has tried to oblige by mandating welfare and minimum wage standards. This has resulted in the Can Do class of people who are capable of and engaged in supplying the wealth of the country to become disheartened and angry. The Doers of society rightly feel that they should not have to support every one else. In fact, they have become slaves themselves to the Can’t Dos and Don’t Want to Dos. What often happens is that the Doers just decide not to DO as much as they could, as there is little point to it. Consequently, the Doers use their creativity to find ways to avoid having to support the Can’t Dos and Don’t Want to Dos. Creative people are quite good at finding ways to beat the system.

    In its proper role, the purpose of any economy is to assist the survival of its individuals by allowing them to contribute to others in their own way and in so doing, earn their own survival. Hunters hunt, gatherers gather, farmers farm, welders weld, and each trades a portion of his work for what he cannot do himself. It allows us to contribute to the whole through specialization. But what do we do with people who have nothing valuable to contribute? This is the real Have Not, and Can’t Do problem. Further still, we live in a time where technology has increased the productivity of the Doers to the point that we need less of them to supply us with the essentials of life.

    Basically, a large portion of humans are simply obsolete. How do we achieve the goal of retrofitting tens of millions people out of obsolescence?

    In order to build a better America, this is the problem which must be solved. It cannot be solved by mandate. It cannot be solved by legislation. It cannot be solved by ignoring this root problem. We must solve it soon, or nature will solve it for us.

    Is Biden Frakkin’ Insane!!

    Friday, July 17th, 2009

    Biden said: ‘WE HAVE TO SPEND MONEY TO KEEP FROM GOING BANKRUPT’. Apparently Biden has never had to live on a budget and does not know what bankrupt means. Either that or he is smoking something the general population is not allowed to have.

    The country is already bankrupt from borrowing and spending more wealth than the country creates. A child born today is in debt for hundreds of thousands of dollars the moment it is born. To think that we can borrow and spend our way out of debt defies all logic, and I have to wonder is there is any intelligence whatsoever in the White House.

    Biden needs to learn that our money is not wealth, it is an IOU, and sooner or later (very soon now), those IOUs will have to be dealt with. The democrats print and spend philosophy is exactly the same as using one credit card to pay off another. This house of cards cannot stand.

    There is only one thing America should spend money on at this time: things which will create wealth. That means manufacturing, the very thing that we have been shipping off to China for the last decades.

    Unfortunately, it seems that there are far too many voters in this country who are as dumbed down as the VP. Hopefully, not everyone is a stupid as Biden and his master BO.

    A little wisdom

    Monday, June 29th, 2009

    Adrian Rogers

    “You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.”*

    This is so self evident, but yet we never seem to get it. If it were possible to tax a nation into prosperity, North Korea, Cuba, the Soviets, and all the other highly socialized countries would be wealthy beyond imagination. But yet, we think it will work here. I have news, it won’t. We are rapidly sliding into 3rd world nation status because Americans no longer feel the need to be self sufficient, and have lost the work ethic. Americans expect someone else to work and pay. This is the heart of socialism.

    Socialism leads only to slavery, servitude, and poverty. Is this what you really want?

    Chrysler and Fiat

    Wednesday, June 10th, 2009

    I see that Chrysler is now in the hands of Fiat. I can’t see anything good coming out of that marriage. According to CBS news, Fiat gets all the good assets of Chrysler. Doesn’t that mean that Chrysler gets stuck with all the junk?

    In my lifetime, I have owned both Fiat and Chrysler products. Admittedly, its been a long time since I owned a Fiat, but the best word I could describe my Fiat with is ‘crap’. I have owned several Chrysler products, and compared to the GM and Ford products I have owned, I have to say that they were also pretty much crap, but better than the Fiat. So I guess its a wait and see to determine if crap plus crap can equal anything good.

    They will probably produce POS Pelosimobiles and then wonder why no one buys them.

    On the good side, there are rumors floating around about Libya owning a chunk of Fiat, but I believe these rumors to be false. President Reagan forced a buyout of the Libyan shares in exchange for contracts with the US Government circa 1986.

    The World Plus 5%
    Why Growth Cannot Be Sustained

    Monday, April 20th, 2009

    Normally, I write my own articles. However, I have found a great article by Larry Hannigan that I feel everyone should read.

    The origins of our current economic/political situation date back to 1694 when The Bank of England was created. King William of Orange was in financial difficulties as a result of a war with France. The Goldsmiths “lent him” 1.2 million pounds (a staggering amount in those days) with certain conditions:

    1. The interest rate was to be 8%. It must be remembered that Magna Carta stated that the charging or collecting of interest was a serious crime.
    2. The King was to grant the goldsmiths a charter for the bank which gave them the right to issue or create credit out of nothing. Prior to this, their operations of issuing receipts for more money than they held in deposits was totally illegal. The charter made it legal.

    In 1694 William Patterson obtained the Charter for the Bank of England.

    Larry Hannigan’s fable illustrates the evolution of banking and power since that time, from a simple barter system to the Fractional Reserve banking which enslaves us today.

    Please take the time and CLICK HERE to read Hannigan’s story on his website.

    Thanks.

    The Upside Down Country

    Friday, April 17th, 2009

    The USA was founded with a government composed of three branches, each designed to keep the other two in check.  The Congress or legislative branch composed of the House and the Senate was given the task of formulating law, regulating the money supply, and raising revenue.  The House of Representatives was supposed to represent the people, and the Senate was supposed to represent the States.  The Executive branch consisting of the President and Vice-President, was given the task of commanding the Army, and providing for the execution of laws passed by Congress.  The Judicial branch consisting of the Supreme Court was tasked with being the final arbiter of what is right and lawful.  That was then.

    The Senate’s role changed however with the passage of the 17th Amendment to the Constitution.  The purpose of the Senate was to represent the State as a whole and protect the rights of the individual states.  Originally, Senators were appointed by each State’s government.  However, the 17th Amendment, ratified in 1913, changed that to direct election of Senators by the voting population of the State.  The result has been a major erosion of states rights over the last century.  The founding fathers envisioned the states as being the major power structures, not the Federal government.  This has been debated over the decades of course, but its easy to see that individual states have mostly lost their sovereignty to the Feds.

    The duties, obligations, and powers belonging to the House and Senate are well described in the Constitution, and limits of power were set on each body.  Likewise, Presidential powers and limits were spelled out describing those actions which the Federal government was allowed to do and which they were not.   For instance, the House of Representatives is charged with the responsibility for the budget, and regulating the value of the currency.  These stipulations created a balance of power within government so as to prevent any one branch from becoming all powerful.

    But now, everything seems upside down.  Instead of the House representing the people, it seems to be representing the President.  That is not their job, and it is not the President’s job to make law.  Nowhere was this more apparent than when the Congress recently considered amnesty for illegal aliens.  The people bombarded Congress asking them to say NO to amnesty, with public sentiment showing 74% of the populace against amnesty yet Congress completely ignored  the people whom it is charged with representing. Recently, it seems Congress has turned a deaf ear to the populace, and listens only  to the President.

    Government has only a few basic actions it can take.  It can spend money, levy a tax, or create a law.  These actions then become all important, and should not be taken without proper knowledge of the issues, and proper debate with input from the populace.  When the Congress becomes a rubber stamp for the President, this does not happen, and the people whom the government is supposed to represent are locked out of the process.

    In matters of the budget, the President has no Constitutional authority to draft a budget for the country, yet every president does so.  It is the House’s responsibility to regulate and control the value of our money, but they have abnegated their responsibility letting the Federal Reserve Bank take charge.  Most of the people in Congress probably cannot even balance a checkbook let alone the Federal Budget and few seem to understand the simplest basic principles of the economy.   The House and Senate have acquiesced to just about every demand made by the President and ignored the general input of the electorate.  The bank bailout was a good example.  This has set up a defacto dictatorship.  The balance of power so thoughtfully worked out by the founding fathers is now broken.

    Congress routinely passes legislation without even knowing what they are voting on.  From an outsiders view, they vote on the title of the bill instead of whats in it, which is sometimes much different.  How many in Congress actually read the original Patriot act before voting on it?  How many congressmen read the entire 1000 pages of the economic stimulus package?  Here’s what John Boehner had to say about it:

    “The reason for passing legislation we don’t understand is because we passed legislation we didn’t read,” said Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.).  “Who knew what and when did they know it?” House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) demanded on the floor. “This language was air-dropped into a conference that occurred behind closed doors involving very few members.”

    This inversion of representation did not happen overnight, and probably goes back to 1913 with the creation of the private banking system which was misnamed the Federal Reserve Act.  At that point, Congress gave up its role in the issuance of currency and the regulation of its value.  As a result, bankers are now in control of the country.   Its an example of the golden rule: He who has the gold rules.

    1913 seems to have been a very bad year for the country with the 17th amendment, creation of the Federal Reserve, and passage of the 16th amendment allowing the creation of the personal income tax.  We should have skipped 1913 and gone directly to 1914!

    So, We The People are essentially left without effective representation, and stuck with a government that is essentially upside down.  I fear for my country, while hoping that everything turns out right.  I wish I could suggest a solution, but alas I cannot.  Maybe if I stand on my head, it will look right again.

    As a result of this inversion, we have lost much of our freedoms.  We live in a time where asking our government to do the right thing tags us as an enemy of the state instead of being a co-creator of a better country.  We live in a time where fear is winning out over reason.  We live in a time where the country is terribly divided when we should be coming together to create a better tomorrow.  We live in a time where science has become politicized.  We live in a time where State’s Rights are being squashed by the Federal government.

    This is not a Democrat vs Republican issue, or a Liberal vs Conservative issue.  This is a creeping disease which has infested the entire Federal government, and will eventually kill our country,

    It is my hope that reason wins out.  In the end, we all want the same thing, a better America, peace, prosperity, freedom,  justice,  and security; the principles this country was founded on. At least I hope that’s what we all want.

    The question is: Will the America we love and fought for still be here tomorrow?

    The Screwing We Get For the Screwing We Got
    Why Social Security Is a Bad Investiment

    Thursday, April 9th, 2009

    I was thinking about  Social Security today, and how it is a colossal rip-off for many people.

    People do not generally recognize what a bad investment SS is because of the varying relationship of the dollar to wealth.  The government loves inflation as it is a tax which does not have to be voted on and inflation alters that money to wealth relationship.  To really evaluate an investment, it needs to be done in terms other than the dollar.  The Consumer Price Index should fill that bill, but the numbers have been fudged to make the inflation rate look smaller and government policy look better.  President Clinton had the formulas and procedures changed.  If the original formulas and procedures are used, the  CPI is almost twice as high as is now reported!   Because of this, the CPI cannot be used to determine the true relationship between money and wealth.

    Money is not wealth.  Its wealth we want and need to sustain ourselves, not money.  We need to look at the situation in terms of wealth, and that means something tangible, and that retains the same importance to society over the time period to be examined.

    Lets look at a real life example of another professional engineer, who I will call Bob.

    Starting working as an engineer in 1968, Bob’s SS payments were about $10001.  That same year, Bob bought a new Chevy Camaro RallySport at a cost of $3000.  Using the Camaro as a standard unit of wealth over time, the $1000 represented 1/3rd of a Camaro.  Over Bob’s working career his salary increased, and so did the cost of a Camaro, and his SS payment was always very close to 1/3rd of a new Camaro.  So during Bob’s  working career he will have essentially paid 14 Chevy Camaros into SS.

    I could have used some other standard unit of wealth for this analysis, like the price of a gallon of milk, or the price of a pair of jeans, but the automobile represents a fairly constant unit of wealth.

    Now that I have an idea what Bob will have invested into SS in terms of tangible wealth, lets see what he will get back.

    According to his latest SS statement, Bob will get $1900 a month, and according to the actuarial data Bob will live to be 75.4 (He hopes longer!)  This means he can expect to draw SS for about 9 years.  Doing the math, 9 years of SS equals $205,000.  So the question becomes, will Bob get back his 14 Camaros worth of wealth?  Chevrolet reintroduced the Camaro, and at today’s prices the more or less equivalent model to the one I am using as a wealth standard would cost about $30,000.  Based on that, 14 Camaros would cost $420,000.  Therefore, Bob will be losing the equivalent of $215,000.  But Wait, There’s More!  Bob will probably have to pay income tax on that, so lets assume a modest tax rate of 15%.  Losing the tax money would cost Bob another $45,000 bringing his amount down to $160,000.  Essentially, Bob lost 8.6 of his Camaros; a loss of 59% of the wealth he contributed to SS.

    Suppose Bob had taken the money he was required to invest in SS, and instead had deposited it in ordinary certificates of deposit at 5% interest and assume an income tax rate of 20% . According to my spreadsheet program he would have $400,000 in the bank at the end of 2008.  How many Camaros is that?  13!  So instead of ending up with 13 Camaros by investing his money privately, Bob ends up with 6.

    Even though Bob is likely to get more money out of SS than he put in, he will only get a fraction of the amount of wealth invested in SS.  Where does the rest go?  It goes to illegal aliens, others who invested nothing in the system and a long list of other government projects having nothing to do with Social Security.

    In actual fact the situation is probably even worse.  Bob, you and the rest of us will end up with a lot less as we head into a time in which rampant hyperinflation is likely to happen.  I’m sure that in 2011, a Camaro if such exists will not cost $30,000.    It will cost a lot more.

    Never say the government is not efficient.  They are very efficient at taking your wealth while at the same time giving you more money.  Is it any wonder then that the gov hates the idea of privatizing SS?  With privatization, you risk losing some of your wealth.  With the current system, you are guaranteed to lose a large portion of your wealth.

    If nothing more, I hope I have given Bob and you a different way to think about money and wealth.

    1) This includes the portion paid for by the employer, which is part of a workers salary.

    Preparing for 3rd World Status — Pt 1

    Sunday, March 29th, 2009

    As the economy continues to falter, we should be preparing ourselves with ways to deal with the consequences.  In other countries, economic crashes resulted in the sporadic loss of utilities, such as electric.  Most of us cannot think of living without electricity 24/7 on demand.  We expect that when we turn on the switch, the lights will come on.

    Well, as someone who has endured many days without electric service during ice storms, I can say that it makes life interesting.  Many of us can heat with fireplaces, and we can use candles and lanterns for lights, and if we live in a place that has public water, we might have water or we might not.  But most of us country dwellers have no water without electricity.  We rely on electric pumps to extract water from our wells.  Living is extremely difficult without water, and so it is a priority.

    In my part of the country, the water table is too far down and the well casing to small in diameter to drop a bucket down the hole and bring it up either.  In my case, my well is 250 feet deep.  So I purchased a deep well hand pump, which can pump water from several hundred feet below the ground.  Unlike the old time pumps which pull water up by creating a suction at the top of the well, a deep well hand pump pushes it up from the bottom. Suction pumps can lift water a maximum of about 30 feet on a good day.  This limit does not exist when the water is pushed up from the bottom.

    The unit I purchased is called the Simple Pump, and is basically produced by two guys (machinists) in a small shop.  They have sold hundreds of these pumps all over the world, and seem to have their engineering perfected.  The system consists of stainless steel pump unit slightly less than 2 inches in diameter, which is suspended in the well by pvc drop pipe connected to a stainless steel unit at the top of the well with the hand lever for pumping water.  A fiberglass rod extends down the drop pipe to provide the mechanical action necessary for pumping water.

    The pump is small enough that it will fit beside an electric submersible pump in the well.

    Here is the really cool part though.  The pump has garden hose threads at the output of the pump, and the pump has a oneway valve.  The hose can then be connected to an outside water faucet, and the hand pump used to pressurize the well tank inside the house.  Then the water pumped up by hand can be taken directly from the faucets inside the house.  No need to carry  buckets of water.

    I will be installing this pump in a few days with the help of my plumber.  When it is finished, I will post a picture, and describe the installation.

    Got Water?

    A Real Stimulus Package

    Monday, February 9th, 2009

    With CONgress and Komrade Obama working on their latest scam stimulus (read communist takeover of America), I thought I would propose some real stimulus measures.

    The immediate cause of any recession or depression is that people quit buying goods. Without consumption, there is no reason to produce. With less production, there are less jobs, which result in less consumption, and so forth. Further, it is manufacturing which produces real wealth, and countries which stop producing wealth will obviously become less wealthy. Countries which do not produce the basic necessities of life cannot be considered to be first world countries.

    So, my first proposal would be a moratorium on personal income taxes for at least 3 months. No withholding tax from peoples paychecks. The increase in the pockets of working Americans would be immediate, and it would go to the people most likely to buy discretionary goods.

    Secondly, I would reduce or eliminate completely the nuisance taxes the government likes so much, like the Federal excise tax on automobile tires.

    Next, I would propose a 5 year Federal tax free period for new businesses which manufacture goods within the US, using at least 75% American made materials. It is essential to bring back manufacturing to our own land, and produce real wealth in this country, instead of sending to China.

    A moratorium on immigration would also be a good idea, as it is not fair to American workers when jobs are scarce to allow foreigners to suck up the remaining jobs.

    Elimination of the tax on interest earned would encourage savings, something which this country badly needs. The capital gains tax on amounts under $100,000 should be eliminated also, as capital gains is tax upon another tax (inflation).

    I think banks should be allowed to fail, as deposits are insured up to $100,000 anyway, and poor management should not be rewarded. Depositors of a failed bank should take their hard earned cash to a better managed institution.

    A cap on credit card interest is also on my list. Credit card companies charge well over 20% interest for credit card purchases, which is mind boggling. It is hard to see how any Credit card business could go bankrupt at these rates. If there are a large number of defaults, the Credit card industry should be more selective about their clientele.

    Putting all these things together would cost less than the CONgress has already committed to, and would not increase the size of government, nor would it promote socialism or worse.

    These things would immediately stimulate the economy, not 3,4 or 5 years down the line as the CONgessional Budget Office says the current stimulus plan will.

    There are lots of other immediate things which could be done, but these things would be a good start. That is, if people want to remain free, and prosperous.