TucsonPolyBlog

Primary Elections and Reform Ideas

2012-01-31T18:02:00.000-08:00

Mojave County, Arizona, USA

The latest presidential race is unique in the number of 'debates' among the candidates, the power of the press and the growing power of the internet. However, it appears that the respective major parties are still in the predigital age.

The primary process is outdated and in need of overhaul, as are the east coast based party systems. During a recent expose' on the Dylan Ratigan Show about demands made on freshmen legislators to donate to the party on a consistent basis, I came to realize that the legislators should be in Washington D.C. to do their jobs, not fundraise from among the lobbyists present. Perhaps this party money in both parties is too much concentrated in one place, from my perspective out here in Arizona. These financial demands encourage legislators to take the easy way out and take lobby money and perks in return for favorable votes. Party money is then allotted to 'strategic' races across the nation. These 'strategic' races are coveted endorsements that produce cash for the candidate, like an out of state windfall that influences local elections.

Powerful individuals within the parties should not be making donation demands on legislators, nor should legislators be required to spend any time fundraising when on the job. A ban on lobbying and fundraising while in session needs to be instituted. No lobbying and fundraising in Washington D.C. should ultimately be the goal, as the halls of government should be free of special interests at all times.

Lobbyists are a chronic problem. Banning lobbying activities for the duration of the session is necessary to clear the halls and permit honest discourse without lobbyists interpretations and interference. Registered lobbyists should be required to wear badges that states the employer and the name of the individual, in order to remind and inform legislators and the public that these people are not their friends: they are hired to do a job on you for their employers. When a certain high politician talked about not running for another term, she evidently felt beholden to her donors to run again, not her constituents, her donors!

Term limits is another issue. Some long term legislators are unresponsive to their constituents because the lobbyists and donors become more important to their lifestyle. As long as big donated money and expensive media advertising dominates the voters, the politician can be voted in even though the overall voting record may not benefit the constituents, or even the nation. An argument can be made that term limits would enable the 'hired' people to run the government, but I suggest that study sessions on the issues and the legislation be made mandatory for voting members. Just the facts. Legislators need to study and learn about the issues, not spend their time in Washington attending fundraisers put on by vested interests. The national health insurance reform bill was not even read by most of those voting on it. That's ridiculous and decadent.

Money is greasing the system and those with money don't want the system changed. I think the moneyed class should admit that they found ways to control the economic system to their advantage but they also created the tea party and the occupiers and jobless college graduates. Riots and arrests in Oakland. Squatters in D.C. and a much heralded jobless recovery. What next? Financial control of the pundits on TV until the American people have only two candidates, both of which represent the groups gaming the capitalistic system? Business as usual, including the jobless recovery. And let's throw in some austerity in order to pay for the debts the politicians ran up with impunity. Give the schmucks easy credit using tax money so my associates can access the tax money using a property only worth a fraction of the price charged. Is capitalism now to be defined as access to tax money?

It's easy to create a game you can win when you control the players. The only problem is that capitalism is not really a game, but is a survival mechanism for our species created over eons of history. Creating a way to manipulate capitalism for short term gain of money and power is relatively easy compared to the task of maintaining capitalism in the face of declining availability of commodities per person due to the high population growth rates. Looting the system by creating new imaginary 'products' that the peons can't begin to understand, but that money managers are all too quick to invest money in, was hugely successful for a pitiful few gaming the system. With housing values down to a more manageable level, the disparities between existing mortgage values and new mortgages is actually growing, down some 45% here in Tucson, down 1% in 2011. Perhaps the perpetrators of the derivatives and mortgage securities frauds weren't so smart after all. Why did our legislators go for deregulation of the controls put into effect after the fall of 1929 and the Great Depression? Those who are not studious end up stupid and greedy. It's time to clean house, folks.

Back to reform of the primary electoral system. It appears that the nominee is always decided back east with a palliative thrown in by the Midwest. In the early primaries, the candidates don't run in the west or even the Texas powerhouse. According to the pundits, the primary will be decided in Florida and they have the winner all picked out by the polls for us. Voters in Texas, Arizona and California and Oregon have no vote, according to these pundits because all the money required to 'win' will exhaust the poor candidates while allowing the rich to shine. Yuk. I know this was not the intent of our founders. I'm sick of these people telling the viewers how the debates went, who won, what their latest unsubstantiated poll says and discussing ad nauseum the private lives of some of the candidates. The other night I watched a controversial issue discussed by three people, all of whom agreed. That's not journalism, that's manipulation and propaganda. So what are the credentials of the Media Judges? I think some are using the power of the media to influence elections.

True reform needs to happen. I suggest that the Primary begin in New Hampshire, then moves to Nevada, then to Georgia, then to Iowa and so on, representing all areas of the country in the early primaries, instead of all of them concentrated in the Eastern Seaboard. Let's have a Mexican border state represented also. How about a super Tuesday with several states from around the country to start it off? The primary is not fair to the rest of the states and regions.

To continue the meaning of true reform, campaign spending must be linked to the population of the state: no more than X amount per voter can be spent, and make the amount modest. If a business chooses to unilaterally support a candidate in ads, then the business and CEO must be identified in the ad. No more PACS. Limited campaign spending and more concentration on real issues needs to happen.

I liked the 'debates', although some were better than others. The debates that were actually debates, instead of the candidates answering different questions, were more fun but the questions allowed the candidates to express themselves, albeit in a tightly controlled manner. I liked the exposure to public view but saw that the glib candidates had a huge advantage over the others. I'm not sure glibness is the quality we need in a president. Studious intellect is sometimes not so immediately vocal. I think the future campaigns will be even more visual and more data will be available on the internet. Effective political campaigns waged on the internet are low cost and accessible, a level playing field, as it were.

The pundits on TV bother me because they are so sure of themselves and are usually unknown people with questionable credentials to critique the actions of others. Everyone has an opinion, of course, but the ceaseless self assured statements concerning the candidates 'performance' wear thin as they become an obvious attempt to influence public opinion. I really don't care what Miss X thinks of any candidate's 'performance' and I'm tired of this kind of 'reporting' instead of factual news. Miss X's opinion is a waste of my time and is deceptive as to value from the time spend on it. Give me some real information like a voting record analysis, speech clips concerning health care, tax records analysis and other relevant information concerning the candidate. I think it is interesting that the establishment candidates are the favored ones, with the reform candidates receiving bad ratings and reviews by the self appointed experts among most of the media. The media benefits from the campaign spending.

Campaign spending needs to be limited in order to save Democracy. The Internet must not be limited for it is the medium of free speech and will play a crucial role in future elections, giving power to the people to search for facts without a media filter.

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz and the Tea Party

2012-01-13T07:58:00.000-08:00

San Xavier Mission near Tucson Arizona

The Meaning of Civility

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz expressed the possibility that the Tea Party might be responsible for the lack of civility she perceives. Perhaps the 'incivility' grew out of financial frustration with the massive ripoffs that occurred during the financial crisis. The Tea Party is a symptom of the same problem that created the Occupiers. The Tea Party is a sympton, not the cause.

Please, Rep. Schultz, listen that the assailant was a known nut case in town that some perceptive people knew was dangerous. In response to a legal problem, the assailant was said to have received mental health treatment, but I do not know if any follow ups or treatment took place. The assailant has been declared insane.

What is actually uncivil is to convince a buyer they can afford a property, set the debt up in a way that you know they will fail, and to sell the mortgages generated this way to somebody far far away who then resells them as AAA securities to the unwary investor. Who does this leave angry and frustrated?

• All who lost their property through foreclosure

• The investors who bought the securities while their brokers bought insurance on the failure of the same securities, payable to the broker, not the investor.

• Anybody who had money in funds affected by mortgage derivatives

• Any investor who lost money

• Construction workers who lost their jobs

• Laid off workers in construction related industries

• Property owners with upside down mortgages

• Job seekers

• Students with debt and no job prospects

• Voters who oppose bailouts

• Can you think of anybody else?

I define civility in public life as the behavior that is produced from fairness, transparency, honesty and a moral commitment to keep free enterprise going in such a way that perpetuates the system, instead of gaming the system. I define civility as a respect for law intended to keep people safe and perpetuate the system, not wealthy individuals controlling what law is produced and profiting from their control. Face to face civility tends to become less important when your family is evicted and you can't find a job. Face to face civility is comfortable, but should not be a shroud for wrongdoings and a reckless disregard for future consequences beyond immediate profit taking.

Our nation is not a game of chess where the King and his cohorts have all the wealth and the others are dead. Are the honchos really expecting that Americans can all compete among themselves for a portion of the 1% allotted to them through the legal process of public debt, foreclosure and taxes? Sickening terms like 'jobless recovery' float from the mouths of politicians and financiers while they deal in 'jobless securities and insurance', gambling amongst themselves while the 99% become restive and maybe a little uncivil.

New Year's Resolutions I Wish the Media Would Make

2012-01-01T09:16:00.000-08:00

Here it be Resolved:

That editorialists and reporters are identified.

That every time a blooper is shown, they must show one of their own.

That news readers may not slant news or give their opinion.

That the bimboid look on the part of newscasters be entirely voluntary.

That the candidates be given equal time.

That the pollsters must post their own accuracy stats when quoted.

That the duty of the media is to inform the public of facts.

That it is not the duty of the press to influence elections.

That the media can assist with the problem solving needed today.

That the media can produce more mini documentaries based on facts related to problems.

This is not a negative critique of the media. I appreciate all the money and time spent producing programming to inform and entertain and attract the audience. I spend time watching news shows and I learn and observe more every day. It is a wonderful opportunity for everyone.

However, a few canyons are created in credibility by some practices on the part of media. I get tired of the barracuda partisanship of some editorialists who act like what they emphasize is hard news. Financial problems loom and a possible global economic reorganization could be in progress. Disparate elements of the political system need to work together to solve problems. Ridicule of a political figure who could become important is short sighted and demeaning to our political system.

The question of the status of women arises when the bimboid look appears to be a requirement on some news shows. I'd like to see the males showing as much skin as the females, all in the name of equality. Would the male's credibility be strained by their attire if they showed that much skin? The spectacle of a woman in a skin tight, thigh high dress sitting with her legs tightly crossed, attempting to report news defies common sense. How can you be taken seriously when your buttocks are visible?

The political candidates are a whole another story. I get tired of endless emotional analysis of the candidates. Analysis should be limited to actual data like voting record and other verifiable information. I feel sorry for some of the candidates who were subjected to yellow journalism rather than rational analysis. Endless reruns of bloopers and salacious news is not only boring but wastes valuable time that could be spent on important stories. It takes tremendous courage to run for office. The candidates deserve respect.

Lastly, lest we be blown to smithereens, let's talk about the specter of nuclear war. It appears that some in the media are warmongering and talking about WMD again. I think it is time to face the reality that everybody is going to eventually have a nuclear capacity. What if a nation thought not to have a nuclear weapon did in fact have one and when attacked, might use it? Nobody knows everything about everything and to warmonger is irresponsible. At least produce a pro and con debate instead of the one sided pro war stance. The consequences of more war for this nation are bankruptcy and insolvency and debt slavery.

Anyway, thanks to the media for all that they do. I'm just glad we have the internet as an alternative source of information.

Happy New Year!

Fannie and Freddie Scam

2011-12-24T12:29:00.001-08:00

Fannie and Freddie were formed to assist in home ownership for citizens. Their mission was to increase homeownership through responsible lending. Note that I said responsible lending.

Since this mission was subverted, the mission of Fannie and Freddie became to create as many mortgage securities as possible and resell them rapidly. The mission of increasing homeownership became the excuse for the behavior that led to the subprime mortgage and bogus mortgage securities scheme.

It's like they said one thing to get approval, but the real motivation was different. Responsible homeownership includes making a payment if one exists. Getting people in homes for a few months or years and then foreclosure and then reselling the appreciated homes was the scheme, while the mortgage derivatives were worth more than the actual worth of the houses they were based on. Foreclosures only became a problem when houses stopped appreciating because the loan money dried up, because the problem with worthless mortgage derivatives had become apparent. It was quick money for a few, however.

It's interesting that anybody who did a short sale cannot get a loan for years, but the house they purchased after an appraisal was not worth what they paid, not then and not now. It was not like you could choose; all prices were sky high and if you wanted or needed to buy a house, you had to pay. The punishment of misled homebuyers is quite a phenomenon.

I would like to see a list of names and positions of those who originated the mortgage derivatives schemes and who are perpetuating them. Mr. Geithner, Mr. Paulson, Mr. Bernanke, and private sector people will probably be on the list. Is Federal Reserve money being used to purchase mortgage derivatives?

Since executives at Fannie and Freddie are rewarded with bonuses if they obtained a larger market share, that is apparently why the chief executives received some $12 million in bonuses, even though they are demanding billions in tax money to fund their deficit spending. I think Fannie and Freddie have 78% of the market share in housing loans now, which is a significant increase. What is wrong with this picture? This is deliberate direct competition with the private market in origination of more mortgage securities, which is the apparent prime goal of Fannie and Freddie. The people these government organizations are supposed to serve are forgotten or used as pawns in order to create more mortgage derivatives.

Obtaining a bigger market share? That was not the mission. Why are chief executives being rewarded for capturing a larger market share? How about paying the executives to do their job and no bonuses? Bonuses are being used by somebody making policy to direct the course of events, which has proven to be a bankrupt way to manage home loans. We need a comprehensive policy statement in Fannie and Freddie that states loans to institutions can be made if they loan it out to deserving homebuyers and that the mortgages originating from those loans will be serviced by those originating those loans. Responsible lending would immediately result, but of course the profits are modest.

I think mortgage derivatives should be relegated to casino bets and the institutions Fannie and Freddie and all their contacts should be disbanded. If a new government institution is created to 'help' homebuyers, no derivatives should be allowed.

It looks like foreclosures are up and I do appreciate the efforts of the law to recoup losses by forcing buybacks of delinquent mortgages packaged as wonderful investments by crooked rating agencies. The inflation in home prices was encouraged because the number of loans increased due to the dropping of lending standards. "If you could fog a mirror, you could get a mortgage", I was told. If they had stopped the scam with those who actually qualified for a mortgage, the foreclosures would have been within norms, but they had to have more mortgages to fuel their scam, so they just handed them out like popcorn to pigeons. Anything to keep the number of mortgages up so more mortgage derivatives could be sold. I knew people who would buy several houses at once and flip them 2-3 months later for tens of thousands more than they paid.

This inflation hit the consumer hard but the immediate effects were softened by various mortgage schemes that focused on the immediate payment the buyer would pay, rather than devious adjustable rate mortgages, interest only for a few years and other schemes designed to keep the payment low for a while, then escalating the payment to a level the buyer could not afford. Since by then there were no homes for sale the buyer could actually afford, these schemes became attractive since the buyers were assured their homes would continue to rise in value. Of course, that trajectory was unsustainable but what did the average schmo know?

It's amazing to me that the federal government is operating an agency that has as policy capturing a larger market share from the private enterprise market. The executives are awarded bonuses on the basis of market share statistics, rather than success in the mission to provide housing opportunities for the responsible buyer.

I suggest a review of the policies surrounding these 'bonuses', who wrote them and why and the consequences of encouraging particular courses of action without heed to future consequences.

Football Cult

2011-11-12T15:58:00.001-08:00

This football scandal tops them all. Graphic details zoom around the world and it looks like the pagan worshipers of a sport have ignored feet of clay on their idol while the gold they worshipped filled their eager hands. The Golden Calf rules over the pagans who put more belief in their obsession than in moral certitude.

What disturbs about this scenario is the dubious value to the countless children who have been indoctrinated to believe that success at football is equitable with your value in the world. See a vision of a child's future that is defined by a sport that requires large size to succeed at the moneymaking trough narrows the field in that child's mind. What has happened to our moral fabric when a moneymaking game takes precedence over the students and the populace? They kept their insular trip going as long as they could.

The public schools and sports should be separated. Let the municipalities handle competitive sports while the schools teach academics and health for life. Profits from the competitive sports would help fund the schools and the municipalities. The competitive sports programs should be open to all on 8-12 grade level, with subsidized bus passes to the programs. Grade performance guidelines would apply to eligibility. Tutoring would be offered on site.

We are told that our local university funds other sports programs from football and basketball proceeds, yet contributions to the academic program lean towards getting instructors fired for giving bad grades to players or having special classes for the players, instead of them becoming a part of the university community and attending normal class. Our local athletic director has stated he will raise the graduation rate of the players, which has been abysmal under the recently retired long time coach. The hangers-on who suck a living out of the sports programs using the university name don't even bother to bolster up academics. It's all about money first and sports second .

Look at the Fiesta Bowl scandal. Free trips for state legislators, free tickets and free hotel rooms and meals, all to obtain influence and cooperation on key legislation that benefits their scheme. So the head of the Fiesta Bowl has access to all this money, which he spends on trips and freebies for himself, when the educational institutions represented get little cut out of all this lucrative action. I'm talking academics here: all that strange stuff like mathematics and the sciences and liberal arts, and the like. Most of that profit should be diverted into funding academics instead of puffing up the pay of the dealmakers and giving freebies to lawmakers .

The moral failure of the 'football leadership' did not live up to the hype fed children through the public schools and universities. Pressure applied by how many people resulted in a cover up that damages the students and the standing of the institution? Who participated in the cover-up? Who should go to jail for putting selfish interests ahead of right and wrong? Who would be better off today if they had stood fast and reported the truth until somebody actually heard it?

Debt as Tyranny

2011-11-08T07:54:00.000-08:00

The High-born Ladye

Debt as Tyranny

Thinking on the national debt and the local city debt is enough to create insomnia. City debt is more familiar to me and with that is a bit of contempt for the decision-making that mired the city in debt and more debt continues to be an attraction even though insolvency looms as borrowing has been the budget crutch in the city for the past few years. Why is borrowed money considered income in the accounting? Borrowed money is not income to be lumped in the general fund and spent on whatever. Borrowing money is a focused enterprise, hopefully with increased income or better conditions as a result of the cost of borrowing money. Around here, the real cost of borrowing money ranges about 30-50% of the principal, which is usurious but seems so desirable to the politicians who are courted by the lenders to borrow.

Politicians who borrow against revenue streams are indebting those streams for years after their term of office is over. They are often long gone and the taxpayers are still paying on those debts, ill conceived or not. The power these politicians have over our lives and environment is now reaching into the future lives of our descendents, as the politicians' insatiable urges to control cash seems to be more important than planning for the future.

Apparently in Greece, the deal seems to be that the Greeks are expected to borrow money at 85% interest and if the latest bailout plan works, the holders of the risky Greek debt will rake in the principal plus 85% interest, all paid for by whomever is paying for the bailout. Since our President did not agree to pay this bailout, then the taxpayers are off the hook to pay that usury and allow those investors to collect big. Nobody should pay that money. A cyberspace rumor is floating around that a banker is going to take over the reins of government in Greece. If the spring drifts north all bets are off so the foolishness of creating a climate perfect for new species will result in unwarranted competition, in ecological terms. Doesn't anybody remember the plight of the Germans after WWI when they were forced to pay war reparations to the point they had nothing left? That political economic mistake led to WWII.

I think the moneylenders need to take a haircut and either go broke or get on with it. They deserve that for all the easy credit they offered on all levels, without checking to determine if any of the borrowers could pay it back. Liberal tax codes allowed for massive tax deductions on defaults. Tax deductions for these losses should not be allowed, since the evidence shows a lack of responsibility on the part of the lender in vetting potential borrowers. So incompetence in the workplace is compensated for by the government in the form of tax breaks? Just think of all the money paid in commissions to lenders who set up these deals. "Fund managers" who invested pension funds and other critical money should be liable for these reckless losses and 'bailouts' should be aimed at the pension funds, not the clown who handled the crappy investments.

Back to the politicians who recklessly borrow and spend, whatever happened to bond elections, where voters had to give permission for borrowing? Around here, the euphemism for borrowing is 'certificate of participation', which bring in millions in debt. The RTA is issuing bonds after receiving .5 cent sales tax to do a job. The borrowing adds more than 30% to the cost, but was it in the voter proposal as an expense? So we were told that it was always understood there would be borrowing. They're wasting over a third of the money they get on debt, but they get to dole out the millions. Refinancing existing debt by rolling over the old debt and starting over with the principal after fees are paid and a few bucks doled out keeps the taxpayers in hock for a longer time, but what the hell, let's spend that cash now and leave nothing but a hole in the ground for posterity. Your kids can pay for it too; it's worth it to somebody. Let's have some legislation that calls a debt a debt and demands voter approval for incurrence.

Debt is tyranny. A forced payment brought on by government borrowing. The spending of tax money on moneylenders is outrageous and should not be allowed above a certain point. It is called the debt limit, which is now an object of ridicule. How about establishing a realistic debt limit and limits on what borrowed money can be spent on? Prosecute officials who spend borrowed money on anything else or who build up costoverruns resulting in partial completion. Somebody has to take responsibility.

Fannie and Freddie, the Fed lending houses that eagerly buy mortgage securities, are a losing proposition, where mismanagement has resulted in a request for billions more tax money subsidy every year, owes the taxpayers $141billion and is now paying top executives $12million in bonuses this year. Who else gets a reward for running a heavy deficit when the Federal government is running a deficit and making it all worse by billions? Close them down. We don't need any more mortgage securities or derivatives and who likes them is totally irrelevant to what needs to be done. Make the lenders responsible for what they lend locally. The power of the mortgage brokers needs to be broken. Real estate prices might fall, which would identify more potential buyers.

One way to avoid more public debt, particularly that foisted off on the voters without permitting a vote, is to adjust the size of the contracts to be awarded. Smaller contracts would favor local workers, while the huge contractors want huge lump sums borrowed and given to them on a large scale. These smaller contracts would be contingent upon receipt of the tax support, which would have some consistency. Smaller, shorter term contracts based on actual revenue would favor local, small contractors. The money paid them would stay in town circulating instead of flying out of state or even out of the country. It is time to set up the local bidding process in such a way as to favor local small contractors who employ local workers without forced union representation. This is a right to work state. Costs need to be lowered on all fronts, which would create more jobs. Smaller contracts contingent on revenue would avoid debt and would allow for incremental building of projects using all of the assigned money with none going to the moneylenders.

Another problem is the 'underwater mortgage' problem. Remember the last real estate boom, the Subprime Boom? During the boom in Vegas, houses were actually selling for more than the asking price, the bidding was so fierce. Inflated housing prices were the norm. If you could fog a mirror, you could get credit. If you wanted to buy a home, you had to pay, like $275,000+ for a cheap 1200 sq. ft. cookie cutter. Around here that overbuilt item is selling for around $40-50,000 and falling. How far can the prices drop? Maybe until the average Joe can actually afford the loan payment.

The debt pervasiveness also keeps rents jacked up so the principal and interest on the debt can be paid, with a profit for the leinholder after that. Renters are expected to pay the subprime boom mortgage price for the lienholder plus more for maintenance costs and profit. The stagnation of the real estate and rental market is due to a heavy debt load that absorbs cash and does not produce jobs. Debt jacks up the price of everything.

The tyranny of debt has brought economic exploitation and now protesters to the streets. We need legislation to prevent politicians from borrowing anything over a reasonable debt limit and any borrowing has to have the consent of the voters. The voters need control because the voters pay for it. It's easy to blow money when somebody else pays for it. No more Certificates of Participation or any other disguised borrowing. The Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) is claiming power to indebt based on the 1/2 cent sales tax they command and I question their legal right to indebt this fund without a vote of the people.

Our legislators can help the voters get control of public indebtedness and the time to act is nigh. No more moneylenders in the temple of government.

The Legacy of 2012

2011-10-31T10:10:00.000-07:00

The Legacy of 2012

The Mayan Calendar ends with the winter solstice of 2012, heralding a new calendar cycle and a new era in world history. The new beginning is not defined in the prophesy but can be likened to the invention of domestic corn and this latest migration to the Americas, which produced the world in which we now live.

Monumental change will be the result of choices made today. The issue of what choices to make is the most important of the day.

Possible choices divide into three categories: Inevitable and Preventable and Attainable

PREVENTABLE

o Nuclear War

o Biological War

o Huge Income Disparities

o Population Growth

o Deforestation

o Pollution

o Growing Poverty

o Economic Collapse

INEVITABLE

 Petroleum Depletion

 Mineral hoarding as supplies decrease

 Higher prices for nonrenewable resources

 Climate change

 Competition for resources

ATTAINABLE

 Curbs on population growth

 Due to finite nature of Earth's mineral resources, extraterrestrial resources must be exploited.

 Research into energy sources and energy savings, due to ongoing petroleum depletion

 Protection and regeneration of fisheries

 Development of new agricultural products

 Plan for global climate change to prevent catastrophic food production losses**

 Localize food production as much as possible

If population growth not curbed: constraints will appear in freedom, food, water, living space, recreational space, wealth, and goods. Those kinds of social conditions will result in higher prices, war and depopulation. In the animal world, overpopulation results in a die-off of that population back to a sustainable level. One would hope that civilized minds could avoid such an outcome in the new era.

Social engineering as an action plan might take a back seat to survival economics in a new era. The various social structures found around the world hark back to pure environmental survival, like what did help us survive was perpetuated like immunity in the DNA. The modern world is changing so fast, this kind of adaptability must be supercharged as compared to the past.

Consider myself: Born mid twentieth century, as a child, I have known people who lived in Civil War times long before the telegraph and the automobile. I did not live in those times, but I heard stories of how it was and what you had to do to survive out there on your own in the wild world or in the world of man. I heard it! And just me can remember before TV and when a typewriter was a prized possession. TV came into Tucson around 1950. Ray Bradbury and A.E. Van Vogt were my ticket off the planet. And now just look at us with computers and space stations and wireless and cell phones! As a teacher, I rode the wave of change so I could teach the students the newest and latest in technology. I am so thankful for that opportunity.

What could a new era bring, considering the changes in the last hundred years? Could anyone have imagined satellites and cell phones in 1900? Jules Verne and H.G. Wells were sensations.

What could we invent?

 A mining network including moon, asteroids and Mars.

 Payload delivery from Earth orbit to the surface

 Solar smelting in a vacuum

 Solar Sail technology

 Nuclear energy research

 Wireless research

 New uses for light

 Genetics research

 Magnetics research

 Endless possibilities..

 *Increased lifespan

*Medical research has led to an increased lifespan, which in a sustainable world would result in a slowdown of replacement population. Longer lifespan = lower birthrate. Medical ethics and the prolongment of life are all issues here but cannot be ignored. I think requiring the lawyers and medics to bankrupt the families must be curbed. Balancing the birthrate with the deathrate leading the way is the only way to morally approach the problem. Discouraging excessive population production should be part of public policy and expressed in the tax code.

Worldwide, the problem of immigration caused by overpopulation in Mexico and the availability of jobs in the USA was mimicked in Europe, where Africans immigrate to where the food supplies are, in biological terms. Population stability needs to be achieved without mass migrations. In plain language, most of Mexico has a religion that discourages birth control, so the excess population migrates north to fill up spaces in the USA. Is this fair or responsible? For the political boundaries to mean anything, this problem must be addressed by the Mexican government and their religious leaders. The USA is not a population outlet for nations with high reproductive rates.

The national jurisdictions should be required to publish a research report on population dynamics and an action plan to achieve population sustainability to the United Nations. A recognition of the connection between population densities and wars must be made and the subsequent importance of population growth cannot be underestimated. High unemployment leads to civil unrest.

Capitalism as an economic success is dependent on renewable resources, discovery of new resources and the opening of new markets. The growth mantra has been uttered so often nobody thinks of the philosophy of an ever expanding population within a finite space. Since new resources are now few and far between, any growth must be at the expense of other economic interests. This kind of cutthroat competition and subsequent monopoly causes unemployment. We are now a nation of buyers of goods, rather than a primary producer of goods. The relentless erosion of regional self-sufficiency leaves too many at the mercy of importation of necessities and also leaves many unemployed. Unfair trade policies are not capitalism, but are rather exploitation. The USA has been exploited and now is broke and unemployed and in debt. Foreign interests now exploit our mineral resources while politicians assist and applaud.

Job creation should have a goal of perpetuating the system as well as employment of workers. Makework projects without a clear economic objective are too expensive for the economy to support, so job creation should occur in sustainable occupations like greenhouses, health care, energy production, research and development, where something of value is created ongoing. For example, instead of wasting money on a solar company proposing to use old technology to compete with the Chinese using their subsidized industry, why not consider a solar company that uses solar catchment units that have easily removable elements that can be retrofitted as the industry R&D continues? An adaptive solar unit! Or instead of building huge culverts where it rarely rains, build solar electricity producing units and export electricity, an ongoing profit making enterprise or provision of plenty electricity for that locale.

One example that comes to mind is the federal subsidy of the installation of a streetcar line made under the stimulus program that will leave the city of Tucson in deeper debt, has devastated the water company with borrowing, and has actually created very few temporary jobs in Tucson, but did export jobs to Oregon where seven streetcars are to be built with borrowed money, which raises the costs by at least one third. After the streetcar line is in operation, the maintenance costs will be paid by the city and are estimated to cost several million a year, all out of the general fund. The city of Tucson has borrowed money the last few years in order to avoid cutting programs and this streetcar will only add to the deficit, since no attempt will be made to make it into a paying operation. Thus, the stimulus just caused more debt, a few temporary jobs, and a lasting maintenance charge to add to the city deficit. Proponents of the scheme say that sales tax revenues along the route will be a money maker and more housing will be built, all this in an economy with a huge surplus of housing.

There are skeptics concerning the stimulus spending, long term debt obligations and the effect on jobs. More debt service = less money in circulation. How stimulated is Tucson right now? The streetcar operation and maintenance requires jobs, but these jobs must be subsidized by the city in a deficit situation. In tight economic times, this means cuts elsewhere in order to keep the streetcar running and the unions are demanding top money and benefits. Should the politicians borrow money to meet the added deficit? Already, the 'modern' streetcar has destroyed the efforts of a private outfit running an old streetcar here in town. So much for the stimulus, which also paid for 'Fast and Furious'.

Proposed spending for job creation must be analyzed carefully. Suppose a foreign mining company says they are creating jobs in Arizona by using local workers to extract copper using local water. This slurry will then be shipped overseas for refining and of course they will possess the metals, which raise in value every year. There's a big rush on this so they can quick get their hands on the new monetary standard, the metals. Why not build a state of the art smelter that can do slurry and recycle? There is plenty of room over in Mojave County along the railroad line: it is time for a smelter. Then the state metal resources will be exploited by local workers, the supply stays within the USA and more jobs are created here. And the huge wealth of the metals will remain here.

The old mining law dating from the nineteenth century must be revised. Perhaps the Feds should spend some time considering the critical long term resources of this country, get legislation passed that protects our national interest and revise that antiquated mining law. Jobs based on finite resources will be gone while somebody else makes off with the loot and leaves a big hole and poisonous waste in the groundwater. Being in a hurry to get jobs might hurt the economy in the long run, like selling Manhattan Island for a handful of bright beads didn't help the Indians long term. Selling all you have of valuables without economic replacement is not a way to get ahead.

The issue of excessive regulation must be addressed. The smallholders are tied up by local zoning laws that prohibit home based businesses, which is a violation of land rights. It appears that zoning laws have required someone to live in one place and have a business in another, which benefits those owning 'commercial' property. This expense defines what businesses can exist and the commercial land holders will charge as much as they can possibly get for any use of their properties, because of the liberal tax code that allows for heavy tax deductions for empty units, thus driving up the rents. Nobody cares if businesses cannot exist because of the high rents and the impossibility of using your own property to have a business, anything from a law office, hair salon, candy shop and so on. Of course, not allowing businesses in homes causes one to have to drive or ride the bus somewhere else to shop for everything every time. Excessive regulation and fees and licenses and super dooper inspections of larger businesses discourage investment, when the governments cuts itself in off the top even before any profits are made. Health and safety inspections are one thing that came out of excesses of the sweatshop age, but harassment and favoritism by petty local officials is expensive and nonproductive.

So the legacy of 2012 will be a new direction, either the choice of more and better technology and an outreach to the stars, or face the problems of population sustainability on Earth, with no more population outlets but death and takeover of resources. War and competition must give way to stability and regional sustainability.

Define sustainable regions, producer regions, needy regions.

Sustainable: self producing in energy, food and water @ 33.3% each for initial rating, then refine to exporters of energy, food, water and then consumers of energy, food, water.

For example, a predictable outcome would be heavily urbanized areas require energy and food to be brought in but are sometimes self-sufficient in water, depending on where they are located. Another predictable outcome would be that some cities in the southwest USA are self sufficient in nothing, due to the population buildup after World War II. Recent Central Arizona Project public policy changes undermine agriculture while increasing water allotments for more housing developments, which shows the foolishness of policymakers, who choose a quick buck over long term local benefit. Five days worth of food in the stores is not much of a cushion against a domestic emergency. Mexico is within these spheres of influence because of important food imports.

The old time methods of population control include mass executions, rolling heads down pyramid stairs, gas chambers and other cruelties all aimed at seizure of the properties, ethnic warfare and other extermination campaigns. The world cannot continue these methods in order to cope with overcrowding. In the absence of a migratory population outlet, populations within existing political or religious or ethnic jurisdictions must stabilize without encroaching. World population stability is a job to do and of course there are those who would try to obtain or maintain supremacy, but the vision of supremacy changes with time.

**http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp/2011/10/24/independent-study-confirms-that-global-warming-exists/

HOW TO CREATE JOBS

2011-10-20T14:26:00.000-07:00

The first item to be examined is the feasibility of creating any given job, the ramifications of continuing to create that kind of job and the resources needed to create that job.

Energy Independence:

Applying this concept would provide jobs across the country as the resources vary from district to district. Natural gas in several places around the country where jobs would be created exploiting it, solar in other appropriate places to create jobs, petroleum in others, wave action energy production on coasts and so on all creating jobs and a desirable outcome of energy independence. Energy independence would save a huge amount of money for this nation and we would not be paying enemies for energy. Maybe they would be too broke to attack us.

Sponsor a competition for entrepreneurs and students highlighting possible new energy sources or a new angle on an existing resource. Offer prizes, recognition and job offers from sponsors. Make these with a local angle, as in Tucson, Arizona working with solar would be local, or a wind solar combo or solar smelter. Florida might want wave action/solar/wind combo. Natural gas combined with wind generators or something brand new that nobody ever thought of before.

This competition would create jobs and stir up new ideas that we need. The institutions of learning could contribute free tuition and other perks to winners to bolster interest. Our students are so creative and so well educated they don't know the intellectual boundaries felt by others. This money infusion into the schools could be based on sheer size: X number of students=Y number of prizes.

Benefits: money and recognition would be infused into the creative world of entrepreneurs and students. competition for prizes would be stiff but the most feasible improvement leading to energy independence would be rewarded. A big prize for the best research lead should be included.

Recall the huge benefits of government support of Research and Development from back in the 1950s. Sputnik and the push in education for science? We walked on the moon! We can achieve energy independence and free ourselves from the expense of foreign oil. And when oil runs out, we will have developed alternative resources to sustain our civilization.

Construction

Construction jobs should be minimal because of surfeit of structures. Renovating and reenergizing existing structures is a possibility. Tax/fee/ licensing breaks for spending money that way for individuals and businesses benefits: homes and businesses are renovated and the community looks better and people are more comfortable. People are employed doing the renovations, which is a continuing profession if the field doesn't get too crowded. Unemployed construction workers can compete for these jobs and they already have the skills.

Space Program:

The space program is a logical extension of the R&D money invested during the 20th century that has changed our civilization with the new knowledge. Exploration of the moon could be accomplished through government R&D and through private investment. The mining companies could be given tax breaks for investing in moon exploration, which could yield plentiful titanium, other metals and minerals. Private enterprise is already funding ventures in space exploration.

Expanding the USA space presence could be funded through the military, NASA and Transportation and other nations. Dream up another academic contest aimed at delivering smelted titanium to Earth from the moon. .. Go for USA creativity because that is where excellence shines in our students. Jobs in R&D and fabrication of units and possibly a new space station terminus. Only fund studies of something new or a vast improvement on existing ideas, like floating a payload in like those satellites that 'fall' but then control the reentry.

Benefits: Immediate employment funding for students, researchers and fabrication and construction of associated units. Long term benefit could be the utilization of the minerals and metals found on the moon, which would enrich our civilization and provide long term jobs on the moon and Earth. Our military could develop defenses for our planet and nation and international cooperation could flourish.

Transportation:

Expansion of the roads has been heavily funded throughout manifest destiny, but now jobs and money should be focused on repair and maintenance and replacement of dangerous structures. Funding for more new roads is like the bridge to nowhere but the land of a land speculator who has contributed to politicos who respond to such stimuli. An elaborate storm drain structure at Quartzite is a good example of temporary jobs that produced no lasting economic stimulus and was basically unneeded because it only rains every few years in the Mojave Desert. Money needs to be invested in what will bring in a return, like solar generating stations at Quartzite would have generated a valuable commodity. The culverts look nice, however. This was transportation money. The transportation lobby needs to cut back and take a look at what will truly benefit the community instead of supporting jobs that drain the coffers without an adequate return in tax revenue that is needed to continue the system.

The key here is what will continue the system. What will continue the system?

• maintaining existing infrastructure

• cut back on debt and consider default on usury and ignore rating agencies

• maintain a strong national defense on Earth and in Space

• continue the innovation that our nation has fostered.

• fund research and development in higher learning institutions

• get insurance out of mandatory status and return to the free market

• free up businesses from mandatory insurance requirements except in hazardous situations

• penalize businesses and countries that abuse trade relations or tax codes

• give tax breaks to businesses established in the USA, the more jobs the higher the percent

• encourage national production of common items

• amend the tax code to prevent lienholders from getting a tax break in any form for foreclosures

• Keep our mineral resources here for job creation

• respect the need for unions with fiscally responsible leadership

• cooperation will continue the system, disunity will not.

At this point in time, analyze data on what professions are disproportionately represented in unemployment statistics. Cut back on training programs in those professions, while encouraging training in professions where job growth is forecast by investment. Teach the students these statistics so they can make their own choices.

In the schools, stress a liberal arts program, because we simply do not know where an increase in R&D investment is going to produce another Jobs/Gates breakthrough that changes our civilization. Stress education in the basic skills of reading, mathematics, and composition plus the use of computers in all areas of learning and researching. An educated individual with those skills will be quick to learn new applications and will be ready for whatever is coming. This is adaptability, a characteristic of our species. A technocrat speaks of the future with hope and faith in the creativity of our students and entrepreneurs.

Gaming the system to acquire wealth by manipulating instead of producing is counterproductive to the goal of continuing the system. At least Caesar had a good motive when he violated the Roman Constitution and created an emperor, thus bringing to an end the Roman Republic. The apparent motivation to control as much money as possible without regard to the social consequences can be discussed... The forethought that should go into the removal of legislation formed by the fine minds of the time in an earnest effort to prevent the economic devastation of another Great Depression apparently was incomplete. The economic gamesters even scooped into tax money to further their 'derivative' schemes and continue the gaming to this day. Hang around a casino for a while and see gaming. Gambling losses must be tax deductable for some, just not for the average Joe. And the games continue, tying up cash.

So now remember what happened to Caesar while there is in the here and how an organized movement protesting Wall Street greed and political corruption on all levels. They hit the streets a while ago in New York and now other cities around the world are hosting demonstrations. This is the direct aftermath of all the gaming and undermining and short term thinking. Sure, Z group won but what did the prize turn out to be?

A flat tax would prevent the use of the tax code to discourage destructive behaviors in the community. Right now the tax code is encouraging population growth. Perhaps deductions per child should be limited to one per adult. Any other children after that would be financed from the family income. Of course the rich will do whatever but common sense will dictate courses of action. The reason is that each child costs the government and disparate groups with high birthrates are increasing at the expense of other groups who have fewer children. Part of parenting is responsibility. An individual should have to pay for increasing the population by more than replacement value. Who should pay, but the person contributing to the public obligation? The same should apply to school vouchers, one adult = one voucher. If you have more children to send to school, then you pay. This political hot potato is never tossed around for comment. Possibly this flat tax would eliminate this deduction.

The issue of population growth must come up when it comes to jobs. High unemployment rates are associated with overpopulation. As cadres of workers come of age, the economy must produce jobs for them. Say X equals population growth, Y equals existing unemployment, then X+Y=unemployment rate. If the economy cannot produce enough jobs, the unemployment rate will grow. Something must happen to restore stability: new jobs, less population growth or a decrease in population to match resources, or the USA will have an ever increasing population with a new lower level of poverty every year. It is time to limit the child deduction to one per adult.

The problem of foreclosures and the state of the housing 'industry' leads to the conclusion that any tax breaks for lienholders for foreclosures should be denied. The foreclosures are a drain on public resources, can become a public hazard and devalue neighborhoods, all which harm the community and cost money. The lienholders should pay this cost because they own the property. Local governments should consider laying a fee on foreclosures. Discouraging foreclosures seems appropriate since a study in Phoenix showed that lienholders were less likely to foreclose on high end properties they held the paper on. So the smallholders are taking the brunt of the foreclosures because their mortgage was 'securitized'. Time to bust some bricks! It's time when a schmuck who took out a loan of $200,000 for a property is foreclosed on and kicked out so his home can be sold at auction to a buddy of the lienholder for $30,000, while the government pays the difference to the lienholder. Of course, the schmuck could have easily paid the payment on $30,000 but that was never an option for him. The more expensive the property, the more likely the lienholder would 'work' with the debtor. Pass moral judgment on that.

In conclusion, after cheap money and massive debt bankrupted so many, there are now fewer jobs and more imports. Unions sometimes demand exorbitant pay and benefits, which drives up the cost of local products, which encouraged investment in importing. The daisy chain goes on and on. Them that has, gets. An old adage come true once again. The problem is in the balance of wealth: "We are the 99%" on a sign at an Occupy Tucson rally, seen across the nation in other cities.

Local job possibilities: The Indians have land and water. What crop could generate local jobs? Cotton is in demand. Cotton spinning, cloth, clothes all made here. Pumpkins grow here. Dried pumpkin? Canning takes water, which is scarce here. Sales in other countries? How about greenhouses? Greenhouses in the winter are cost effective. Research on new plant use at the UA might uncover cash crops we never knew we had, like buffgrass flour maybe. Food crops grown here are to everyone's advantage and could provide jobs and lower everyone's food costs. I think Pima County is a natural for greenhouses, which conserve water. Hydroponics and tilapia farms are also a possibility. There is a successful experimental tilapia farm here, sponsored by the UofA.

Already, jobs are being created in the second hand industry, with thrift stores opening all over Tucson. Recessions generate interest in thrift shopping. This shift has closed some retail stores. Interesting, that the price of antiques appears to have peaked with the real estate boom, as a luxury item not so valued during recession. How about a huge thrift shop on the far east side of the UA like the White Elephant store in Green Valley? Employ students on a flex schedule. Remember, the old Value Village store was on 4th Avenue for years of success.

If the city contracted out the landscaping without demanding union membership, more jobs could be created on the private market. Other jobs could be contracted out also, which would lift the burden of high pay and benefits for city workers. No more can be afforded and more jobs would be created in the private sector.

People should contact their legislators concerning tort reform. The stranglehold the lawyers have on the economy is second only to that of the insurance companies. Study the Texas model. The insurance companies are holding cash for all of us but when a big payout is required, they have to be bailed out. Nice to know that AIG now has a new line of credit, is opening a life insurance program with 40 year payouts and is now hosting lavish meetings at a posh resort once again. This must be part of the jobless recovery. The people should be free of these taxes disguised as insurance and they should be free of the costs of Armageddon litigation.

Zoning is a barrier to home based businesses. Unreasonable parking space requirements, retrofitting and inspecting and rejecting all restrict the right of a person to their own property. The purpose of the city should go back to the original charter, which has been interpreted and ballooned into a puffer fish. More jobs would be created if people were 'allowed' to use their properties to make money, like a wood shop, a cooler repair shop, a sewing shop, a bakery, a consignment shop....

Of course, Tucson needs new businesses who do not use water. We have plenty buildings, cheap solar energy, workers, cheap housing, a major research university...what else do you need?

A COOPERATIVE ENVIRONMENT AND LOW TAXES

TUCSON RISES AGAIN

2011-10-13T08:13:00.000-07:00

Ideas for Tucson

The recent international baseball event at Kino stadium where about 12,000 people attended over three days was such a success to be repeated.

How about hosting international baseball here? League games could be played here while weather in the Southern Hemisphere is cold.

Why not build a soccer field out there on some of that land downtown? Let go of grandiose plans and go for bleachers and field and associated health needs and forget the 10 storey stadium idea. Bring in soccer teams from across the states in the winter for practice and games. Lure international soccer in and get things going again. Build fancier facilities incrementally and avoid debt. Get rid of the moneylenders and go for what we can do here and now. Partner with Rio Nuevo and get soccer facilities over there.

THE BIG PROBLEM

Everybody in this town is charging too much rent, probably because of the debt load. The reasoning goes like this: if we owe a payment of X then we have to charge X+1. So nobody rents it because nobody has enough money and it stands empty. Teams can't afford X+1 so they don't have anywhere to go. If the rent is lowered then the teams would rent the facility and something would be gained. It appears that these facilities are owned by the people but the controllers are charging so much to use it, the people's teams can't use it. Lower the rents for Kino and Corbett and see them fill up.

How about free admission for little league kids plus an exhibition game for them the next time the Mexican league is here? This would boost attendance and stir up interest. Lower the bleachers seats to $1 per person! Kids free! Give families a place to go!

THE VENDORS

Another problem are the prices the vendors charge for food and drink. Monopolies do not lower the prices and result in price gouging. It's like the TCC that charges exorbitant rates for vendors to set up during events, which in turn raises the prices for the average guy who stumbles in there and the four kids scream for a $5 hotdog after he already paid $8 to park and more money to get in. And they wonder why their events are not so successful or the TCC stands empty.

Get rid of the vendor monopolies and charge a minimal fee to set up. Provide jobs and opportunity for vendors, which is jobs for the community. Let them set up and compete and they make a living, and the people have more food choices and lower food prices. Everyone benefits.

PARKING

Free parking or $1 for all events. Parkwise reports dollar in dollar out in the revenue/expenditure line, so maybe they are padding their bank accounts at the expense of everyone else.

MANAGEMENT

Get rid of confrontational management. If the facility they are managing is not profitable, fire them. Get rid of management that does not want to work internationally to attract teams and conventions.

PRICE STRUCTURES

In summary:

• Lower rents for Corbett, Kino and TCC

• Lower admission charges

• Free parking

• lower vendor charges

• cancel vendor monopolies

• scale back Parkwise

COMMUNITY ADVANTAGES

The winter weather in Tucson is a huge advantage in attracting teams. There are many open rental units in town, which is an advantage unless the landlords demand exorbitant rent. Perhaps reduced rates for visiting teams in apartments, motels and condos could be arranged.

These are just a few ideas for improving the use of our public facilities that will increase revenue and give our families wholesome games and events to attend at a cost that all can afford.

Dorothy Prater Niemi October 2011

Available on Kindle Amazon

Political Issues As Related to Environmental Limitations

2011-09-09T14:49:00.000-07:00

The issue of climate change may loom large to the nations of the world as sea levels slowly rise. The outcome of receding floods may be that the prior coastline is obliterated in low lying areas as sea levels have risen from the icemelt in the north and south lands. We're not inundated but the sea level rise continues. Study of the fossil record informs that lands now one way were not always that way. Like fossil seashells in the mountains of New Mexico. Dinosaur bones near Showlow among the pines. We are in a sea of change all the time and are just now beginning to understand the enormity of history and how limited our view has been.

Hurricanes might begin forming where the cold arctic water hits the warm equatorial waters flowing off Africa and now with more melt the water is flowing faster and makes a more energy filled turn when it hits the mass of warm water off North Africa. The wide whirlpool where one meets the other extends to the atmosphere. I wonder what the stats might say about the connection between more and warmer arctic water pouring south. Where is the Antarctic melt going? Does the melt travel towards the equator? The melt occurs in one place where sea levels rise, slowly pushing the excess to an average very gradually. Incremental melting. Storms redistribute the melt. New Orleans would be a good place to look for evidence of sea level rise that is obvious at the poles. Or Bangladesh.

The implication of this for public policy is enormous. Politicians must be willing to address actual problems without worrying about donations to themselves. These problems are too important to allow them to be solved as a secondary issue to any other concern. Arguing about who or what causes warming trends is not my purpose here.

The predicted sea level rise and the predicted increase in precipitation in northeastern North America has so far proven true. What does this have to do with public policy? Here are a few public policy issues and ideas for long term planning concerning climate change.

• Evaluate floodplain data and possibly expand the floodplain designation in low lying areas along coasts and rivers.
• Deny Federal insurance to every property in these low lying areas and provide a relocation fund for needy families. Use cut rate excess housing for these people. If somebody wants to stay in the zone, private property rules but no federal insurance will be held on the property. Voluntary sale of properties in the zones would be the rule, not imminent domain but no federal insurance. Local governments should be held legally responsible if they issue occupational zoning for these flood zones.
• Sell or lease floodzones on the open market for use as pasture, farming and recreation. If local governments retain the land, private contractors could be hired to convert flood prone areas into parks, ball fields and green zones. This action could create jobs in the affected areas, create more recreational areas and enhance tourism. Perhaps some of the floodlands could be leased for temporary concessionaires, like taco and hotdog stands.

These solutions to problems created by sea level rise would take years to implement, which is a long term solution for a long term problem. It would also create jobs immediately and circulate money through the economy. The issue is where is the money for such projects without borrowing? Possibly some of the 'transportation' money could be funneled into reclamation of these lowland recreational areas. Since the infrastructure is in disrepair, attention should be paid to maintenance, rather than creating new roads. We need to utilize existing rather than spending money on new ones that give limited economic benefit to only a few. We need something new, but it isn't new roads. We need roads in excellent repair and that is where those jobs are.

I have drifted to the topic of the repercussions of these actions. Political opposition to rezoning/expanding floodzones due to the loss of value of the land to their constituents will occur but the economic advantages of such recreational areas over time and the savings from national flood insurance as these at risk properties could be partly remitted to the states for a more cooperative attitude. Since the national flood insurance program is billions in deficit, some action must be taken to discourage continued occupation of flood zones and the foolhardy insuring of structures in floodzones.

I do have a few observations about the stimulus. In Tucson, the TIGER Grant from the Feds caused more borrowing and commitment to a streetcar project that will leave the city with a $6 million a year maintenance cost, while the local bus system is already subsidized by $40 million. For the past two years the city has borrowed to pay costs, now has a debt of $1.2 billion, has cut police and fire and services to citizens, ad nauseum. So the TIGER grant put the city in more debt and added $6 million a year to the millions in deficit. Some stimulus.

Apparently, stimulus money was used by the ATF to fund 'Fast and Furious', the gunrunning scandal that is now reaching to the white house. All these people have been transferred, hopefully in a holding tank for interrogation. Do we really need to help depose the legitimate government of Mexico by providing firearms to what look to be revolutionaries funded by drug money? What were they thinking? Were local law enforcement like county sheriffs informed of this scheme? Were the city police chiefs told about this 'Fast and Furious'? This stupid scheme endangered every law enforcement officer in Arizona and they reportedly spent stimulus funds on this horseshit. Were the Border Patrol people informed???

Now the Democrats are screaming about a GOP gun raffle, while they remain conspicuously silent on the issue of the ATF scandal, no doubt because it was the brainchild of the Democratic administration, who apparently has a cavalier attitude about Arizona law enforcement . Those guns surfaced in 23 crime scenes in Phoenix, at the Agent Terry killing, and all over Mexico, including where two of our agents died on a mission close to Tampico. And this is economic help? More jobs for the undertakers and medics?

Tax code revision is coming. I hope they start from scratch, simplify the code and give a calculated group of tax breaks for businesses that locate in the United States and make physical objects to replace imports.

A rationale for this tax break: Fuel costs will increase, which will increase the cost of the overseas objects, particularly the heavy items. As an example, glass making used to be a huge industry but has now been hurt by cheap imports. A tariff on heavy items seems reasonable, as fuel becomes more scarce. Exporting our raw materials seems foolish with unemployment as high as it is here. Let's use the raw materials to create jobs here. We need to keep our precious metals, copper, wood, uranium and anything else of use. Don't export scrap metal, use it to make jobs here at smelters, steel plants and all the things that go into the industry. Think long term goals and jobs as a result of tax breaks, not largesse for political contributors. We really need to help the country.

No tax breaks for non productive investments like derivatives and mortgage securities and equities. If the scheme 'investment' does not create jobs then tax it at a higher rate to discourage the practice. Possibly this kind of 'insurance' should not be tax deductable. These 'derivatives' the originators were so smug about creating something that the peons could not understand just give me your money and I will take care of it for us. It was just another scam. Mr. Bernanke tell me it isn't true that QE2 went to purchase securities in an effort to keep the scheme going? The originator of the loan should be responsible for servicing it and if it goes belly up must pay whomever they sold it to for the full cost. Something has to stop the schemers and charlatans from running this country. Tax heavily those who make a living soliciting and setting up debt.

On from the tax ideas, another problem is the increasing cost and scarcity of fuel. On a positive note, the current administration has taken steps to raise mileage requirements and the carmakers have returned to solvency with new fuel efficient models. Natural gas data needs to be examined. We need a variety of fuel sources. The ethanol industry has begun and should be maintained, for the possible need of it. Federal funding of Research and Development brought us computer technology and there is more creativity where that came from. Fund universities and create student jobs in R&D, not more administration. The ideas are endless and the solutions to national problems are endless but we need to act before the situation reaches crisis stage.

Another problem is population growth. In these times, increasing population will increase joblessness because there are not enough jobs. Each cadre of workers now averages about 9% unemployment and job creation has just about kept pace with population growth. In revising the tax code, perhaps slowing population growth might be accomplished by allowing only one child deduction per person, with higher taxes to be paid for each additional child, in order to pay for the expensive accommodation of more population when unemployment is high. We cannot afford to increase the population at the expense of the rest of the population, who is supporting the surplus with unemployment benefits and welfare. We are no longer expanding into 'empty' territory: we cannot continue to increase in numbers since we are living in a finite space with finite resources. You cannot infinitely expand in a finite territory. One person has one child tax deduction and must pay higher taxes for more children. The encouragement of childbearing through the tax code should be discontinued as an anachronism. The welfare system also must address this problem, the sooner the better. A school tax for more than one child needs to be implemented, in order for the actual parents to contribute towards the education of more than one child. Who else should pay for it?

I don't like the idea of a flat tax. Taxes should be aimed at the phenomena that actually costs the system as solvency has become a problem. Tort reform comes to mind as well as the tax setup on repossessed properties. I heard that lienholders were not paying property taxes on the foreclosed properties and that the local governments need the cash. How about a huge penalty for these lienholders not paying local taxes? If they hold over a certain number of foreclosed properties, they must pay a tax for the police and fire protection fund? To discourage foreclosure, taxes on foreclosed properties must be paid before delinquency. Taxes can be used to form public policy as well as a source of revenue.

Taxes discourage business creation but the number of other ways to discourage business that exist in our society today are legion and the total adds up to stagnation. The price war conducted by foreign nations has replaced too many jobs and now the stuff they sell is rising in price and quality while our workers sit idle. I read of an instance up in the NE part of the country where an object was manufactured welcomed a foreign observer with samples and was later driven out of business by cheap foreign copies. They have tariffs on our goods but we have no tariffs. I know our consumer has enjoyed the low prices but now the unemployment is causing social unrest and welfare costs. We cannot afford to buy so much overseas and pay benefits and welfare to the unemployed. We need a tax on goods we can make ourselves coming into this country. Tax imports and investors will see an opportunity to create jobs here making something: Cotton/cloth/clothes/linens/canvas......See the job possibilities if the unions can restrain their wage demands. I am for open shop because I always disliked paying into a union that did not represent my political beliefs. It was a violation of my civil rights.

Taxing is a valuable tool if the ones wielding the tool are doing it for the public good and not as a personal favor to their contributors, who may or may not be contributing to the public good, but rather feeding from the tax trough. Maybe I'm talking about corruption here. Like you don't give tax breaks to your friends and lay tax on their enemies. We're not on the playground here. We are attempting to plan for the future and petty reasoning should not be heeded.

So back to doing business in my community, which is hampered by licensing, inspections, rejections, favoritism, zoning, neighborhood associations, cronyism and corruption. The desire of the populace to obey the laws allows the bureaucrats who work for the taxpayers to slow things down. The bigger the bribe the faster the service to allow for business activity? Do you realize what I just wrote? Should all these laws, licenses, inspections etc even exist? These laws must be simplified, because communities need some laws like public health laws but they don't need the level of control that is being exerted in an effort to extract money from businesspeople. First we need enabling legislation to Rezone, then throw out all existing zoning and begin again.

Since the local governments have increased spending by borrowing, which is a deep hole, this mania for getting money from people starting a business has catered to the wealthy chains who can afford all the fees and hoopla. During recessionary times, perhaps a different approach could be tried. The 'upscale' chains are going broke and scaling back because the high unemployment rate has less ready cash in the local system. Less cash out of a job doesn't go even midscale, gravitating toward discount and cheap fast food. Less spending means less tax collected by the city, who prefers raising taxes instead of laying off people, useful or not. Raising taxes means less money in the system because people have to now pay more tax instead of consumer spending generating more sales tax. Sometime, governments are going to have to cut spending. Is it beginning now? Devaluation would make each dollar buy more but there would be fewer dollars. Cash is king again and let the pawnbrokers rule. Americans have accumulated material possessions and perhaps can weather a devaluation and possible shortages of material goods and continued high unemployment.

This Rezoning idea of just starting over and changing all the zoning designations would allow for a fresh approach to economic problems. We need to help set up a way for people to actually open their own tiny businesses in their homes, as a mode of survival if nothing else. Idle hands are the devil's workshop. Forcing people to drive long distances to get groceries is going to be counterproductive as fuel supplies dwindle. If our neighborhoods are already set up with a secondary distribution system in the form of farmers' markets and local Abarrotes, it would be easier to cope with a fuel shortage. Trucking or railing in food is cheaper than every family driving in a car to a grocery store. We need more distribution centers in the neighborhoods. The zoning laws are preventing this survival mechanism and also the development of neighborhood small businesses. Zoning as we know it today should be revised

EL TIRADITO

Hate Speech and Death Threats in Tucson

2011-09-06T08:50:00.000-07:00

Hate Speech or Freedom of Speech?

I am writing this to protest an editorial in the Arizona Daily Star that incites violence by name calling and making insinuations against a specific group. I think this comes under hate speech.

An inflammatory unsigned editorial veted by the Arizona Daily Star viciously connects two unrelated circumstances and then proceeds to flay the Pima County Republican Party for it. Such specious logic would be laughable if such journalistic bias had not resulted in a death threat against Republican candidates and members.

The Star used the following descriptors against the entire Republican Party of Pima County:

"Crass, insensitive, vulgar, displaying a lack of empathy or compassion, dumb-founding, offensive, callous, boorish, thoughtless-all words that would fit." or how about "But Shaw proves again that the county party isn't concerned with the people who lived through the Jan. 8 rampage, the families and friends of those who were killed or the community that has been dealing with the loss and grief."

I think that is an unfounded attack on all Republicans in Pima County and I think this fallacious connecting of our local Republican Party to the Loughner shootings is inciting violence, as evidenced by the recent death threat generated by all the publicity around this vicious linking to the Republican Party. The first paragraph of the editorial mentioned the GOP raffle and the next brought up the Loughner shootings, as if the two were related.

Civility? These individuals are using a tragedy perpetuated by a madman for their own political ends as a smokescreen to cover up all the criminal investigations concerning Rio Nuevo and the city. Whipping up raw emotion and using it to strip the skin from somebody who had nothing to do with it is contemptible. And, according to the Arizona Daily Star, we must have 'done' all this before because 'again' indicates a prior occurrence. I feel they are inciting violence against a particular group.

Such outrage over Glocks: The NRA raffled off Glocks right here in Tucson just last month, Police carry Glocks, Glocks are used in shooting competitions and Gabrielle Giffords owned a Glock. I wonder why the Democrats and the Star didn't take on the NRA about the Glock raffles right here in Tucson a few weeks ago? Was the Pima GOP a better target?

Jeff Rogers, head of Pima Democrats, has been hate mongering and he must think this latest emotional blast over the shootings during elections will get more votes for Democrats. At what cost? Will someone else be shot due to all this hate mongering and insinuations and death threats against Republican members and candidates? I think that Jeff Rogers and the Arizona Daily Star are indulging in hate politics and that the community is being hurt as a result.

It is probably too much to expect an apology or even a cease and desist order, so I find it necessary to call this situation to the attention of law enforcement, due to the death threats against Republicans and their candidates.

Tucson AZ September 6, 2011

USA DOWNGRADED

2011-08-06T15:08:00.000-07:00

Solving problems through use of modern technology

The people need more input into the government, which would be available through the internet on a timely basis. The people could ask questions and vote on proposals via the internet, while their chosen representatives implement policy. This idea would take power from the representatives and senators and give it back to the people.

The current indebtedness is the result of short term thinking, rather than attention to long term planning. The eagerness of the moneylenders to finance our wars and bailouts makes me wonder about what is actually going on. I would not want our military to become mercenary under such conditions. They will not be used to protect foreign mining and commercial interests at taxpayer expense on borrowed money from the one being protected. If such be needed, then they provide it for themselves at their own expense. Long term planning indicates the need for a strong military, perhaps with the prospects of peaceful commerce established rather than active hostilities. The people need to vote on the possibilities for peace.

The idea of voting via the internet on important issues like the debt ceiling hike would allow the people to participate actively. Our elected representatives possibly are thinking of campaign donations rather than what is good for the majority of their constituents. Perhaps if their constituents participated in internet voting on specific issues, the politicians might pay attention to the details.

I wonder if they thought about the COLA on Social Security as a curb on excessive inflation as a tool to reduce debt while printing more money. If they remove that curb, the power of the Federal Reserve will be used to increase inflation. You still get the dime, but its only worth a nickel.

New news today states that Standard and Poore's downgraded the USA to AA+, a result of the continuing spiral into debt. Are these the same people who rated the subprime derivatives as excellent investments worthy of pension funds? Yet I assume that certain standards are to be met concerning these ratings, and assuming they are now actually checking for these standards, then the USA can be rated 'dispassionately'. This hassle occurred on Treasury Secretary Geithner's watch and calls for his resignation are surfacing like sharks.

The Tea Party is right about debt and I applaud those leaders who helped bring this problem to national attention. Maybe the downgrade would have alerted the common person but now continued downgrades in the headwind of slowing economic activity could occur. It is obvious that the continued low interest rate touted by the Federal Reserve is having a negative effect on the economy.

This trend of more and more debt will continue until national bankruptcy unless action is taken to prevent further debt. Term limits in the House and Senate are needed, so those elected will be home to face their neighbors instead of appearing as an icon in Washington for us to admire from afar. Elected members should not have the power to borrow without curbs or without a popular vote. They cannot handle the responsibility. We need to change the law in order to save the government.

Perhaps the 1878 mining law needs revision so that some control over our metals assets is retained for the good of the local economies, putting our metals resources out of reach of foreign interests. Metals are the new currency and the USA needs to conserve and control these resources. It is a matter of national security that we preserve our metals supply, because our civilization depends upon them.

My parting cannon shot is over the bow of the warship Derivatives. Tax reform is coming and these 'investments' that do not create jobs but yet reap huge rewards for the lucky gambler should be taxed at a higher rate like 'unearned income' taxed interest payments. Establish lower taxes for interest payments that come from job creating business paybacks. Higher taxes for the parasites gambling among themselves with the money they absorbed during those heady subprime days. Let's get rid of this corruption by voting those responsible for enabling these schemes out of office.

We need a balanced budget amendment that does not allow borrowed money to be counted as income to use to balance the budget. No accounting tricks, just true income and outgo, no more no less. No more Certificates of Participation to avoid bond elections and no more of selling public buildings for ready cash. The public needs to put some controls on these people. They are squandering our future for ephemeral goals.

If the size of government spending has doubled in the last decade, then it is obvious that this increase is not sustainable at this level. Call it the 'Government Bubble'. The last bubble was the 'Housing Bubble' and now government workers are going to be laid off because there isn't enough tax money to keep them all on the payroll. Adding workers and paying them with borrowed money is a bit risky in the real world.

Now is the time to open up private property for small business use. If government has less money to pay inspectors, perhaps restrictions on the use of private property should be lifted in order to assist people in the need to make a living using the property where they live. Current policy requires people to rent storefronts, provide parking and travel distances to work, so encouraging home based businesses and neighborhood walking paths would benefit the development of small business. If your house is along a walking and bicycle path, then you could sell cold drinks and snacks or you could have a snow cone sale or t shirts and hats or carnitas. I think that a license to have a business catering to foot traffic should be nominal. How about a tiny panaderia just down the street? How convenient is that?

Our society is changing and we need to cease the non adaptive behavior of forcing Tucson residents to drive to get food. Locating food sources near the people would cut down on fuel use and would also create a sense of neighborhood and employ people without having to move them across town. Maybe people would walk more.

Our society can change for the better and there is now an opportunity to make some changes using this debt reduction commission to be quickly formed even though they left town. I want to know who is on the commission and I want to know a date for the first meeting. Deadlines need to be met, the USA is now 'downgraded' and the debt continues to rule.

They need to get back to Washington and get back to work.

Hold the Debt Limit Line

2011-07-30T16:06:00.000-07:00

The debt limit talks show people for what they are. Political gamesmanship amuses the watchers, I suppose. So whatever President Obama and his supporters choose to pay if there is a halt to the borrowing will reveal character and resolve. Insolvency will not be aided by further borrowing. If you have sold the future, what is there to do?

I think the point here is that the present should not have the power to indebt the future until choices narrow to subsistence and debt service. We are at the crossroads of history and rationality as the choice to default moneylenders or default to the people looms over Washington. So far TV business news has mentioned jitters in the Orient and in Abu Dhabi, presumably due to default worries as the USA legislators grind out a compromise guaranteed to please few.

One thing both sides agree on is the need for entitlement reform. You know, like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. The COLA (cost of living allowance) presently in place in Social Security which guarantees a Social Security raise if inflation appears is now to be cut out of Social Security. Since Ben Bernanke's stated policy and objective is to keep inflation at about 2% a year, all Social Security checks are automatically worth 2% less in spending power. In ten years, a Social Security check will decrease in value by 20%. What an easy way to pay off debt! Just make the legal tender of the debt worth less and print more money. Of course, this policy hurts the retired depending on Social Security, but so what? What are these people thinking?

The interest rates might rise if the debt limit is not reached! Smallholders all over the country would celebrate possibly getting something for their CD holdings. Of course inflation erodes further the buying power of the dollars held by the smallholders. The interest rate paid is far less than inflation, so the value of the holding decreases by 2% or more each year due to abysmal interest rates paid, courtesy of the Federal Reserve.

Talk of canceling mortgage interest deductions would forge towards the goal of cutting trillions in deficit spending, they say. So now people looking for a mortgage will have to be told they cannot deduct the cost of the mortgage from your income tax payment. Across the board aimed at homeowners, a handy way to raise cash. It also cuts consumer spending, like other schemes. Cutbacks in Federal spending might be the best way to raise cash you don't have.

I hope our people avoid all the crisis mongering and forge ahead to success in not raising the debt limit. So California has arranged for billions to borrow if the Fed doesn't keep paying them. Sounds like a good idea to me. Self funding for the states. Cutbacks in government jobs are inevitable. And statistics suggest that the trend for the last few years has been to forward the Bush tax cuts on that basis that higher taxes means fewer jobs. I don't think that the data demonstrates that the Bush tax cuts generated any jobs, and indeed presided over massive layoffs and a rise in unemployment and the bailout crisis.

Closing tax loopholes is an interesting option but whose loopholes will be closed? That's when it gets political and choices loop back to who doesn't know what's going on anyway and who does know what is happening and who might give a nice contribution after things are resolved favorably. Closing middle class loopholes won't help the economy. It would cut consumer spending.

Counter by cutting prices, thus more people could buy widgets if they wanted to and more could be sold. But the people making the widgets would get paid less per unit because you are selling them for less....The continuing devaluation of real estate is a true indicator of the economy. It occurred at about a 4% rate last year, close to inflation in fuels and commodities.

More debt will not cure insolvency and avoiding the cutbacks in government spending is futile as the ready cash remains tied in obscure investments that the Plebian could not begin to understand except that the securities markets do not create jobs on the ground making widgets. If you cannot make widgets, you cannot sell them, of course. And if the Chinese make widgets at a quarter the cost of making them here and can ship them for another quarter and still undercut 50% on the dollar, you are out of business because money is tight and people cannot afford to pay more.

Now if the shipping costs rise because fuel costs are gradually rising and the trend is to continue to do so, then shipping costs might outweigh the worth of the goods. Possibly it is not worth shipping some of the Oriental goods due to the cost and the importance of the goods. Do we need to import glass, which is heavy and costs more to ship, when we have glassworks in Ohio and Arkansas and a railroad network for transport? How about keeping our scrap iron here instead of shipping it to the Orient? Smelting it down, refining and making new things would create jobs here and cut down on shipping fuel use.

The more debt there is, the more payments to make and less ready cash after the borrowed lump sum is blown, thus our problem now. Wars already fought, securities already purchased and sold, real estate is deflating and the chickens come home to roost. Politicians indebted the future while some of the old decry the opinions of youth, who must live in the future as it is created now. We must listen to the youth in Congress and bypass name calling and deriding, and remember who voted for what all these years. Accountability is a heavy cloak to wear.

Power is not easily relinquished but age will require it.

RIDING

2011-07-30T16:01:00.000-07:00

RIO NUEVO RIPOFFS INVESTIGATED

2011-07-23T13:28:00.000-07:00

TUCSON CITY NEWS: Rio Nuevo Rundown

The Rio Nuevo Board takes action to uncover the daisy chain of events leading up to the evaporation of the Rio Nuevo dream. It appears that high rollers took most of the money and very little hit the ground for the little guy. Rio Nuevo is a tax rebate program created by the state aimed at encouraging development that would result in increased tax revenue. The construction was to create jobs and the result was to attract consumers.
Since a few well connected individuals made off with most of the money, there were very few jobs and now there are no consumers because the money was blown on multiple designs, trips to Italy for U of A faculty, a useless $700,000 video, and endless cost overruns that were always granted. The rich became richer and the poor had no jobs, yet our tax money paid for all of it.

The problem with Rio Nuevo is that the projections lacked practical vision, leaving the field wide open for charlatans, which I will label any designer who designs something that is so expensive, it can never be built by the employer. Yes, employer. Rio Nuevo hired these people to produce a workable design and they did not do that. Clawback time for sure. Oh, but somebody's feelings might be hurt if they had to refund money for a job not done well. How about limiting design costs for that actually constructed?

This Garfield Traub mess was to be predicted, since they have serial lawsuits recorded all over the country where they sued other cities. I don't know who brought these people in, but they should be thrown out. And as for Sundt not paying his contractors, I say that they be excluded from bidding on government work until they pay up.

So I heard on the John Justice program that this new forensic audit will not only look at the existing paper trail of who was paid what, it will also examine bank records and possible conspiracies centered around the disbursements. Let's remember that all of this took place with the Democrats firmly in control, their lawyer issuing opinions that allowed for payments over the amount of contract to flow unimpeded into the hands of the unscrupulous. The Democrats and their buddies milked Rio Nuevo dry. Just hours from the institution of a new Rio Nuevo Board, the old board borrowed $80,000,000 and disbursed most of it. This money trail has to be followed.

The upcoming city council elections are extremely important. We have a little Napoleon around here by the name of Jeff Rogers, head of the Pima County Democrats. Rogers runs the town and the politicians like a fiefdom, dictating positions and lack of compromise and apparently he supported the Rio Nuevo Ripoff. His people are still in office, still burdening the city with debt and still allowing rampant cost overruns on the streetcar and the bridge. The Democrats are running a lawyer for Mayor, who has deep financial ties to the current city council, which means more of the same for the taxpayers. The Democrats are supporting the unions yet allowing workers to be furloughed in order for workers on overtime to have the empty slots. Are the union honchos grabbing that work for themselves, while the rank and file take furloughs? The Democrats deserve to be voted out of office for corruption and waste.

The primary election for the Mayor and city council is coming up in August. Republicans have two candidates for city council, Jennifer Rawson in Ward 2 and Tyler Vogt in Ward 4. The Republican write in candidate for Mayor is Rick Grinnell. I hope you all write in Rick Grinnell on your mail in ballots for the primary. If enough people write him in, then Republicans will have a candidate on the ballot.

If you are wondering why we don't have a Republican on the ballot when you signed a petition for Shaun McClusky, I'll tell you now. Enough petitions were turned in, but some petitions were signed by two people, which is taboo, according to the elections people. The Democrats challenged Shaun's petitions and they were thrown out because two people signed a few of them. The signatures were valid, but the glitch allowed the Democrats to challenge successfully. It seems to me that the intent of the people who signed the petitions was to have Shaun on the ballot and that the government thwarted the will of the people. The people signed the petitions! I think that a huge write in campaign for Rick Grinnell would reward the Democrats for ignoring the will of the people.

Amendment to Pima County GOP Bylaws

2011-07-08T18:44:00.000-07:00

Amendment to the Proposed Bylaw Change set forth by the Pima County Republican Central Committee

This is the original proposed bylaw change to add Section 5 to Article IV:

An elective officer of the county committee may be removed at any time by a vote to that effect of two-thirds of the precinct committeemen of the county committee elected per the provisions of A.R.S. ~ 16-821 A. and present in person or by proxy at a mandatory or special meeting of the county committee, but an elective officer may not be removed at a special meeting unless his/her proposed removal is set forth in the notice of the call of the meeting as one of the items of business of such meeting. Thirty percent of the precinct committeemen members of the county committee elected per the provisions of A.R.S. ~ 16-81 A. and present in person or by proxy at a mandatory or special meeting called for the purpose of removal of an elective officer shall constitute a quorum.

It is proposed that the following paragraph be inserted behind the above Amendment to the Bylaws:

An elective officer of a Legislative District may be removed at any time by a vote to that effect of two thirds of the precinct committeemen of the Legislative District elected per the provisions of A.R.S. ~ 16-823 C. and present in person or by proxy at a special meeting of the Legislative District precinct committeemen. An elective officer may not be removed at a special meeting unless his/her proposed removal is set forth in the notice of the call of the meeting as one of the items of business of such meeting. Thirty percent of the precinct committeemen of a legislative District elected as per the provisions of A.R.S. ~ 16-821 A. and present in person or by proxy at a special meeting called for the purpose of removal of an elective officer shall constitute a quorum.

(The rationale behind this amendment to the proposed Bylaw Amendment is that many of the Legislative Districts have no mechanism to remove officers, if that does become necessary. This is a situation similar to that of the county GOP, and needs to be rectified. Since the LD officers are elected differently even though they are on the county GOP committee, a different paragraph is needed to cover that eventuality. It also offers a failsafe for the LDs in case of lapses of judgment, infighting, cronyism, sectarianism and false accusations. If the central committee wants power to remove the chair, they should all be subject to the same removal procedure as the Chair.

I think that allowing non precinct committeemen to vote or hold proxies in this election is a violation of some kind that must be investigated. This election is for elected precinct committeemen who hold proxies of precinct committeemen from the same precinct only, not Tom, Dick and Harry. There needs to be some order maintained. If citizens want to vote as a precinct committeeman, then they should run for the office.)

Dorothy Prater Niemi 8 July 2011

Tucson City News Let us eat Cake!

2011-06-18T17:08:00.000-07:00

This Jeff Rogers who is chair of the Pima County Democrats is waging a campaign against the voters of this city. If he manages to disenfranchise all of the Republican voters, he may view that as a victory but it actually shows why lawyers should not be running this country. I always did think that the rules for getting signatures are too fluid. How about a standing number of 200? If 200 people want this person to be in the primary, then so be it. Cancel clean elections and let the primary sort it out. In the mean time, the Democrats seek to prevent legitimate candidates from even being on the ballot. The letter of the law but not the intent of the law.

The intent of the law was never to prevent all candidates but the Democrat candidate from being on the ballot. The intent of the law was to have an orderly election process that prevented unworthy candidates from running for office by requiring citizen signatures of support for the candidate. How about a little reform that would lower and standardize the number of signatures and let everybody pay for their own campaign? If Rothschild is the only candidate of the two major parties on the ballot, I will not vote for those tactics.

Democrat chair Jeff Rogers can be lumped with Clarence Dupnik in his rabid response to the January shootings, blaming his old political foes for that horrible tragedy. Too bad such shortsighted and narrow men remain in power among the Democrats. I sense a possibility of compromise and progress if these roadblocks to creativity are removed.

These Democrat politicians and Mayor Walkup have used and abused the city of Tucson, leaving the taxpayers with a heavy debt of more than $1,200,000,000,000 that these people expended. $1.2 billion in debt with more planned so they can spend and spend. Since Jeff Rogers is suspected to have threatened the Democrat city council members with dire noncooperation from the party if they don't follow his line, I can't help but wonder when his name was on the ballot. It is obvious that he likes shutting out a chosen candidate from the meetings simply because the Democrats have a majority. Our voters are being disenfranchised by the city council who refuses to hear anything from the voters who elected our guy.

I openly call this kind of political manipulation corruption. We don't need any little Kings in this town. Let us eat cake, will he?

I can't help but hope the current investigations bring some corruption to justice. The heat of the summer might bring out the tarantulas. Just shine a light down their holes.

In other news, the RTA is borrowing and must pay back about $150,000,000 plus about $50,000,000 in interest. I don't believe that $50,000,000 in interest was a professed ballot item even though projects that cost far less were on the list. Why has the right of voters to OK borrowing been destroyed? Mr. Hayes is playing fast and loose with tax money in an effort to meet some imaginary deadline, instead of using the ready cash to pay for projects. Mr. Hayes is in such a hurry to start projects, he is wasting fifty million dollars on interest. That's $50,000,000 less to spend on local hiring. I'm tired of these wasteful officials who are not even an elected having the power to indebt the taxpayers. So what will Mr. Hayes cut from the RTA budget when he has to pay back the money with interest? Valencia Road work? It's near the bottom of the list.

Maybe Mr. Hayes can hire more of his inlaws, like he did for the 'Value Engineering' reports for the Grant Road and Houghton Road RTA projects. I asked for these reports in a public information request that was finally answered after repeated e mails. I was told that the reports would not be available until July. That was a month away but Mr. Hayes had assured everyone that money was saved by hiring his inlaws for $89,000 without a bid. Maybe the next time Mr. Hayes has a no bid project, he should hire local. I can hardly wait to see these reports!

Support Republican candidates for Mayor and City Council plus Joe Flores in Ward 1 if you can vote in the Democrat primary. Jeff Rogers has blackballed Joe Flores even in the primary among the Democrats. I guess Joe is a little too independent for the likes of Rogers.

Vote Shaun McClusky, Jennifer Rawson, and Tyler Vogt! Clean up the corruption in city government!

Dorothy Prater Niemi

June 2011

Creeping Corruption in Tucson

2011-06-03T14:47:00.000-07:00

Tucson City News

I am hearing all kinds of stories that are really accusations of corruption if analyzed from a certain perspective.

One story indicates that the 'Central Democrats' have decreed that if a Democrat on the City Council cooperates with the lone Republican, then they can expect to lose official support, use of the phone banks and other resources and will not win the next primary because of the rug jerked off from under them. So does this mean that the city council is controlled by the local Democratic Party honchos? Nobody voted for them. Are the current members of the council really just doing what they are told, instead of what should be in their hearts and minds to help the people of this city?

Was it a lack of moral engagement that resulted in the recent failure to actually balance the budget, relying instead of on 'restructuring debt' and borrowing more cash to get by for another year? Perhaps the honchos at the central office lack the moxie to see that some council members understand more than others and forwarding the foolish and shortsighted is actually a negative for the city. Or are the Democrats hiding yet another scandal like more Rio Nuevo? Advising against needed funding cuts because big Democrats might get a haircut is counterproductive to the goal of actually balancing the city budget.

In elected officials, corruption is allowing others to make decisions that you should study first and then make from your heart and mind. Corruption is allowing others to control you for reasons that have nothing to do with the common good. Whatever happened to altruism? Politics is apparently trumping human kindness and cooperation, particularly among council members. This is uncivil.

Another story has to do with the mayor's and council members' aides meeting like a quasi council meeting to discuss and decide the issues that will be fed to the actual council members. Once again, the lone Republican is left out of this action with no input and no representation allowed. Considering the level of corruption in the Rio Nuevo squandering, perhaps it is time to allow input from a fresh source. This kind of political infighting is despicable and is resulting in huge debts and mismanagement. I call borrowing money to make it through next year a failure.

Several funds need to be examined: The subsidized housing is expensive and I think that the rents should reflect the value of the real estate rented out. I smell a disparity between what the city is now subsidizing and the rental overcharging that is bolstered by city subsidies. I think an investigation is in order. Maybe the city is paying too much out in these subsidies.

How much is the city paying out in insurance? All insurance! This needs to be exposed and documented and then examined as to how to cut those costs, even if old 'friends' are the agents.

Parkwise should be phased out or forced to contribute to the general fund instead of spending all the excess on bureaucrats. The parking is too expensive, the fines too punitive, and the money generated never goes for repairs, like it used to. Of course, if party 'friends' are those bureaucrats, then party honchos can take over and tell you what to do.

These creepy people who are 'legal' but skirt the intent of the law are like the recent expose of the RTA hiring in-laws and avoiding the bid limit by a few dollars. Discretionary spending should all be local, even if needy family members want the work. Sorry guys, the purpose of tax money is not to hire your in-laws or other relatives. I think the lesson in this is that the initiatives should not be allowed to put more than one project in a line item vote. No more massive building programs stretching for 20 years, tying up funds for projects that may not be needed or wanted down the road. We should be able to vote on one project at a time. We are losing our rights to pick and choose through these massive spending initiatives that mandate tax money to go to people who hire their in-laws and relatives to do the jobs. Local people need not apply. I am disgusted with the never ending nest feathering by powerful individuals while the rest of us pay for it and there are no jobs for anyone but insiders. I don't want to pay for it any more.

All city leases need to be reviewed as to their legality and enforceability. Leasing city land for 50 years for a dollar a year is a gift of public funds. All these leases should be cancelled. Patronage like this is not free enterprise and as for the artists, let them compete on the same venue as others. I don't want to subsidize them with a gift of public funds. Any official who assigns a gift of public funds should be fired and investigated as to criminal activity.

Another story is the Tucson Convention Center that is used about 10% of the time and is being subsidized by the city for $6.5 million. Evidently policy favors the use by non-profits over the paying customers. Must be nice not to have to pay for it and be able to choose the best dates before anyone else has a chance. It's nice to have friends to set that up for you. No business will bump paying customers in favor of the freeloaders. I don't want to subsidize freeloaders and run off paying customers. This kind of mismanagement shows me that the ones responsible for this foolish policy should be terminated immediately, the cause being irresponsible fiscal behavior.

How about the Fox Theater? Burdened with debt, the people in charge are in default of $7 million to the city but the city does not want to repossess it. A suggestion has been made that the TCC music hall, the TCC theater and the Fox Theater all be put under one private enterprise that will bring in acts to fill the empty time. Conjecture is that the Fox sublet itself to somebody for 50 years at a dollar a year. Please tell me it isn't so! Can you do that over the top of a $7 million debt? I doubt it. I like the idea of a management group for the three venues but I think they are now charging too much rent to be competitive.

Tucson was never an Aspen or even a Sedona. Tucson was always a competitive town with reasonable rents and freedom to run a business without having to pay officials to allow it. Restore property rights and get rid of most zoning and watch the businesses crop up like Sonoran Hot Dog stands. Now rents are too high due to excess debt on properties sucked dry of profit by the 'equity' people. Lower the price of TCC use and bring in more attractions. Free parking would also aid the financial recovery.

It is time for more retirements and resignations of those who do not treasure fiscal responsibility. Hopefully our pension system will not be burdened with double dipping, in case any of them want to return in another capacity.

Dorothy Prater Niemi 1 June 2011

Border Issues

2011-05-26T16:11:00.000-07:00

Analysis of the few days from Penasco to Tucson after a nice vacation.

The economy of Rocky Point is suffering due to the lack of tourism from the USA. It's a beautiful resort with fine seafood and reasonable accommodations. We stayed at La Roca, where Al Capone liked to vacation, safe behind rock walls. We saw many Mexican tourists but few from the USA. It seems to me that it would be beneficial to have a citizen presence there.

We used to have the freedom to cross the border without writing to our government first, but now that hassle and expense discourages economic activity along the border. Nogales, Arizona used to have more shops and trade. Nogales, Sonora has decreased USA economic activity. Remember, we import excellent food from Mexico. Railroad traffic should be increased but so should the local border traffic. I don't know why some of that money spent on the Border Patrol loungers and cruisers sixty miles from the border can't be used to expedite the border crossings at the Nogales Port of Entry. Shift the funds and personnel to the actual border to facilitate local economic activity.

The Debt Limit

2011-04-18T15:34:00.000-07:00

Unions have taken a back seat to the hassle over the debt limit. Both remain of interest and the topics are related.

I begin with the debt limit problem. The original purpose of the debt limit was to limit debt. I don't know what the purpose of the debt limit is now but that it must be constantly be raised so the nation will function, according to those in the know. A contradiction. Ultimately, the nation cannot function with too much debt, so the debt must be limited, like our founders intended.

It appears that Treasury Secretary Geithner is threatening no payments to seniors if the debt limit is not raised. The crass idea that our citizens will go wanting while moneylenders must be paid seems to dominate. The moneylenders must be paid so that they will lend more money so they must be paid. What is wrong with this picture?

Donald Trump might have the right idea about China when he criticizes sweetheart deals for Chinese interests and the Chinese currency manipulations. Perhaps some of the past disparities among the currencies could be remunerated with debt credits, as a beginning negotiation point for continued payments of any kind.

Time for real negotiations, like Mr. Trump says.

And on to the topic of unions, much in the news lately. Governors are concerned that union demands are bankrupting the state and local jurisdictions. It appears that the aura of corruption extended to politicos who signed deals with unions that were financially unsustainable but I got mine, so what? Responsibility must be laid at the door of those elected officials who caved into union demands without the financial wherewithall to maintain payments to individuals. Borrowing is rife and the unions support the borrowing culture because they get more jobs now and fewer later and overall but so what? Short term thinking seems to be the leader of this crew.

The idea that clerical workers for the state need do or die union representation is ludicrous. Miners need that kind of representation, not paper pushers. The hazardous occupations need union representation and collective bargaining should come in if the members voluntarily join a union in response to poor working conditions. Mining is one of those occupations where the workers need protection from poor working conditions, like unsafe shafts. Police and Fire might need union representation if chronically understaffed, for instance. Requiring workers to join a union is a violation of workers' civil rights. Unions should arise in response to a need in the workplace, not be mandated 24/7. As of now, unions are controlling substantial required contributions from workers, which is money workers might like to spend elsewhere if they had a choice.

Get rid of the government worker unions. I don't want unions controlling any aspect of the government, including when and where workers will strike and shut the government down. Public employees and others like teachers have a responsibility to keep the schools and government functions open. OSHA should be sufficient for job safety requirements.

Now back to how unions and the debt limit are intersected: government unions encouraged the growth of pay levels beyond that of the private sector while relying on tax money to pay for it. The more, the merrier, except that the recession hit and the tax take shrunk and each worker now takes a higher percentage of the whole than before. In other words, there are too many workers at too high pay working for the government. The SunTran runs empty buses instead of cutting the number of runs on a route because of an agreement with the union not to cut jobs. So now the fares are raised and the poor pay for the extra runs. Would they rather pay less for fewer bus runs?

This story could go on and on but the idea is there to extrapolate: The entire nation is debt ridden. Moneylenders rule and the tax money is earmarked for however long the funding source lasts. The cash is long gone but the debt remains. Encumber your income sources and you have less cash to work with. It seems so logical but now this debt service obligation has blown everybody's mind with the implications for our immediate future. How much of the borrowed money is squandered?

For example, the Regional Transportation Authority is a tax on the populace. This money is to be used for a list of projects, yet millions are being used for a purpose never listed on the voting descriptor. The voters never voted to spend millions of the RTA money on interest payments. The use of the RTA funding for any other purpose than is what is on the ballot material is not legal, yet millions are wasted on interest payments. The RTA will sunset earlier than intended because the income will be gone or tied up in interest costs. The Rio Nuevo revenue stream is committed from now until 2025, which sunsetted the economic activity more than a decade before the revenue stream ends. Politicians should not be allowed to encumber every revenue stream available to the government. Why are they able to indebt the tax money without a vote of the people? Tucson Water owes half a billion dollars yet borrowing continues with spending having little to do with improving water quality or service. Are there no limits to the use of money derived from borrowing from Tucson Water? They raise water rates in order to finance this borrowing.

The cycle of borrowing has to end somewhere. The myriad brokers, unions and hangers-on are getting too expensive and the moneylenders and gamblers rule the halls of government.

Winter Storm over Tucson

Tucson City Council Election is Important

2011-04-04T00:30:00.000-07:00

Corruption in Government

I am amazed by the mistakes made by those in governance that might be construed as corruption by the less forgiving or possibly the more discerning.

The focus of government has been a bit wider than our founders had envisioned, leaving the people with less rights than the our original countrymen with all those free resources. Population pressure has reduced our property rights to a travesty defined by HOAS, zoning laws and ordinances. Apparently, monies collected by the government goes to keep the municipal necessities like police, water, fire, health and keeping the roads open. These departments in some cases have grown beyond the basic functions not defined by the Arizona Constitution or city charters.

During boom times, these excess functions were easily funded yet commitments were not sunset or phased out in case of an economic downturn. The debt load for Tucson ballooned to $1,200,000,000 due and payable through 2035. Tax collections are down, yet the borrowing proposals are still seriously considered.

Is excessive borrowing and spending corruption? This is a red flag, a warning of the follies of letting short term politicians indebt taxpayers. Some projects are built like the downtown fire station, a beautiful functional building. Other projects are planned and graded and never built, yet the debt remains. Other projects are not worth the money spent but the debt remains. Of course, there is no money for other projects because of the huge debt service owed. A few short term politicians tied up a huge chunk of Tucson's prosperity for years to come with little to show for it except a few well padded moneylenders, consultants and developers. Parking lots stand empty while they feverishly build more parking garages.

The sad thing about this is that Tucson actually needs a new museum to add to the tourist attractions. The ineptness and corruption ripped off the citizens. A funding instrument called a Certificate of Participation is available to borrow huge sums without the annoyance of a bond election. The City of Tucson has over $200,000,000 in COPS and the money is long gone but the debt lingers. I think the Arizona Legislature should institute a ban on these COPS, because it subverts the intent of the bond election law. Another problem is the 'bundling' used by the RTA to pass a blanket bond issue featuring wildly unpopular pork items sandwiched in with vote getting proposals. I suggest that each proposal be voted on in turn, but the bulk of these projects can be done by private enterprise rather than keeping an army of roadbuilders on the payroll all the time. Since the RTA is short of money, we need to revote on the proposals, one at a time. The RTA also stated in election literature that they were responsible for moving utilities for all RTA projects, but now they want the city to pay for that very expensive work when the city is bankrupt. We can be taxed twice for the same work, evidently.

An investigation into bidding practices, cost overruns, and the chain of command leading to disbursements of funding must be undertaken. Vicious cost overruns are what sunk so many of the Rio Nuevo projects, where accountability was lax. What happened to performance bonds? Don't contractors sign to perform a job for a defined amount? How much chance did actual bidders have of landing contracts if they bid actual cost plus a profit?

There's a skunk under the porch, folks. I am waiting for Attorney General Tom Horne to smell it.

I think the skunk had skunklets. Tucson Water is already in debt for almost half a billion dollars, yet spending for the streetcar demands a rate hike for the users, who will pay $10,000,000 to move water lines for a streetcar. The RTA is millions in the hole, yet plans to borrow funds to meet deadlines are actually being considered, which would cost about $40,000,000 in interest, paid out of sales taxes. The roads would get none of this interest money. What a waste. Why not prorate the spending? Of course the favored contractors don't want this slower, smaller feed into their coffers. So hire smaller contractors on shorter term contracts. What is the hurry? The taxpayers cannot afford more debt.

I think the problem goes beyond power and influence into the realm of what can be done to assist the City of Tucson to get through this recession that remains in effect despite what the economic pundits say. The cronyism, patronage and outrageous financial commissions and debt load have made Tucson into a difficult place to do business.

A Tea Party Anyone?

RTA Spending Plan

2011-03-09T10:04:00.000-08:00

What is wrong with the RTA Spending Plan?

The current estimated cost of all the projects must be made. The projected income from the half cent sales tax must be made. The two figures must be compared. The termination date of the RTA must be discussed as a reality deadline and not something that will get even more money eventually. This RTA thing should be finished at the sunset date: this means any debt and the projects.

It is obvious that paper compliance is more important than the reality of what revenue the RTA is expected to generate and what the community can afford from these tax monies. Going in debt because 'scheduled' projects are projected to cost so much more than will actually be generated is both costly and foolish.

Poor planning.

Practicality would indicate that a spending pattern based on what is actually generated per month would be adopted. Just starting a project with no funds to finish it is not "compliance" with what the voters thought they were getting; it is a waste of money. Voters need to revote on the RTA. Why is this illusory 'compliance' so important? Could they lose their revenue stream due to nonperformance?

Since they are non compliant, perhaps voters should decide how this remaining RTA money should be spent. The RTA people want to go into debt, which would add $35 million to the cost of these projects they just want to get started on. Taxpayers cannot afford any more public debt that ties up future revenue streams in debt service. The cities need more ready cash from local taxes, not more encumbrances that suck a 35% profit out of local taxpayers, reducing the value of the tax dollar to 66%. Moneylenders will walk away with $35 million out of this community. We cannot afford this just to hurry up and get started.

Reduce the scope of projects. Focus on the project with the most safety concerns or focus on funding sidewalks, bike paths, bus pullouts and all those things that actually benefit the citizens. How about a nice bike path that could be used for the Bicycle Tour and others and then by the locals? This would be a tourist draw, useful for locals and affordable, according to actual RTA revenue, not borrowed cash that ties up cash for years to come. A nice safe Tour track winding all around Tucson would be a boon to the community.

What I am really saying here is that the RTA projects need to be rethought now, not after the RTA borrows and squanders $135 million in tax money, leaving behind an interminable debt. We never voted to give away a third of the money to moneylenders. We voted for the money to be spent on the projects. Since they obviously cannot afford to complete all the projects, let's forget them and start over. Take it to the voters in the next election. In the meantime, slow the spending and collect the funds as they come in. No more borrowing. Contract only for what funding actually exists.

Come up with some projects that would benefit the community, bring in seasonal tourism, open up small business zoning, and encourage the use of bicycles and buses around town. Revamp the bus system by creating bus centers in shopping malls and near medical facilities and the University. Repair existing roads. Stop the RTA from wasting money on beginning projects they don't have the money to finish.

I call for a forensic audit of the RTA planning and spending. The RTA appears to be following the same reasoning and actions that the Rio Nuevo boondoggle followed. The Tucson City Council and Pima County need to revisit the RTA election promises and get started on a logical action plan that does not further indebt the taxpayers.

According to Councilman Steve Kozachik, the planned borrowing by the RTA will result in $50 million of taxpayer money going to moneylenders for interest. The new fire station cost $38 million, just to give you an idea of what this borrowing is costing the Tucson community. You can add the new fire station and the new parking garage downtown as an example of what $50 million taxpayer dollars will buy. The city of Tucson cannot afford to lose $50 million just because the RTA is behind schedule.

We need a revote on the RTA projects because not enough money will be generated to pay for them and they are behind schedule. The hierarchy of the RTA has also said that a $9 million project that now will cost $22 million is what the voters wanted. Their callous attitudes towards cost overruns and taxpayer money is blatantly obvious.

I call for an audit and a commitment to deny further cost overruns on RTA projects. If bidders cannot meet their bid, then call in their bond and get somebody else.

Support Governor Walker!

2011-02-21T09:29:00.000-08:00

Thoughts on the Hassle in Wisconsin

I retired from a career as a public school teacher and thus may some say I am biased. I am perhaps more knowledgeable because of the time spent on duty, not biased.

Being a teacher brings with it more responsibilities than meets first perusal. You have to be there in lieu of guardianship and you are legally responsible for those students. You have temporary custody of them. Being a teacher is a complex job, much of which has nothing to do with the actual curriculum you are charged to teach.

Are teachers paid enough? May I ask if prices are too high? Is it the same question?

Frankly, I am embarrassed by the actions of many teachers in Wisconsin. They even want to be paid for demonstrating. Some are apparently collecting phony doctors notes excusing them to get a sick day when they were not sick. These doctors should lose their license and teachers who claim the phony sick leave should be fired. What are these 'teachers' teaching the students? That it is ok to commit fraud for a cause? That it is ok to demand that you join a union if you want to work? You have to join my gang or you can't work here.

The unions are fighting the end of this forced servitude. The unions will lose money when people have a choice on whether to join a union or not. How much are union dues? How much was lost in the new contract? What is the difference? Maybe the teachers can exercise their right to free choice on what organizations will collect dues from their paychecks and save money that way. It's all about freedom from being forced to give money to an organization. The unions are afraid to lose this money: they might lose their jobs. These teachers who are demonstrating are attempting to force union membership on everyone else. They already conceded that they would pay more of their own pensions and benefits.

I call for law and order. The teachers should go back to work or face immediate termination. The cowardly legislators who fled their responsibilities should return and face the budgetary problems. The governor does not want to lay off teachers but the union would prefer layoffs to this new agreement that cuts off mandatory union membership. I never liked mandatory union membership, having worked under it in California. All it generated was a few puffed up individuals going to conferences on money I was forced to contribute. And of course, the union I was forced to join made very public political choices that were against my own political beliefs. The teachers of Wisconsin would be better off without this expensive yoke around their necks. The unions cost too much money.

Part of my hassle about unions, is the lack of responsibility for any consideration of the long term results of any demands they make. If they can get some craven public servant to agree to outrageous demands that are unsustainable, they believe they are successful. Success in the short term that decimates long term practicality is not success: it is irresponsible. If the current union bosses set up huge pensions and cheap benefits for themselves with minimal personal donations, Bell California comes to mind. Clawbacks!

The public servant who agrees to an unsustainable pension plan should be sued for stupidity. I see these people gain public office, run up the public debt, agree to DOA pension plans, and let the unions run the government like their own cash cow. I do believe the situation in Wisconsin is a microcosm of the problems in our nation today.

I was looking over a federal grant application and noted that the 'affiliated unions' for the proposed project must be listed and guaranteed. All this in Arizona, a right to work state. Why must the Feds guarantee union control of all jobs using federal money? Who set that up? The federal money is derived from federal taxes paid from Arizona, so why does the federal government have the right to tell us how to spend the funding?

It's probably obvious by now that I do not support the anti-government demonstrators. They are anti-government and pro-union and I do not want a union takeover of any state government. Take a look at the states: union demands, pension problems, debt and insolvency. Does that sound like the automakers? Does that sound like we need to support Governor Walker of Wisconsin? Yes it does.

Creating Wealth and Paying Off Gambling Debts

2011-01-27T11:06:00.000-08:00

I don't know what all the Dodd/Frank regulation is, but I do know that investors have been gulled into thinking the subprime slippery interest rate mortgages were well documented legitimate loans made by a morally responsible lender. Something needs to be done, like a reorganization of the regulatory apparatus first as the new rules are implemented. Possibly the regulatory problems are related to the structure and hierarchy of the departments, which has apparently fallen victim to incompetency or bribery or indifference to what actions would produce positive results for the economy. What was the true mission of the regulators?

Tax reform should be accomplished in conjunction with this new regulation. Tax those 'investments' that throw the money back and forth way up above that never hit the ground in the form of jobs. Derivatives, mortgage securities, credit default swaps and the like should be taxed at an extremely high rate due to the damage done to the economy and the rise in unemployment. Regulation of them should demand transparency and extensive documentation every time they are sold or insured, like a performance audit of every component.

Reform of the institutionalized government agencies is necessary to implement Rep. Paul Ryan's suggestion that the government must be downsized. Downsizing will not take place without reform of the structure of the bureaucracy. It is interesting that President Obama and Rep. Paul Ryan made the same suggestion, coming at it from other directions. This is an opportunity for bipartisanship.

A down-sizing of the debt load needs to be a focus, by whatever means necessary.

Due to the world situation, cutbacks to the military seem unwise. A reduction in spending can occur as the two wars wind down, but our military is vital to our continued existence and should not be downsized. Full numbers military plus more high tech R&D. Tech is not a replacement for sheer numbers. Expensive, yes. Our military should cut out waste and frivolity.

The space program should be funded for the R&D and jobs and the possibility of lucrative mining ventures on the moon and asteroids. Public and private investment in interplanetary research is integral to world security and international cooperation in this research is needed now. Military outposts in space are crucial.

Long range planning must confront the possible futures of a closed world with a population explosion and increasingly scarce resources and the painful need for sustainability planning in a finite space. Not that infinite space exists, but there is more next door, complete with exploitable resources and presumably no competition other than among ourselves. I hope the USA stakes claim to the best ore deposits but it won't happen if we don't fund more exploration, manned and unmanned. Stuck here or out there exploring, these are the choices.

Create more wealth with more material resources. Colonize the local habitats, then aim for the stars. Any other vision turns us to dust.

TUCSON EQUINOX 2010

How Americans can Honor Representative Gabrielle Giffords

2011-01-18T12:15:00.000-08:00

Representative Giffords supports and believes in the space program of the United States of America. Her husband is an astronaut on leave to be with his wife.

We as Americans should pledge our support for the exploration of outer space. Republicans and Democrats working together can help push through an expansion of the current space program that would also create jobs and encourage private investment in developing mining and other business opportunities off planet.

Our economy needs rare earth minerals, titanium and other riches to be found. We already landed on an asteroid and the moon and Mars and bits of our work are probably on the surface of Venus. We have had success. Cooperate with the other technological leaders to create new enterprises. Space Exploration is now our Manifest Destiny.

To honor Gabrielle Giffords, Americans can support her dreams of space exploration and her love of this country. Let us all work together to create a new world of hope and jobs in space exploration. Let us help give Gabrielle Giffords something she knows is important: an expanded space program.

RTA Boondoggle

2010-12-26T14:04:00.000-08:00

So now the RTA, Rio Nuevo, TCC, and Tucson are all broke! And the only way RTA can see to get out of the hole is to borrow against the tax money they control. This is not a new story: the taxpayer funded activities around here are all wallowing in debt with little to show for it. Let's cut these bums out of control and force accountability for the use of that money.

If RTA has mismanaged and overspent, then halt the spending and put the projects on hold to join the Rio Nuevo projects in limbo. Borrowing huge sums so the same people can get their hands on the money to spend it capriciously on more inflated projects seems like an exercise in futility. The idea that projects need to be merely begun, and not funded in entirety, is a foolish way to do business. If there is any actual money left, let it be spent on public safety projects for local use. No more cross town freeways for outsiders to use: let's spend what is left on local projects hiring local people.

No more borrowing. The dollar value is cut by 40% usury charges, which creates a huge debt for this community to complete boom inspired projects. Whatever the promises were, what money that can be spent will be received as it comes in. Create an RTA fund and when that fund is large enough to proceed with completion of a project, then begin again.

The money is not there. Accept the fact and scale back operations until times get better. Fund ongoing street repairs and small projects out of the incoming revenue. Debt only delays the realization that the money is not there, it just sets taxpayers up for a deal where the money is blown now but the debt must be paid for years and years, during which time there will be no money for anything else. Now, if we can wait out the recession without debt, then times will be better much faster. It sounds like the RTA is planning on using up Pima County's credit rating to borrow huge sums. Pima County Supervisors might be interested in this angle.

I'm sorry about the jobs we are talking about here. Putting projects on hold deals with fiscal reality but real people work those jobs. The incremental funding jobs in RTA would keep some jobs, retirements could be encouraged, and attrition will account for some. I do believe that the unemployed need retraining programs tied to unemployment benefits and perhaps the unions would be interested in funding some of this.

Dorothy Prater Niemi

Modern Streetcar Stimulus?

2010-12-14T14:01:00.000-08:00

In Tucson, Mayor Walkup is once again in a hurry to get another grant that must be supported by borrowed money. We should all stampede to the fore to protect this 'opportunity' to indebt the taxpayer through encumbering the RTA revenue stream and the Tucson general fund, thereby increasing the debt service and interest charges. If the RTA borrows $88 million, then over $100 million must be paid back, thereby diluting the material buying power of the tax dollar they are spending. No telling what kind of deal the city would make on new 'Certificates of Participation' or 'grant anticipation notes', which would further indebt the general fund.

So the bottom line is that they want to borrow money to build a system that will not be self-sufficient in operating costs. Mr. LaHood has evidently sabotaged the stimulus by paying grant money into projects that will not be self sufficient or profitable when they are completed. In the case of the city of Tucson, which is reportedly $54 million in deficit for 2011 and is paying about 30+% of total income as debt service, more debt cannot be tolerated. SunTran must also be subsidized and this new streetcar project would just add another increase to the deficit. The city of Tucson does not need more revenue streams tied up and diluted nor does the city need more debt service drain on the inadequate general fund. What next? Laying off police and fire to subsidize this streetcar? The city already wants to raid $14.5 million from the street repair fund to build another bridge over the Santa Cruz for the streetcar. Our streets need maintenance. Spending $178 million on a project that is of questionable economic benefit seems out of place in this economic climate. The city cannot afford more debt.

RTA money is obtained county wide, yet this streetcar project will not improve the economy countywide. Economic benefit will be limited to a few landowners and businesspeople along the route, which will cost more than $50 million per mile, with the RTA funding covering half the cost. This is not a judicious use of RTA funds. I remember a long list of funded projects, of which this modern streetcar was not one detailed, but existed only as part of a list of possible projects. $88 million is a bite out of RTA projects elsewhere and even more money would be lost to interest payments on $88 million in debt.

Possibly another grant could fund local projects, rather than using our tax money to fund jobs in Oregon. We need local stimulus money to stay local, not force us into borrowing in order to get the money in order to buy streetcars made elsewhere. We need jobs here and less debt.

I have an alternative proposal. Put buses or vans on this proposed streetcar route. Bulldoze a road through the Santa Cruz to mimic the use of the proposed bridge and send the buses over it. Connect it all up now with increased transit and just see the economic activity along the proposed route. If this deal is truly about moving people along this route, let's do it now and try it out. Revamp the bus pullouts or make new ones and get busy moving those people. We need a bus stop right by that new UA classroom complex! Stop talking about this proposed route and get it on! Modifications to little used routes could pick up the cost. Put those expensive teamsters to work on this people moving project.

HELP THE UNEMPLOYED!!!!!

2010-12-06T11:18:00.000-08:00

Unemployment in perpetuity?

Unemployment at 10% is caused by:

• population increase

• money concentrated in 'financials' instead of production

• dumping of foreign consumer goods on US market

• 2% of population has 25% of the wealth

• borrowing has lessened since subprime boom

• taxes favor financial losses

• foreclosures and devaluation of housing to pre boom levels

• credit card use is down due to increased standards

• cities and states are debt ridden to the maximum

• the federal government is debt ridden and in deficit spending

• insurance costs are out of control

• medical costs are out of control

• local taxes are up

Certain industries related to construction have been hit harder during the recession. Jobs overall are scarce, with work to be found in medical services and internet related businesses, among others.

The long term unemployed need to find new professions. I remember when the mines closed down and left many workers stranded. The government offered job training classes to these displaced workers, giving them a chance to get off the dole and back into the workforce. A friend laid off at the mine south of Tucson took this opportunity to become a skilled diesel mechanic. Why can't workers now be offered an opportunity to change professions?

A long term unemployed person signing up for this program would continue unemployment benefits. Success would continue benefits until the program was complete. Non attendance would cut off benefits.

Enrollment in programs should be limited to certain growing professions. For example, a program in construction management would not be eligible for funding due to a glut of workers in that profession. A program in website construction would be eligible because work in that area is growing.

A further caveat would require that the school providing the training would not be paid unless the student successfully completes the class, with a final payment due upon completion of the program. This would prevent the schools from getting the money upfront, which lessens their responsibility to the student. If the student fails, the school is not paid!

I think that the long term unemployed would leap at the chance at a retrain themselves and give themselves a chance in this new tight job market. The nation cannot afford to have 10% of our workers on the public dole and a simple program to reeducate these workers would give hope to distressed workers.

My program suggestion has several important aspects:

• Workers have a chance to reeducate and get off unemployment

• Schools have an infusion of students and money into their programs

• More money is circulating

Tax Policy as an implement of change

2010-11-18T11:58:00.000-08:00

Tax Policy as an implement of change

A short term tax source would be the taxing of the original mortgage lenders on all foreclosures and the taxing of the foreclosing party, as the empty homes are a blight to neighborhoods and make problems for local law enforcement. Local economies should tax vacant houses at a higher rate, due to the extra costs. All tax hikes go on the foreclosing parties, not the people being ousted. The idea here is to discourage bad loans at the inception, and collect taxes on the problems loans all down the line.

Another idea would be to discourage non producing investments like mortgage backed securities and ETFs, that tie up money and produce nothing except commissions and dividends. Tax the profits from these kinds of investment at a high rate and tax the losses also, as a drain on the system. No more tax credits for losses from non producing investments, real or fabricated. The government is rewarding these non good or service producing investments with tax breaks. The government even covered their losses with tax funded bailouts, instead of refunding to the original investors, who took a loss. There were other ways to prop up the pension funds.

Long term tax policy as a remedy for economic problems could include stabilizing population growth as a remedy for high unemployment. Lately the numbers of jobs available has not kept up with population growth, resulting in high unemployment rates and many unemployed young people.

Perhaps the tax policy should state 'one dependent per one adult' instead of huge tax breaks for people who have many children. Having more children actually costs the system, the schools, welfare, busing, meals, and other subsidies. Limiting the dependent credit to one per one would tend to discourage large families. The same would go for school tax credits and tuition subsidies. Manifest Destiny is certainly over and more population growth plus high unemployment will damage the prosperity of the citizenry.

As for the economic model that demands ever increasing growth for success is surely in for a disavowal as populations become more dense and physical supplies are strained or tenuous. Tax policy could slow down this 'population infill' before we have people living in doorways. Too many people are broke and unemployed while the amount of money the mega wealthy controls has ballooned.

Current tax policy uses the IRS as an arm of welfare, giving 'returns' to people who did not earn them like a once a year Santa. I suppose that gratis payments to low income people is easier to do this way than it would be if the legislative process were used to authorize these payments. It also attracts less political publicity. Payments to these people should be limited to one per one.

So now the IRS is to be used as an arm of insurance companies to force people to buy private health insurance? If the IRS is checking on this, then it must be a tax that you will be punished if you do not pay, just like income tax. A tax imposed on us by private companies is not sound policy. I am hearing stories of people who have to buy high deductable insurance because it is cheaper and then still don't get health care because they can't afford it. Anything to keep the IRS off your ass, right?

More on tax policy later.

REVISE TAX CODE

2010-11-13T12:32:00.000-08:00

1. Exchange-Traded Fund (ETF) Definition

Exchange-Traded Fund (ETF) - Definition of Exchange-Traded Fund (ETF) on Investopedia - A security that tracks an index, a commodity or a basket of assets ...

www.investopedia.com › Dictionary -

Exchange-Traded Funds are being discussed as the next scam like the mortgage backed securities debacle. It looks like another way to make money without investing in material jobs. This kind of investment does nothing to add to the economy, except for a few receiving commissions and a few receiving dividends. Money tied into these second tier investments produces no jobs, creates nothing material and freezes money out of circulation.

Carnival barkers rule. Taxes pick up their losses. Perhaps losses in investments that produce no jobs or material goods should not be tax deductable, which would discourage the practice. The prevention of future bailouts for these kinds of manipulative non producing funds must be a priority. Those subprime losses and the 'securities' losses should not even be tax deductable but instead were subsidized with tax money. Maybe these kinds of losses in 'non producing' investments should be taxed as a burden to the rest of the economy. Profits from non-producing investments should be heavily taxed also, in an effort to capitalize on and discourage non-producing investments.

Fannie and Freddy and any other of those who subsidize non producing investments like mortgage backed securities should lose funding. If the mortgage brokers go broke so be it. These people cannot control monetary policy and tax policy and all that would benefit them.

Our nation is becoming a playground for the rich for whom it is apparently easier to avoid messy investments that actually result in jobs producing something. Too much in the hands of the few did not bode well for other nations.

I think it is far too easy for politicians to put governmental agencies in debt to give tax money to special interests who were making risky investments. That is not capitalism: It is parasitism. Tax the ass off these people and those non producing investments. Tax the original lender if a home is foreclosed, as it increases welfare and homeless. Tax the owner of record of a foreclosure at a higher rate than residents, because the empty house requires increased police patrols. Provide tax incentives for keeping the homes in the hands of the buyers, instead of tax incentives for eviction.

Tax policy is a tool and should not be a weapon. We need to work together to solve economic problems that are causing unemployment and scarcity of money. Stop passing the bubble around like a hot potato and let those who profited from the fraud fed bubble take the losses. Why not create tax policies to achieve this aim?

What kind of capitalism is being promoted by these archaic tax policies that reward making bad loans and eviction and tying up money? Special interests bailouts will make this monetary system a reversion to the wealthy oligarchies of the past where the masses are expected to absorb fewer jobs and a tax hike while more money is concentrated in the hands of a few? Taxes on the upper echelons should be increased, with easing provided for increasing employment in local sustainable businesses. Spending on increasing infrastructure should be avoided, with infrastructure maintenance to be encouraged as a source of jobs, but not the only designee for funding. The kinds of businesses that should be funded are those that build up a continuing business for example like a sewing business that imports fabric, sews it into something salable, sells it locally at a reasonable price that competes. Flip side would be that Pima cotton is once again grown here, thread is spun here, cloth made here, sewn here, sold here and elsewhere if there is a surplus. Pima cotton used to be famous and cotton seed oil is a commodity. This is an example of what could be accomplished. A cottage copper industry would create more long term jobs than a huge short term mining operation. Sustainable jobs should be the focus of tax break investments.

ADVICE TO THE POLITICIANS: GET BUSY AND MAKE SOME TAX CHANGES THAT BENEFIT MAINSTREET!

The Rio Nuevo Debacle

2010-11-07T13:58:00.000-08:00

Rio Nuevo Rundown

The issue of management must be addressed when considering the decisions made by the Rio Nuevo Board and the Tucson City Council and Mayor as of the TIF time period from inception to Q4 2010.

As of 2010, $230,000,000 was spent: $156,682,160 was spent as mostly borrowed cash on capital projects, of which most are grossly incomplete and another $70,000,000 was blown on other 'costs'. Future money was encumbered at an average interest of close to 50%, cutting in half the material value of the dollars invested in jobs and projects.

In 2010, Rio Nuevo spent over $15,000,000 on debt service of which $6,200,000 went for interest on five debts incurred by Rio Nuevo and passed by the City Council. The TIF revenue of $9,322,000 did not cover this payment. This huge debt payment is not covered by the total revenues of $13,000,000, even though the income from the TCC is also encumbered. Reserves of borrowed money are being used to make up the difference.

Using this train of fact, perhaps it is time to question the decision making that occurred that produced this unfortunate situation. The individuals involved were quite interested in possessing borrowed cash to pay out. They were so motivated to get the cash; they agreed that taxpayers would pay 50% interest. This reduces the value of the tax dollar by half. The moneylenders get half and the Rio Nuevo handlers get half and the taxpayers get to pay for it. Is this mismanagement?

I know the scheme was that the boom would be endless and properties would continue to escalate and the tax money would continue to flow and grow. Debts would be smaller because of increased value in equity. Instead, a recession intervened and closed the party down. Property is down only 40% if you're lucky and commercial and housing sits empty. Tucson is not booming. Tucson just turned down a tax hike for the city. Tucson has a history of real estate booms and busts. Was I the only one in town who knew this?

Poor decisions and a recession that was foreseeable by many of the cautious has put Tucson in the category of the family who just bought a new car and home and then lost their jobs. Default, anyone?

But it's not just the borrowing and spending, it's the way the cash was spent. According to the Rio Nuevo audit, the Rio Nuevo handlers played fast and loose like a sailor on shore leave with a pocket of cash. Evidently no spending plan existed beyond borrowing the future proceeds of the TIF and TCC and setting up payment plans. No attempt was made to pay for work incrementally. Everybody dreamed big but not in enough detail to actually fund most projects that were begun. Evidently, the spending was dictated by whim or friendship, instead of what could be afforded. Rio Nuevo would now need $449,530,501 and more to complete the projects they began.

This scattershot approach resulted in millions of dollars wasted. I call this mismanagement. Even if the recession had not intervened, it would have been difficult to raise enough money to finish what they started. Looney tunes seems rational compared to this.

The Rio Nuevo audit revealed that few projects were actually completed. The Fox Theater restoration was completed but the operation of the theater is not profitable. The 'Presidio' generates no income. That brings me to another consideration. Apparently the TIF spending was supposed to be an economic stimulus. Projects should be revenue generating. Projects should not be infrastructure or housing. This was not a 'living space' project where housing is created and tenants pay rent and buy needs from area stores which generates tax revenues. The Rio Nuevo was supposed to be a new arena/stadium that held important big events, raised the cultural opportunities of locals and generated fat tax revenue. However, instead of focusing on the big event facility, a series of other derailments took place, with the money going to a hokey film and other frivolities that did nothing to create revenue. The tacking on of a glassy entrance to TCC did nothing to enhance revenue but did result in a substantial debt was a bad business decision. Architects collected millions in tax money. How about paying architects as the project is built, on an incremental basis? If the structure is not built, no payee to architect. We have been taken to the cleaners. We have no new arena nor do we have a world class museum, but we now have cash happy architects and outlandish designs and an out of state filmmaker has $800,000 in tax money. Is this mismanagement?

What happened to the bid process required by law? Why was this Rio Nuevo video not put out to bid? The city and Rio Nuevo paid the bills for this film so it should have been put out for bid. If the bid process was violated, the city charter says that those responsible will be removed from office. If more laws were violated, this should come to light. It has been suggested by the Rio Nuevo Audit that the payments to the U of A were in violation of state law. Legal problems, subverting the bidding process required by law, and lack of progress point to mismanagement. The bidding process for all spending needs to be documented.

The city matching funds projects for Rio Nuevo were transportation projects, some of which seemed that there was a bond issue for some time ago. What are the cost overruns on these transportation projects? Did these matching funds projects bring in revenue to the TIF? I know the premise is that good streets generate business but did this happen? What was allowable for matching funds? The Martin Luther King housing units downtown have been eating money but generating nothing after the tenants were ousted. The debt level will ensure the rents remain high.

The modern streetcar that lacks funding has already consumed millions in Rio Nuevo 'matching funds' , another fiasco designed to need a city subsidy to operate. Already deep into transit deficit spending to set up a situation projected to require a subsidy to operate is the ultimate foolishness. As for the streetcar projects, most of them take place out of state employing workers building streetcars while Arizona's unemployment rate remains high. If the Federal funding requires that our community export jobs, then perhaps this type of funding is simply too expensive for Arizona.

The new Rio Nuevo Board has been hiring lawyers and now wants to hire employees, even though Rio Nuevo is in deficit spending. I suggest this board nominate and elect one of their own to be treasurer. I also suggest that those with financial interests in the defunct hotel project resign over a conflict of interest. As a community, we need fresh ideas on the board and we also need a board that is willing to work in a transparent manner and one that is willing to work to salvage what is left of Rio Nuevo. We have from 2011 to 2025 to work towards solvency and material achievement. A hiring freeze is in effect, isn't it?

This bum on the street corner now wants you to buy him a new car when he's flat broke. Tell him no. Tell him to get busy and do the job as Rio Nuevo Board, instead of just claiming dubious prestige for the title.

The pattern of disorganized and whimsical spending without a reasonable budget for accomplishing material gain in the form of an arena or expanded TCC or even a viable project to generate revenue was an outstanding example of mismanagement that needs a full investigation. The gambler who is forever optimistic just continues on and on until he is bankrupt.

I say it is time for the gambler to fade away and a fiscal conservative to take his place.

IF YOU WANT MORE INFORMATION:

Rob O'dell wrote an interesting factual article on Rio Nuevo and the hiring of lawyers and what they were paid out of tax money:

http://azstarnet.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_522148bd-131f-5d86-bb90-5ac6c3867d11.html

Joe Higgens and Chris DeSimone wrote a good opinion piece on the Rio Nuevo Audit:

http://tucsongrowup.com/2010/11/06/those-responsible-for-rio-nuevo-must-face-consequences-wut-column-for-inside-tucson-business/

Tucson Convention Center Renovation Ideas

2010-10-29T13:38:00.000-07:00

The Convention Center Renovation

We are talking cosmetic changes at the beginning. Jobs to renovate the TCC can be created. TCC is a serviceable facility that has much to recommend it. We need projects that serve the needs of the community and that create local jobs.

Money? Is there any money at all? A $51,000,000 deficit on an adopted budget ? Should budgetary decisions be based on cutting costs to meet the budget? If so, then matching a retiring debt with a new debt that does not change payment amount in order to obtain money for jobs projects should instead go to cut the deficit.

Perhaps, but the train of thought will continue as if there were money. I would prefer to short contract pay as you go with no debt. Without the debt, maybe part of the $ could be used to retire other debt and a smaller amount would go to a fund. When that fund reaches the size required for a short term job, then hire! The improvements thereby would be on city property to city buildings by local contractors on an incremental basis.

Implementing an incremental hiring and renovation plan would require planning to meet the need to renovate TCC. After an outside tour of the TCC, I think that cosmetic renovations are needed. Maybe TCC isn't as large as some but artistic quality, ambiance etc will attract clients. If the rent prices were lowered, then possibly more acts, attractions would be able to come here. We need lower rent prices and a better looking structure.

The grounds of TCC are really nice, beautiful plants and nice brickwork. It's like a park. The grounds are a plus for the entire set of structures. Tourists love the flora.

• The structure has a nice brick facade but the older metal and glass additions could be refurbished or replaced.

• Doors need refurbishing.

• brick needs sandblasting

• cement walks need sandblasting and resurfacing. Tile would be nice but expensive.

• new light fixtures and electronic signs

• The tunnel is quite unattractive: how about bright tile mosaics or murals and better lighting? The tunnel is nice in summer. Good open air snack cart area. It seems like something really good could be made out of the tunnel. How about scenes from Arizona history done in mosaic all along the walls? There might be an art grant out there somewhere to help pay for it. Local artists make it more valuable as a tourist attraction.

• The west side is horrid, except for the plants. This definitely needs reassessment and redoing. Paint, stucco, anything. Is this what people see when they walk to the back lots? All that area could be turned into breakout rooms and the maintenance crew could be quartered in a steel building somewhere else.

• The chain link corral and chairs stacked against the walls don't do much for the decor. Ratty chairs look like a yard sale.

• The TCC could be a showcase for local art if murals are put on some of the walls. I'd love to see more sculptures by local artists on the grounds.

• The new addition is ugly. Why didn't they match the TCC when they designed it? It looks like a cheap skirt tacked over levis.

• We were over there on a Thursday. the escalators were grinding away and icy air conditioning even though it was 85 outside. Expensive choices. What is the utility bill over there?

• Solar power additions. I don't know what the roofs look like but that would be a good place for liteweight units if it's feasible.

• I have been told that the TCC needs new electronics.

These are just a few ideas from walking around the main TCC.

I like architecture and buildings. The TCC could be a showcase for local art. Jobs refurbishing the structure could be created. The ratty chairs could be reupholstered by locals, rather than replaced by chairs made in China. A good cleaning would help. The place looks like maintenance has been deferred. How much money was spent on maintenance at the TCC?

Arizona Educational Reform

2010-09-21T15:59:00.000-07:00

Available on Kindle

School reform is a popular subject during an election year. Arizona has applied for and been denied two lucrative federal grants intended to encourage school reform in the states. Perhaps the lack of desire for change in education in Arizona was obvious in the application. The recent spate of negative statistics concerning student achievement in Arizona has begun a dialogue among many concerning the need for school reform. Arizona educators have tried testing and teaching to the AIMS test, ESL instruction for teachers, making certification more expensive in terms of time and credits for teachers, career ladders, raising academic requirements for graduation and many other fruitless gimmicks. The dropout rates remain high and the average academic achievement test scores are mediocre to terrible.

What next? I suggest a real overhaul of this 1912 educational vehicle. Changes since 1912 are apparently endless but the stars of this show are the growth of population size and the change in material technology and innovation. Immigrants have changed the cultural makeup of Arizona and a service economy has emerged. Things are different now in 2010, almost a hundred years later.

I will now address one facet of school reform that would benefit academics and sports, without sublimating either. School reform can eliminate a social emphasis that creates a hierarchy other than academic, often centering on sports proficiencies.

Both academic and sports proficiencies are important but should they be competing against each other in the public schools? On a social level, if the sports proficiencies are deemed the most important by the staff, then the students will get the message that the sports proficiencies are most important and that these people must be pleased by performing sports, which also gives social prominence.

I taught a long time and I know teachers push the academics but the social rewards are for the stars of the sports. As a preliminary to reform, the costs of sports must be separated from the total school budget and analyzed as percent of total, donation level, cost to student, income from events, cost per student participation donated and requisitioned, cost per capita student participation, etcetera... After this analysis is completed, a discussion on the distribution of funds can proceed.

I propose to separate the academic job preparation proficiencies from the sports proficiencies in the public schools, in an attempt to elevate the social status of academic proficiencies to more of a realistic level as found in later life. Create two separate entities, the academic schools and the sports schools merged with the city parks and recreation department programs. Separate these entities, while requiring passing grades for students to participate in the new City Sports Plan. Of course this would require cooperation in facilities management as the city costs and facilities are merged with those of the public schools or in partnerships with charter schools. There would be no need for additional facilities or busing to the Sports Schools; bus passes for needy students would be available through a donation program or subsidy.

I think this plan would free up money for academics.

This separation plan would also have an added benefit in that the academic facilities would be more flexible, since large groups of students of similar age need not be amassed in order to field a better sports team. Smaller schools for all ages closer to homes of students would eliminate busing costs. The Internet and Distance Learning would make available any course requirement online plus any level academic electives. On duty teachers would monitor progress and offer assistance in the upper grades, plus traditional classrooms for basic learners of any age. The possibilities are endless in a local K-12 academic school. The elimination of busing would save money. As this plan takes effect, bait the school districts with money from the state that would be spent on busing would either be lost or diverted to distance learning equipment designated for local smaller schools. Bait the universities into establishing a curriculum for generalists who can run and teach in one of these new K-12 Internet and basic skills schools.

As for the Sports Schools, attendance would be voluntary with the exception of x number credits in 'Lifelong fitness and nutrition", which would be required of all students in the Academic Schools 8-12. This requirement would introduce the students to the sports schools and thus the staff could encourage participation in Sports Schools volunteer programs. These programs would be funded on a per capita daily student attendance basis, which would encourage the Sports Schools staff to encourage more students to participate. If attendance fell below a certain percentage in a month, an immediate review of the teacher and the class would be conducted. To encourage attendance, student would be offered bus passes at a small profit. A Sports School would allow for the development of local sports stars, parental donations, recruitment possibilities and sports games for people to attend for a small fee. A self supporting program would provide jobs for concessionaires and security. Regional games could be funded as the schools fund them now. Why not a hierarchy of leagues until the big leagues take notice? We have two facilities in town plus all the school fields to use to develop local talent and we have all winter to practice. I do believe that the mandatory schooling law dictates that academic eligibility requirements be met by all Sports School volunteer programs. Community spinoffs could include sports leagues for older players.

As for Vocational Education 8-12, vocational centers would be established and programs of apprenticeships in local businesses would be developed. These vocational centers would contain various shops and trades, sewing, art, theater, electronics repair, real estate, agriculture, home gardening, small business management, business finance etcetera. As with the Sports Schools, students 8-12 would be required to earn credits here, which would expose students to career choices and the actual physical facility. Attendance would be voluntary and funded on a per capita daily student attendance basis, which would reward the best most relevant teachers. After a month of low attendance, the class would be under mandatory review and possible immediate cancellation, which would save student funds for successful teachers. I have seen teachers in electives run the students off until just a few were left, which is quite a low class load while collecting similar money to the teacher teaching required courses, swamped with students. Vocational certification would be relaxed to include more life certified teachers and journeymen. Cooperation with specialized charter schools could cut presentation costs.

School reform has many facets and possibilities. The state of Arizona has a good basic curriculum, but the teaching of that curriculum is too loosely interpreted by principals, who prefer to cultivate a non confrontational attitude towards teacher management. Perhaps that is the easiest row to hoe, but the curriculum as it applies to the success of a child in the system must be presented to all children, who will understand at the level the teacher is able to impart to them. Some students will have the native intelligence to understand the material without instruction, but those are few. In this era of electronic instruction of factual material, the concept of mastery learning must be revisited, rather than strict adherence to the grade level system. In a K-12 school, the concept of students proceeding at their own pace would be much easier to implement and would free the students to proceed through the required curriculum at a reduced or accelerated pace. Given the various maturity levels of students in any age group, this system might be a relief to many.

To create liquidity, If the school facilities are too large, then divide up the facilities and rent them out to other government agencies first at a nominal rate, then to private enterprise: child care, clinics, therapy centers, and other health related businesses. Get some cash flows and use the money to fund academic competitions and travel. How about awards dinners and travel for academic stars? The Science Fair is an excellent example of how to run a creative competition and exposition.

I was gratified to hear that Mr. Huckleberry of Pima County is fielding a plan for a local sports complex, where traditional sports and sports not taught in the schools will have a venue. I support the idea of this complex and would suggest that the Sports Schools plan could cooperate with the county in use of these facilities, sharing in educational efforts, utilities and maintenance costs.

School reform is a complex issue that must be addressed with practicality and creativity plus realistic views of the academic and social needs of students. Today's job market is tough and students will become motivated to learn how to make a living and exercise voting rights. The job of the schools is to prepare students to earn a living and function lawfully within our society.

City of Tucson Budget Crisis

2010-08-31T08:54:00.000-07:00

Mind Set and the Economic Crisis

Another tax hike will cut commercial spending, which is an undesirable outcome even though the city would then have more money to spend. Take from the many to give to the few. I think it is time for new ideas.

An analysis of city spending needs to be made. I will begin with SunTran.

How often do the routes run?

What is % ridership? If it is 25%, then four too many buses are being run.

How much is this transit management team being paid? They are producing nothing.

How much federal funding does Tucson get for transit?

How many actual runs would serve the needs of the riders?

At forty cents a ride, maybe a little inconvenience is worth it. If SunTran cannot afford to run so many buses due to low ridership, then it would save money to cut the number of buses. Preserve the routes but not the frequent pickup times. People who ride the bus will plan ahead to continue using the service. If these excess runs are being demanded by the union in order to create jobs, this point must be negotiated. The money is just not there for them to spend. The taxpayers are subsidizing their jobs with no increase in productivity.

The ticket subsidy should remain the same if SunTran cuts the bus runs. This is the sacrifice asked of the people who ride the bus to the budget crisis. They cannot afford to pay more. The 'executive staff' giving up their free cars and cell phones might be a nice gesture. How about they get a free bus pass?

This plan will cut personnel costs and might result in layoffs, unless the drivers want to get together and share the actual available work. This plan would cut personnel insurance costs. Fewer buses would be running, so the bus fleet would last longer. Running huge empty buses is a waste of machine hours, fuel, insurance, street surfaces and productivity. This is like a teacher giving sixth graders scads of third grade work to keep them quiet. It works but there's no productivity. Those handicapped transit vans could run when full by appointment, with a driver on call, not just to pick up one person. You know, like the shuttles to Nogales from South Sixth.

This is a right to work state. The unions have no right to demand that the city fund excess bus runs in order to maintain their membership dues payments.

An analysis of the mindset that asks Don't you think that this worker is worth $100,000 or $50,000 or whatever? The question they should be asking is: What is the amount we actually have to pay workers? Figure that out and then cut payments and city funded benefits to workers to what the city can actually afford to pay. If these workers feel slighted, then they can move on. In this job climate, applicants at a lower pay will be legion.

This brings me to somebody's saying that each department will be cut X%. This screams assumption that each department is equally important, not top-heavy, overstaffed or even competent. An analysis needs to be made on each department. Some departments could be eliminated entirely, others remain more intact. Maybe some departments can be merged into others. I know it's easier to leave it all intact, but I question the efficiency of spending in some instances.

How about the city visit one of those agencies that do debt consolidation and renegotiation? I know this has already been done, but perhaps something could be gained. Has the city considered 'clawbacks' of money paid out with little received in return? It happens on Wall Street why not here? I am awaiting the Rio Nuevo Audit. Possibly charges can be filed? Excess indebtedness has eroded the value of the tax dollar to $.60 with $.40 going into the pockets of the moneylenders for years and years to come. What about default? What are the options?

According to a verbal report, the Fed wants to keep 3-4% inflation rate, which helps pay off the exorbitant Federal debts run up in the last 10 years. If that happens, that means we pay higher costs for everything, while unemployment continues and the people have less to spend. Higher taxes on top of that will simply put more of the money supply in the hands of government for distribution to that select group of workers. This is onerous when reorganization has not be achieved. Reorganization of city departments should result in lower taxes, not higher. Excess indebtedness has eroded the value of the tax dollar to $.60 with $.40 going into the pockets of the moneylenders for years and years to come. What about default? What are the options?

Tucson Budget Crisis

2010-08-18T13:47:00.000-07:00

If the city is requesting a tax hike, there must be more information given to the voters.

So let's do some math! What is the amount of federal money received by transit today? How long is this requirement from the '70s in effect? Are these higher costs associated with hiring a management company, the union demands, the benefit levels and coping with strikes worth what the feds are contributing now? Too much money is tied up in this. If the answer is that certain people who make money off federal grants control the process and they're not going to let go of it, then this financial crisis cannot be solved. If this management company hiring is in perpetuity, then a court challenge needs to be made. How much does the management company for transit cost the taxpayers? This appears to be an unnecessary restriction in a right to work state.
I want to know what percent of this proposed tax increase will go to what department and will be used for what. How about a nice pie chart showing the raw data? Then break down each core department into how it spends the money: personnel, pensions, benefits, equipment, maintenance, buildings, consultants, debt service... Another general pie chart showing personnel numbers per department, others to show executive, administrative, clerical, field personnel, contractors and consultants as a percent of total expenditures in each department.

Core services as defined by charter? how detailed is it? Are all these subsidiary to the core services also untouchable? Can some portions of 'core services' be transferred to other departments, away from core services? let's redefine 'core services' to more austere levels.
I know what kind of core services this city had in the early days and what they are defining as core services now is nothing like that.

Here is an explanation for the creation of a management company for transit, politely supplied by George Caria:

Here are the answers to your questions. The first and third questions are reated, so I answered them together.

1. When did the city give this management team the right to negotiate with Sun Tram, giving them the right to strike when others can not? and 3. She said it was federally mandated. Why would this be?

When the Transit system went from private to public in the 1970's, the Federal Government had agreements in place with the Department of Labor. If transit systems, throughout the United States, not just Tucson, were going to received federal money they were required to have a right to strike clause in their labor agreement. Since most cities do not have a right to strike clause, they were required to hire a management company, so those employees were not employed by the City, but a separate management company. Additionally, it is required that issues related to labor details in the agreements, only be negotiated by the management company, and not the City.

This model was used throughout the country in cities such as Minneapolis, Mephis, Richmond, just to mention a few.

2. Who in the city set this up?

As I previously mentioned, this was set-up back in the 1970's. As private transit companies were folding, the Federal government offered financial assistance, and this was one of the strings attached to receiving Federal dollars. If Federal monies were not used to acquire transit systems cities were faced with the dilemma of using the Federal dollars or not having a transit system in the community.

PROPOSED TUCSON TAX INCREASE

2010-08-13T15:17:00.000-07:00

THE PROPOSED TUCSON TAX INCREASES

I have been holding my consul lately concerning the fiscal problems of the City of Tucson government, while hoping to learn more about the situation. A few discussions, presentations and websites later I think I know enough about what is going on in order to logically comment upon it.

The presentation at El Rio by City Council members Romero, Fimbres and Ulich was illuminating in that four 'core services' are identified as being Police, Fire, Parks and Transportation. The Police and Fire and Parks departments were well represented by the respective department heads who took responsibility for informing the people concerning the tax increase to be voted upon in November. Nowhere did I see the head of Transportation, nor did I hear a word concerning their proposed share of this proposed tax increase. They should have been there to explain their part. I feel slighted by this omission.

I don't trust this proposal without estimates, percentages per department, prioritizing cuts and layoffs. Isn't there more to this proposition? We need expositions for the rest of this proposal. What about the reorganization of city hall? What about the proposed salary raises for council members? What else is tied up with this vote? Using scare tactics to get through a tax increase that would also include raises for council members? These items should have been four separate votes, not one huge vote with unrelated items in it.

Reorganizing city hall should be tied to a tax decrease, not an increase. Giving raises at a time when unemployment levels are high is unwarranted. Guaranteeing that one segment of the city is immune to layoffs and hikes in benefit costs is not fair to the rest of the city employees or the taxpayers since this tax hike would benefit Transportation employees in just that way. I heard that the city charter details transportation as a 'core service' but I suggest that parts of the transportation department would be better organized under different departments, thus reducing transportation to the actual core services, which would not be so difficult to fund. How about public safety and road repair administered under the police department? Are the SunTran employees under a management company so they can be exempt from the city worker agreement not to strike? Who set that up?

As for the scheduled cuts to be made in the event this tax increase does not pass, these are not the only configurations of cuts to be decided upon. I mean, there are other things besides police and fire to cut. I've seen the budget. One presenter at another meeting suggested retiring the 'double dippers', cutting high level salaries and benefits and reorganizing and cancelling departments. Absolutely, the level of public debt is too high! No more borrowing for anything.

Analyze this streetcar thing. How much money was borrowed to finance this? How much grant money was obtained? How much debt service will be paid on all borrowed funds? Does the interest cost of borrowing use up the grant money? Are we really making money on this thing, or are we just employing people in Oregon to build streetcars? What will the maintenance on this system cost? Are fares expected to pay for this deal? How realistic is this scheme? A few will be employed, but how long will it take for the rest of us to pay for this system? How many of us will use this system? I think deals like this and Rio Nuevo are impoverishing the community with debt service, reducing the value of our tax contribution.

Maybe this is off the topic of the proposed .5% tax increase, but voters are wary of giving more money into the hands of the city because of the recent track record. More tax to give to the moneylenders for debt service is simply unacceptable. If there were no debt, there would be no money crunch and projects could still continue to be built out of incoming receipts. A new way of thinking is needed.

The size and cost of government spending and projects must be reduced to fit the budget! You cannot depend on tax hikes, borrowing and selling real estate assets during a downturn.

TAX THE LIENHOLDERS!

2010-06-10T14:49:00.000-07:00

TAXATION AND SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
Communication with others produced a new idea. According to a source, it is possible to tax banks, but that is a state responsibility.
Can the legislature take charge and tax foreclosures and repossessions? Not a tax on the poor guy who just lost his home or investment! How about a tax on the repossessors,; instead of giving them a fat tax break on the homes and businesses they repossess? They end up with a tax advantage and physical possession of the properties, a good deal for them and a bad deal for the rest of the community.

The foreclosure policy could also be implemented as a fee. How about a fee on every repossession and foreclosure, payable by the lienholder? The courts and administrative offices could raise fees on the lienholders foreclosing and repossessing. The police and fire could have a non-refundable contingency fee on empty homes and commercial property and require a monthly list of foreclosures and repossessions, plus cash payment for each at time of filing.

The reasons for instituting new fees and taxes on lienholders foreclosing on and repossessing properties should be stated:

Foreclosures and Repossessions contribute heavily to:
Homelessness
Increases in public housing costs
Increases in bankruptcy rates
Neighborhood blight and vandalism
Increases in welfare rolls
Increases in state health care costs

These foreclosures and repossessions are damaging the social fabric of our town. Community resources have to take care of the people ousted from their homes and businesses after the lienholders are through with them. Homes and jobs are lost as a result of bank policies. Foreclosed homes are even sold for less than the original buyer could have now paid. How about appraisal fraud on homes, like the false appraisals on 'derivatives'? Social responsibility can be maintained through taxes and laws.

This fee or tax money from the lienholders could be divvied up among the state and communities. This is a tax people would support! Sock it to the banks!

NEW REVENUE SOURCE

2010-06-03T15:59:00.001-07:00

In thinking about the need for new revenue for the city, my mind landed on the banks, who are rolling in cash. I have several questions about the banks and the foreclosures and the taxes on the foreclosed properties.

In several places I have seen case histories of those who lost their properties through foreclosure, then were charged taxes on these properties even though they could no longer had access to the properties. Taxes apparently accumulated long after they were ousted by foreclosure.

My question is this: Where are the taxes on foreclosed homes? The lenders foreclosing should be liable for the taxes, since they ousted the inhabitants and claimed possession of the property in fact. They claim the property, they own the taxes also? If you buy a property, you assume the liens which must be dealt with at time of purchase. The taxes should be assumed by the banks, since they take defacto possession of the foreclosed properties.

How much money could be generated by making the lenders pay taxes on the foreclosed properties?

The cities, towns and states could use this owed tax money, which should be paid by the defacto owner, not held in limbo by a paper technicality that allows the banks to stick the prior owners with the taxes, who now must struggle with this added debt after they lose possession of the property, that held fraudulent appraisals in the first place. The banks should step up and pay the taxes and penalties they owe on the properties they seized.

Pass some more penalties and tax the lenders for every empty home they own in this community. If they were taxed, maybe they would cut the rent or prices and get people in the houses. Empty homes in this community should cost those big owners some money.

Our governments need the money.

Tucson Employment or more Unemployment and debt?

2010-05-25T23:15:00.000-07:00

So I learned much about this city since returning here a few years ago. Ready to compare with what I had seen in other communities to my hometown, I engaged in political activity, mainly in the form of attending political functions and listening.

Factions have been squabbling over the spoils from the failed Rio Nuevo projects and very few have taken money from the many and then given to favorites. Too much money has been spent on too little. A few made big bucks and too many are unemployed.

The latest boondoggle is to buy streetcars from Oregon, putting them to work while our own people are unemployed. And they want to borrow money to do it, laying heavy amounts of debt service on Arizona people in order to hire people in Oregon to build streetcars we don't need.

Adding more debt to the public load already in place is foolish in this economic climate. Rio Nuevo is $2,000,000 in deficit a year, owing that much more than they bring in while they feverishly try to set up yet another debt for the city to guarantee to build a hotel downtown. Occupancy rates downtown are about 50%, which is too low for another hotel to be built. Can you believe Shelko wants to borrow money, hold enough to make payments for x years and is planning on a high occupancy rate to pay for the hotel? What are the occupancy rates right now? What is the intake of the TIF revenue right now? What is the present take of TCC? We need a dose of reality.

The city is $33,000,000 in deficit but just borrowed more money to build a building when empty buildings stand all over town. This new debt adds to the debt load.

Now an 'emergency' meeting was called to bring RTA into the money pit downtown in order to adequately fund this modern streetcar project. A huge portion of this money will not bring jobs to Tucson, except in the form of benefit to the few merchants along the very short route and the developer at the end of it. How much of this proposed debt, the federal grant and the city and RTA contributions will actually stay here to fund local jobs?

What percent is debt service? Sales tax revenue is not predictable as a revenue source when compared to the steady drain of debt service on the local economy.

What percent will be spent in Oregon on streetcars built by people who boycott us?

We do not need this project. We already have roads to all of these places. Let's use them.

We need small scale local jobs funded without debt. Instead of a giant museum all at once, we build a wing.

SB 1070 Arizona and Illegal Immigration

2010-04-29T01:04:00.000-07:00

ARIZONA AND ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION

Senate Bill 1070 was passed by the Arizona House and Senate and signed by Governor Brewer, drawing both criticism and praise within the state.

Police officers will be made responsible for checking immigration status as well as given the power to stop people who might be illegal immigrants to check their papers. In the hands of a repressive police force, this law is dangerous.

On a practical level, I don't think the cops are interested in repressing or hassling anybody and that they now have plenty to do managing public safety concerns. The role of local police in our society has been to maintain order.

In order to maintain order, several criteria must be enforced:

• Traffic safety

• Immediate violence prevention

• Investigations into violence

• Enforcing court orders

This maintains continuity and consequences and preserves the fabric of our society.

The attitudes that created this law, will not be solved by this law. Let us think about Mexico and the Cartels for a while. There are a few facts on this that should be noted:

• Increasing violence in Mexico against police and Federales

• Rival factions in Mexico are competing for a market share of the USA drug trade

• The Cartels are reported to have $$$$$

• Is the Mexican government in danger of falling?

• the last Mexican election was quite close, with the populist candidate losing

• Recession has caused Mexicans to return to Mexico from USA, losing income

• Mexico produces about 450,000 more people a year than they have jobs for.

• The USA as population outlet for Mexico has slowed down due to higher unemployment in the USA

• High unemployment or underemployment rates in Mexico

• The USA has a law giving citizenship to anyone born here

• Arizona/Mexico is part of an ancient migration route

• Hispanics settled in what is now Arizona during the 1500s

• Anglos settled in what is now Arizona mostly after 1850

Recent history needs to be reviewed:

• During the subprime boom, Developers and Builders dominated Arizona politically

• Large numbers of undocumented workers were hired by developers and builders

• Mexicans heard about the good jobs available and headed to the USA

• Cultural change caused by the influx of Hispanic workers upset some residents

• Existing medical and educational services are used by undocumented workers

• Resentment over undocumented workers rose as unemployment grew

• Violence from Mexico appears to be spilling over into the USA

• An Arizona rancher was killed on his own land, apparently by a trespasser from Mexico

• Drug cartels in Mexico continue to feed the demand for drugs in the USA

• Illegal immigrant apprehensions are down in Arizona as jobs became scarce

• Federal action on illegal immigration has been fragmented and ineffective

• Some politicians are asking for militarization of the USA/Mexico border

Is illegal immigration a public safety issue? The immigrants have criminals among them, like any other human group. The drug cartel violence, drop houses and coyotes give the Mexican nationals a bad reputation, but the reality is that most illegal immigrants are peaceful people trying to find work, have children in the USA and build a better life for themselves and their families. Many of them send money to Mexico in support of impoverished relatives. Some of them ask for medical help and they all send their children to school. These human needs cost money to fulfill and the state of Arizona is bankrupt. Don't wait for the government of Mexico to offer to help pay for these services their citizens are receiving while in the USA: no money has ever been sent to pay for these services or needs, although the money the illegals send home to Mexico is certainly welcome.

So we have a situation where the impoverished come to the USA to work, their presence utilizes state services, but no sovereign entity is picking up the extra cost. Therein lies the resentment. Mexico and the USA should refund the cost of these services to Arizona and the other states taking care of undocumented immigrants. WE NEED THE MONEY.

As for SB 1070, I regret the perceived need for such a law on the part of lawmakers. Law enforcement should be able to concentrate on public safety issues. It is increasingly obvious that immigration reform is needed on the federal level, whether or not special interests oppose action. This election year politicians are finally talking reform.

It is about time!

Responsible Capitalism

2010-04-23T10:53:00.001-07:00

Responsible Capitalism

Are we capable of responsible capitalism? A definition of terms is in order. Responsible capitalism is defined as capitalism performed in such a way as to perpetuate the system as a whole as well as create profit for the individual. Reliance on short term thinking is a sign of decadence and eventual decline if the future is not considered when making present profits.

In the vernacular, "I got mine!" The carnival atmosphere of the Boom has now given way to sober reflection of how to cope with the aftermath of overproduction and subsequent surplus in the housing market. Derivatives are now known to be gambling but how the taxpayer ended up paying for losses incurred is beyond comprehension.

I have not read the new financial regulation legislation. It does look as if investigations for fraud are just beginning. The raters will now be rated and schemers will keep company with Madoff. Do the regulators and the appraisers really work for the lenders? This cozy relationship needs to be dismantled, distanced, anything to remove them from such proximity.

So the scheme unravels to begin with easy money pumped into the system from the government. Developers seize on this opportunity to get loans to build houses that were then sold to people who previously could not get credit. Since credit standards were apparently nonexistent why not charge more for the units and get more money on return? All they had to do was find an appraiser who would raise the appraisal on demand in order to facilitate more profit per unit.

This was a good deal for everybody, the developer, the builder, the broker.....These became the fodder of the subprime mortgage derivatives. Empty calories were these 'investments' touted to be good returns for investors, but were actually just failing vehicles for hedge funds to bet against. Who was not surprised when these derivatives failed?

But to forge ahead, we must plan for the future. We have Ponzi schemes and now we have Subprime schemes, both of which will be run by outlaws. At least we can now identify the scams. I can't help but wonder what the next scam will be. We can all pray for some morality to continue this economic system.

Profits expectations remain too high, with incredible luxury demanded, not just a comfortable living expected. In this world of excess human population, every rich man can be viewed as having the portions of many. I think some luxury is deserved for work, but not deserved for social manipulation resulting in profit, like the subprime scandal that morphed into an insurance scam betting on failure. So they created a scam and hit it big for a while. Clawbacks are hell. How about rebating the money cities, counties and states lost in the housing market crash instead of paying off foreign bankers and irresponsible moneylenders and brokers? The boom debt needs to be paid off. Who owes whom? Let the courts decide.

TO THE ARIZONA LEGISLATORS

2010-04-09T16:05:00.000-07:00

SOLVING THE ARIZONA BUDGET CRISIS

As with any problem solving set, the solution can only be achieved by a structured approach. Begin with the definition of the problem:

The state of Arizona is obligated to pay out more than the revenue amount.

Various approaches to solving this problem have been forwarded:

Spending must stay as is so we must raise the amount of revenue.
a. raise taxes
b. increase business activity and thus revenue through taxes
c. sell off assets
d. increase debt by borrowing to spend

Spending can be cut back and less revenue will be needed
entitlements take large part of revenue
constitutional amendment needed to change entitlements
cutbacks in discretionary programs
cutbacks in police and fire
cut salaries/pay

A new budget can be formed from scratch, using ‘necessary services’ as criteria earmarked for funding.
a. freedom to fund what is needed.
b. if default is declared, contracts are voided.
c. after basic needs like water, police, fire, sanitation are funded, then discretionary
spending for the remainder of the funds, if any.

The first two approaches have been melded and used. The net result was a continuing budget deficit and heavier debt load. The Constitution of Arizona is now a parody, as the debt load exceeds the stated limit. Permanent overrides are now discussed, yet nothing can be done about the mandated spending.

Bankruptcy. What will be paid first with cash? Police? Probably.
Will it ruin our credit rating? Should we worry about that? Didn’t somebody sign an agreement that our interest rates on borrowed money would go up if our credit rating slips?

Instead of wasting time trying to make taxpayers pay for what is forbidden to fund in the constitution of the state of Arizona, why not focus efforts on another referendum? How about a referendum to amend the referendum/initiative laws that requires a sunset clause of no more than 5 years of financial obligation with a specific project stated, instead of the current version of pure permanent entitlement, with no strings on the funds. A change in the law could also sunset all existing permanent entitlements.

Before voting anything budgetary, think does this add to entitlements, does this raise what we are obligated to pay out? Amending the constitution to allow for tax money to go to private religious schools will increase the educational obligation where none exists today. Not a good move. We can’t afford it and it is against the constitution. We can’t put teaching religions at the tax trough. Isn’t it against the Federal Constitution?

You can’t afford to pass legislation that increases spending. If this tax increase does not pass, more cuts must be made. A recent article in a local paper said that not passing this tax increase will result in the loss of x number jobs. This would not be necessary if all took a pay cut to allow for fellow workers to share in what funding there is. It used to be a game to see who would get the raise, it’s now not a game to actually have to cut back because the money is not there. The boom is over, the money and equity is gone and too many workers were hired then for to be paid now with the current revenue. It will work if they all take a pay cut. This will cut down on benefits costs. Should everyone’s taxes be raised in order to furnish high benefits for city workers?

Debt loads must be defined and prioritized. Water must be paid, because it is a source of revenue and a necessity. Default must be discussed.

Departments must be defined and prioritized into
a. nice to have
b. could survive without
c. necessary

Retaining those departments that bring in revenue might not be the cheapest in the long run, if ultimate social costs rise. Tax collectors never lose their jobs, I guess. It is still not obvious to me how paying more license fees, taxes and mandated insurance frees up more money to purchase inventory or spend on the open economy. Higher taxes and government fees take money out of circulation, leaving less to be spent elsewhere. The tendency of the Tucson solution set is towards higher taxes in the city, which will drive buyers elsewhere. The least mobile will be the hardest hit by higher city taxes. The net result might be less revenue. Businesses might leave Arizona if taxes go up.

As a finale, you have a huge job to do. I suggest that the bodies meet without all the hangers on. Meet among yourselves and discuss this budgetary problem the state is facing. Exclude the lobbyists, special interests, department heads and others with skin in the game. You have a huge responsibility and it is yours to handle alone.

Political Vandalism

2010-03-29T07:06:00.000-07:00

I watch the news regularly and recent reports of violence towards congressional offices have been the subject of much comment. Apparently both political parties have been hit with vandalism.

Finger pointing has been rife since the first incidents occurred at Democrats’ offices, including house member G. Giffords of CD 8 here in Pima County and Tucson. Mr. Limbaugh and Ms. Palin use unfortunate phraseology like ‘wipe them out’ and ‘reload’, causing a spate of complaints from those who think they are inciting violence. Ms. Palin has denounced violence. I think she may have meant ‘If at first you do not succeed, try, try again’.

I have no idea who did the violence. Perpetration is difficult to prove. But I do wonder why it was so easy to stir up the violence. Ms. Palin verbally attacks the media, directly challenging their power. Bias appears to be the norm, both in the press and on the podium. With the internet, it is becoming more difficult to slant reporting, since there are so many sources of data. Perhaps perception of bias provokes violence if coupled with economic inequities. People understand bias.

The internet article in the Arizona Daily Star was blatantly biased in saying Cindy McCain was ‘lukewarm’ in her introduction of Ms. Palin. A biased interjection of opinion into what should have been a factual report of a political event, things like crowd size reported accurately, who was there, interviews with local organizers, etc. etc. I don’t really think people are interested in a reporter’s opinion disguised as fact.

So what is the source of the violence? Maybe people don’t like the attitude of the politicians, the lack of jobs, the level of public debt, mandated insurance costs, higher taxes, cuts in public services, more regulation and loss of freedom in the name of protecting us. Take your pick. We have an educated populace, phenomenal communications and an attitude of lifelong learning. A large number of people know a great deal about what is going on in the government, from the internet and a cadre of dedicated media. This educated electorate sees what before was hidden and slow to disseminate. The electorate is perceptive of a lack of accountability in our elected officials for the bailouts, tax rebates and lobbyists.

Perhaps reflection on how action creates reaction, the role of government, the constitution and the freedom of the American people should be required of our elected officials. Did any of them thoroughly survey constituents concerning the important issues of the day? Should all elected officials understand and act on voters’ interests and needs? I think so.

TAX REBATES AND HEALTH INSURANCE

2010-03-25T08:05:00.000-07:00

So the interstate homebuilders are bailed out by refunding tax money they paid during the boom, as if these people really deserved to get this windfall? The moneylenders are bailed out in direct payments to them from tax money that had to be augmented by borrowing. Essentially our government is borrowing money from foreigners in order to rebate money to the homebuilders. Our government borrowed money to give to the banks. Convenient that the bill excludes TARP recipients from these rebates. That would be a little too over the top.

What I see here is that the same people who created the boom are still in power and will still control too much of the money supply, using machinations available to them through political campaign support and lobbying. Why should those who caused the bubble end up with more power?

The Federal Reserve is lobbying to get more power and a court order must be obtained in order to obtain information from them. This all powerful, unelected bureaucracy makes choices that benefit special interests over the economy in general. Names are concealed from the public record. Payments are concealed. Less power needed, not more here.

The interstate homebuilders get tax rebates? This is incredible. I would like to see the end of cookie cutter home construction brought in by these ‘too big to fail’ homebuilders. I can see it now. They get their taxes rebated, they hold the money until the housing market is deemed cheap enough to snap up properties at a bargain, betting that the market will upswing instead of continuing to lose value. A false bottom would relieve them of their cash with diminishing returns. Why should they have the cash? They can ride out the recession on this cash while the smaller businesses are squeezed out.

Favoring interstate firms over locals is ruining the economy. Requiring millions in contracts awarded with borrowed money in order to interest the interstate firms wastes money. Go local. Go incremental. Stop the borrowing. The moneylenders are reaping 40 cents out every tax dollar spent on borrowing here in Tucson. Incremental financing as the funds come in would give taxpayers 40 cents more for every dollar spent. Better the taxpayers have the material value increase, than the moneylenders. If a default spawns ‘poor credit ratings’, then go incremental. Live within the income.

So now the IRS is getting a $20 billion dollar makeover and a drastic increase in their power to punish and collect money from citizens. The tenth amendment is ignored as the Federal legislatures deem it legal to require that citizens buy a money handling service in order to obtain health care. This is a violation of our personal rights to decide how we will spend our money. So now the health insurance firms will have a permanent sellers market, illegally mandated in violation of the tenth amendment. The federal government is creating and controlling economic activity instead of only regulating economic activity interstate.

I feel that we need reasonably priced health care, not a series of mandated brokers handling our money for us.

DEBT DEBT EVERYWHERE A DEBT DEBT

2010-03-14T14:32:00.000-07:00

How to cut local and federal debt

The government must cut spending somewhere before adding a new obligation, popularly known as PAYGO. Unfunded mandates from the federal to the state must cease, particularly in education.

A young doctor will borrow against future earnings to buy an incredibly expensive piece of equipment, and then charge patients to pay for it. Perhaps the government might subsidize the cost of the equipment, rather than distributing the same amount in subsidized patient health care. I think health care professionals would find subsidized equipment financially attractive debt relief.

Student loans are a drag on the economy. Somehow, you should be able to work all of them off in public service, like on the reservations. (For example, teach GED or tutor students to work it off)

Did term limits encourage the mountain of debt? This is a cynical thought that during the cheap credit drama, borrowing on the part of cities in Arizona rose precipitously, giving the borrowers much power in the community, without having to return to the voters for a long career in congress. Absolution of responsibility? Why not borrow? They won’t be here to pay for it because they are term limited. I think politicians ability to indebt the taxpayer should not exceed their term of office. Term limits disrupt entrenchment of special interests, which is a positive effect. Which is worse?

Road building has gone far enough for now. We need to maintain the transportation infrastructure rather than borrow to expand it. No more borrowing for transportation would force a pay as you go plan and reliance on short term contracts to local contractors.

Moneylenders have their place but it should not be at the top of the profit chain. There are too many fees, interest payments, obligations; it costs too much to borrow, too many brokers, too many people who produce nothing cut in front of everybody at the table. Endgame. Somebody big should take a haircut, face a clawback of that money and fraud charges.

Legislation against debt needs to happen. It looks like the city of Tucson is paying $133 million to borrow $80 million. This is not judicious use of taxpayer money. How about limiting debt incurred by politicians to their term or require a public vote on any debt?

Reduce the fleet the government sponsors. Cancel all cars for other than police and fire. This would save insurance, fuel and maintenance plus a cash outlay for new units. Sell off gas guzzlers, private cars etc.

Van Tran in Tucson: how many people are being served at what cost per person? Would this be cheaper contracted out to a private enterprise taxi?

Pima County should not borrow to build more wastewater plants. We are still paying for the last one. Why not start incremental work and use local contractors and pay cash as it comes in? Don’t borrow to build. Pay for the ongoing work as the money comes in and avoid interest charges. If this doesn’t generate enough money then the plans are too grandiose and must be scaled back to the actual income available. The amount of actual income available should drive the scope of the project, not the maximum able to be borrowed and the cash in a lump sum for somebody to play with. It costs money to borrow money and an ambition to control a large amount of money is not adequate criteria to indebt the public.

The TIF Rio Nuevo in Tucson did not produce adequate results from the cash borrowed and the debt remains. Legally this appears to be tenuous as audit results are awaited. How did the people who controlled Rio Nuevo get the power to borrow against the revenue stream? Why is this allowed without a popular vote? Somebody landed control of $80 million and blew it. Who voted to do this? What about the $15 million entrance boondoggle? That’s like financing a new Cadillac and never getting possession of the car but still have to pay the debt.

Mandating insurance turns it into a debt. This assures that a percentage of income is forever inaccessible to the earner. This is a tax also. The net result is that the earner may never have access to this money, but is required to pay it. This is a debt. The insurance companies are taking too much out of the general economy and funneling too much of the money to themselves and health care professionals, who are pumping up the costs by ordering expensive tests/procedures in order to avoid litigation.

Litigation in the medical world is making money for the lawyers at the expense of the insurance companies and medical professionals who must pay enormous insurance premiums. Some claims are legitimate but the parasitic aspect of litigation and the negative results on society is a cause for concern. Limits on litigation must be set in order to protect our medical professionals, while protecting individual rights.

There are more ideas out there. Cut debt, reexamine contracts for legalities and applied limits to more than the market value for rent as a lease payment in Tucson, and renegotiation possibilities for strapped homeowners. Or defaults will continue to rise. Nobody wants to put more money into something that is losing face value, making the debt impossible to pay in today’s economy. If you can get better elsewhere for less money, then that will happen. Buyers have dried up. Cut the rents. Nobody can make money while paying exorbitant rents because the owners have huge debt on the property. So units stand empty.

If you own a rental and that rental remains unrented with an exorbitant rent demanded, does that constitute a tax deduction for the owner? If it does, cancel that deduction. Nobody should make money from the government by leaving units unrented.

Creative thinking needs to happen. Focus on the real necessities. If local default becomes an option, we can start over with the actual income to be applied to the necessities of government, instead of harmful cutbacks in physical necessities in order to meet debt service. Practicality must rule.

Remember that old Alexander Dumas story about the poor woman who borrowed a diamond necklace from a rich friend, lost it, and spent years paying for a replacement only to eventually find out the original necklace had been glass? I don’t want to spend the taxpayers’ lives paying for debts incurred within a few years. This truly impoverishes the community for the duration of the debt. They cannot count on continued inflation and another boom to bail them out of debt made smaller through inflation. That is wishful thinking.

Hypocrisy at the Arizona Daily Star

2010-02-20T12:31:00.000-08:00

Dear Colonel Gent:

I read with interest your letter in the Arizona Daily Star on February 15, 2010. The best line in the letter is “When elected officials decline to take part in public discourse, one has to ask why.”

I looked on the net to perhaps find your e mail address and found your bio, which tells me you are a person to respect. Like many of the Republican Party, I support the military and veterans. This is not a partisan issue. This is an issue of national pride and responsibility. I am also a Daughter of the American Revolution and am proud of it.

I surmise we do have more goals in common. Since you serve on Representative Giffords Military Advisory Council, I surmise that you support the space program. To me the space program is too important to be a partisan issue. Many military people I have met also support the space program.

I also have a great interest in environmental issues and as a consequence, I have supported Representative Raul Grijalva in my district. Possibly you also have such interest in preserving the natural environment.

A noted Iraq War veteran and author in Arizona, State Representative Frank Antenori had the following to say when I requested a statement about the Arizona Daily Star’s editorial policy:

“The Arizona Daily Star's editorial board has clear bias and hidden agenda that distorts or filters information in an effort to influence public opinion in favor of their ideological beliefs. They offer no opposing views on their editorial pages and have consistently suppressed opposing views submitted by readers by refusing to print them. They are now truly living up to the words of Mark Twain, "Those that do not read the paper are uninformed, and those that do are misinformed."”

I believe that Mr. Antenori is correct. Apparently, nothing is more important than partisan politics to the editorial staff at the Star.

My own experiences with the ‘Reader Advocate’ Debbie Kornmiller did nothing to correct this assertation. Ms. Kornmiller has banned me from commenting online because my husband allegedly broke the terms of service while using his private e mail address. No complaints were made about my postings.

Ms. Kornmiller banned me because I am a Republican precinct committeeman who does not always agree with her personal choice of candidates. My blog explains my interests and opinions, if you would like to see what Ms. Kornmiller banned. A past president of the Pima County Republican Womens’ Club has felt ostracized because she was at odds with Ms. Kornmiller. Ms. Kornmiller has also ‘edited’ letters printed in the paper, receiving complaints. I attend several Republican political organizations and often the discussion turns to the biased editorial page of the Star. The problem appeared to escalate after the demise of the Tucson Citizen.

What does this have to do with elected officials declining to take part in public discourse? It has been suggested that the Star have more ‘conservative’ viewpoints represented in the opinion section. I support this idea.

I think what we have here is a breakdown of genuine bipartisanship, reflected in the stagnation of the legislative process. My problem with Ms. Kornmiller is a microcosm of the mentality that is preventing true public and private discourse. The lines of communication are cut. What the opinion page of the Star is offering is not public discourse, but is a heavily edited version of the truth as sifted for you. That’s probably why some decline to comment for the Star. They don’t deserve to be criticized for not answering the Star’s demand for a statement. There are other venues to reach the constituency.

A free flow of ideas is essential for democracy. I think that the key to future success in solving the problems of this country lies in bipartisan or antipartisan agreements. Important issues like the military, veterans affairs, forwarding the space program, health care payment system reform and other issues should generate bipartisan coalitions, but the lines of communication must remain open for this to occur.

I am disappointed in the Arizona Daily Star.

Sincerely,
Dorothy Prater Niemi
LD 27

Capitalism?

2010-01-18T09:04:00.000-08:00

Capitalism/Free Enterprise System

The Free Enterprise economic system is not a game of ‘keep away’ played as a child. Free Enterprise is a game designed to keep the system running while making a profit. If the means to a profit eventually destroys the system, then this means is immoral to use. Morality is actually subjective as used by people and the legal system only covers a small portion of business practices. A sense of responsibility has been absent in the past, either that or a blissful ignorance or indifference to the consequences of the business model deemed to earn a profit. Ms. Bair indicated that compensation practices be linked to FDIC insurance rates, as an insurance hazard that promotes risky investments. Is it really true that investment houses funneling investors’ money into mortgage ‘products’ bet against success and collected insurance money when the mortgage ‘products’ failed while the investors they counseled lost their cash? And what about dividend payments? Are these boards and executives feathering their own nest using tax money and the capital invested by others? Many questions remain to be answered.

Of course the excesses produce regulation and restrictions. Yet they still want more derivatives and other investments that produce nothing but commissions for a few, very expensive people. These derivatives and hedges should be relegated to organized gambling in Nevada or let the Indians handle them.

Formerly known as killing the goose that lays the golden egg, this destructive behavior
must be discouraged, in favor of a less phenomenally profitable enterprise that makes a good living and keeps work going. The short term profit taking model should be analyzed carefully before implementation, as to whether the economy will be perpetuated in a healthy condition after the profit taking. Is that so much to ask on a moral level or must the government create regulation? The answer lies before us.

Now the investment banks that were intensely subsidized for a short time are hugely profitable and plan to pay themselves large sums for handling the government money. Unemployment is about 10%, social services are strained, the real estate market overbuilt and foreclosures rising. Local governments talk more taxes and insurance is in danger of becoming a mandated racket, while layoffs continue.

Can all this be blamed on the mortgage bubble? Easy money and no oversight pumped up real estate values so the securities sold by the investment banks would be worth more and they could make more mortgage ‘products’ for their clients while betting that these same securities would be worthless, collecting on insurance paid by the Feds through the ‘too big to fail’ authorization. Clients sold these ‘securities’ lost out as the foreclosure rate surfaced and the lack of loan oversight became a national scandal. Is buying insurance on something you know to be questionable or even worthless a crime? Fraud? Claw back that money.

Populism aside, people feel ripped off, gasoline prices are creeping up and the President is talking taxes on the investment bank bubble. Unbridled capitalism does become Darwinism as the available resources become controlled by a few manipulative individuals. Better yet, if these ‘new entrepreneurs’ can make up their own investment games without oversight, force the government to pick up the losses and come out of it with huge sums to divvy up, just like the train robbers of old, they think they won the game of keep away.

A brief return to the social unrest of the 20th century in the United States in my memory and knowledge of history tells me that the economy is often cause of unrest as manifested by bitter elections, corruption, recession, fewer jobs, riots and more regulation. The phenomena of bus rides past AIG mansions, rumors that Goldman Sachs people find it easier to get a firearms permit, or that GS people had swine flu shots before anyone else fan populist flames. I thank the media for publicizing the outrageous ripoffs and giant payoffs. I hope our Legislators order a full investigation of the ‘too big to fail’ authorizations. If they do not, expect them to be voted out. Difficult for incumbents in times like these.

Responsible capitalism? Is that possible? Regulated responsible capitalism? Foresight and careful decisions will perpetuate our civilization and allow free enterprise to function within a framework of sustainability in this new environment of 2010.

Tucson City Council

2010-01-09T15:17:00.000-08:00

Recall of City Council 2010

What do I think of the recall?

What caused the recall?

A lack of focus in Rio Nuevo contributed to public distrust. One project should be the focus until that project is completed and paid for. Squandering money on consultants resulted in a few benefiting hugely from Rio Nuevo while few jobs were created. Most of the money was skimmed off by those in the know before the job benefits actually reached the people. As for the public structures to be created with this money in Rio Nuevo, they do not exist, the money is gone and the fund encumbered for $80,000,000. We see a very few benefitting at the expense of the rest of us as the city staggers under a mountain of debt service. And there are no new museums or parade grounds for the people to enjoy.

I think an investigation and the ongoing audit will determine where the money went, what it was spent on and who got it. How about a list of people/enterprises that received Rio Nuevo money, in order of amount? This is public information. Let the audit begin when the first Rio Nuevo crew was ousted and the new regime took over.

Insular attitudes, insider mentalities, a lack of long term planning, lack of focus in Rio Nuevo, too much debt, and high unemployment have resulted in a negative public attitude. Recalls are a sign of public unrest and competition for scarce resources. The Rio Nuevo money was a rare opportunity for this community that has come to just another credit line to be obligated with nothing to show for the money. Too many people were cut out of the deal. Too much in the hands of too few. A few jobs for some very expensive people. Free land for select individuals. Rent subsidy for some and not others.

The ‘discovery’ of the $32,000,000 budget deficit just after the election left some people wondering if this information were withheld in an attempt to influence the election.

And now after all this public debt and the recession, we cannot afford more taxes and fees. With the city scrounging in our pockets for money and high unemployment rates, citizens need relief. The recall interests people because the city is insolvent and the Council raised fees and might be considering raising taxes.

Tucson Budget Crisis

2009-12-30T13:57:00.000-08:00

Year end musings on the sad budgetary state of affairs of Tucson, Arizona, USA.

Tucson had an election and I pray the council will succeed in the difficult task ahead. Some guidelines for solving the budget cutting problem should be in place before the task is attempted. Prioritizing objectives must be done.

In this analysis the special place of the responsibilities of cities must be considered first.
The city of Tucson is responsible for providing essential services. As a definition of essential must be made, I say that the following services are essential.

I. Essential

Law enforcement
Fire protection
Water and sanitation
Garbage collection
Prosecution/incarceration/courts/public defender
Records and Elections
Related Administrative

Other services are ongoing but are not essential in the short term. These must be cut back what percent?

II. Secondary (not in order of importance)

City manager
Real estate
Zoning
Rio Nuevo
Community services
MLK revitalization(no longer low income)
Housing Management
Community development
*Audit Housing Assistance
Convention Center
Director/administration
Event development
Event services
Finance
General Services
Information technology
Neighborhood resources
Parks (explore alternate way to keep open, caretaker system)
Procurement
Transportation

To continue this categorization, the following must be cut heavily or discontinued.

III. Non-Essential (not in order of importance)

Intergovernmental relations: elected officials
Development Services skeleton crew for the downturn
Budgetary Requirements environmental services
General Services architectural and Engineering
Fleet services could be cut overall by having fewer vehicles online
Internal service fund
Is golf a net economic boost for Tucson? How much does golf generate?
Human Resources
Urban Planning and Design
Non Departmental: mishmash of causes needs weeding out
Debt Service

Cutting the budgets of the secondary and non essential services is necessary. The essential services could use an administrative reorganization and review of expenses in order to shave off a percent of their budgets. They should be given further goals to meet.

Debt service is huge and the debts should be restructured to meet existing economic conditions, in order to prevent a default. I would rather pay police and fire protection than pay debt service, if the choice has to be made. If the pundits say Tucson will ruin its credit, perhaps this is a blessing in disguise, since about ¼ of the budget goes to debt service. The city cannot afford this debt load and certainly does not need more debt in any form. Look at it this way: if you count the debt for water systems, the debt service rises to $140,788,980, which is about 29% of total stated expenditures. I wish it were impossible for elected officials to create debt that lasts beyond their term. With so much of the expenditures tied up in debt service, flexibility appears to be limited to employee pay cuts and departmental expenditures in the form of cuts in services to residents.

What a plan! Raise taxes and continue the level of debt service no matter what happens to essential services? Not a good plan. Tell them to take a hike after you have cut these departments and downsized the budget, if that is still needed. We do not neglect the weak in order to pay debt service. We do not lay off Police and Fire to pay debt service.

Difficult decisions are ahead. May you all succeed in this task.

Dorothy Prater Niemi
December 2009

POLICY CHANGE TO STIMULATE ECONOMY

2009-12-06T13:18:00.000-08:00

Federal and local entitlement programs: A long term approach

In a few years, years, the Federal budget will be all entitlements. They are now borrowing in order to fund operations and defense. Arizona is in similar shape. 2/3 of the federal budget is mandated and sunsets are nonexistent. Borrowing is rampant tying up revenue streams for years. The whole country is so tied up in debt, discretionary income is ????

Some new policies are needed:

Entitlements should be limited to X% of the total income, not income plus borrowing.
All new entitlements through legislation or initiative should have a sunset clause and an escape clause in case of a budget deficit. Flexibility is needed in budgeting.

To cut the growth of entitlements, slow population growth through tax incentives. Government subsidy of poor should not escalate with each mouth added, thus paying the poor to breed. The more well off also are breeding in record numbers, using the tax deduction to help finance it. The public schools also must accept unlimited numbers of children from any given source, which favors those with large families, while the others pay. A religious objection to population control is personal, but those who want large families should pay for it.

Suggested changes in policy:

After 1 child per person, no welfare payment raises for further children. This does not apply to food stamps, however.

After 1 child per person, no further deductions for income tax will be given by the state or federal governments and an overage must be paid for on a per capita basis.

After one child per person, any person having more than one child must pay a stipend per overage to the local school public district or arrange for private schooling subject to curriculum set by the state/federal and passage of state/federal tests.

Tax refunds to the childless.

These changes in policies would result in a slowing of population growth, which would slow the growth of other governmental costs. This would raise taxes for some, but it is those who are using the services.

Further policy changes linked:

Illegal immigration needs to be discouraged. Border security will succeed only when the economic climate does not favor hiring illegal aliens, who will work under the radar for less than the minimum wage. Perhaps the minimum wage needs to be revisited, but if population growth slows, fewer workers can demand higher wages, but only in the absence of illegal immigrant competition. Immigration policies in general need to be amended to force other countries to manage their population growth instead of relying on the USA as a population outlet.

Getting business owners out of the health insurance business and allowing them to pay what they can to workers would open opportunity. If a large business owner pays so little that their workers must apply for assistance, then possibly a stipend should be required of them, as a percentage of total profit. Reasonable compensation to the owners would be monitored in these cases.

Awareness that free enterprise will carry on under the blanket despite governments effort to control what people are paid and what these people have to buy with the money they earn. Enough already. Local trading economies will arise as will trading economies like smuggling, all of which operate without taxation or regulation. Filtering money through an administrative hierarchy in order to pay for health care makes me want to move towards cash payments that skip these people who are charging us to pay themselves to distribute this money for us. Reality check.

I still don’t get how AIG securities insurance failure milked the US government of $180,000,000,000. Did some of this $ that went to foreign banks make its way to Dubai? Prosecutors need to trail this milking and pinpoint the chain of command. What interesting news that would be. Is it true firearms permits are now more available in New York?

Like who instigated? Who set the stage? Pipeline information? Cleanup crew as recipient of riches?

We need new policy.

Suggested policy changes:

Outlaw securities, derivatives and hedging anywhere but under legalized gambling. The economy is not a toy and people depend on it.

Review economic needs within the USA before looking to export. Sell to each other and Canada and Mexico.

Free business owners from mandatory health insurance requirements

Do not force the purchase of insurance on the populace.

Link employee wages to their welfare needs to employer profits and required support payments to the state, with exemptions for subsistence business.

Ease zoning laws that discourage localized small businesses.

Ease up on taxes, regulation, licenses, fees, for all business except for public health/environmental concerns.

Fewer inspectors rather than fewer law enforcement personnel, when the government has budget shortfalls.

Policy can dictate change in oblique ways. The insistence that growth can be infinite is indicative of a lack of population curbs and the inability of production of food in the infinite is bound to coincide in a population crash, starvation of the species in the classic ecological boom and bust cycle defined by physical resources. Must we act so much like animals that we must do this to ourselves?

Opinion Bias at the Arizona Daily Star

2009-12-04T10:38:00.001-08:00

Due to a recent problem with the Arizona Daily Star, I have taken an interest in opinion page policy analysis. Since I also subscribe to The Arizona Republic, I compared the two papers.

The first major difference between them is the amount of information about an author that the Star requires.

Star

Name
Address
Daytime phone
Occupation
Political affiliation
Issue affiliation
Candidate affiliation Campaign affiliation
150 word length

Republic

Name
Address
Phone
200 word length

The second major difference is that in the Star, submissions become the property of the Star. The Republic publishes the work in several formats and makes no claim of ownership. If an author’s work is printed in the Star, then that author has ‘sold’ it for nothing. Does this mean the author can no longer sell the piece?

The third major difference is that in the Star, submissions may be “edited for clarity and length” while the Republic makes no mention of that possibility. Who is doing this at the Star?

Having always admired the Arizona Republic as the better paper, I believe that the Star opinion page guidelines set the stage for ongoing opinion page bias on the part of the Star.

Health Insurance or Health Care?

2009-11-09T15:46:00.000-08:00

The discussion is still about insurance, not health care. Is it the government’s purvey to provide health insurance or provide that government care for the infirm and ill? Traditionally, government did provide for the poor out of humanitarian reasons or out of the need to prevent revolution from the ground up. The funds came from the king and the wealthy. Religious institutions also provided assistance to the poor out of a necessity to prove they practiced what they preached but probably out of a natural human need to care for others.

I am heartened by the Republicans finally coming up with some ideas to reform health care delivery systems. I am disappointed in the Democrats for embracing mandatory insurance as the way to provide better health care for our citizens.

Requiring business to buy health insurance for employees keeps the price jacked up and the whole scheme going. The idea of mandatory insurance for all citizens will also jack the price up. Government price controls are resisted as the public option, which would limit what could be paid for a given medical service, forcing health care providers to rein in costs or services to patients or forcing them to take a pay cut. The debt overload is staggering uphill, so it is suggested commercial debt relief to medical care providers. Exorbitant commercial prices during the boom left medical businesses swamped in building debt in the form of high rents or payments.

These bills our fearless leaders are coming up with contain the idea of mandatory insurance. Our elected leaders deem it necessary to force the people to pay for insurance instead of health care. They also think that insurance companies are better at handling our money than we are.

If this mandatory insurance idea is foisted upon us, I suggest the following be implemented along with mandatory insurance payments:

All health care providers must accept all insurance. No hoity toity, no exclusive treatment salons that do not take Medicare, no ‘private’ clinics that take ‘exclusive’ insurance. If a rich person hires a private doctor for cash payments, that is private enterprise.

All health care providers must accept all insurance because all citizens are required by law to buy insurance. We lose our right to choose, health care providers lose the right to choose who they treat. This means all hospitals, doctors, clinics etc. who accept any insurance have to accept all insurance.

Price fixing between health care providers and insurance companies should be a thing of the past in that prices for procedures will be dictated by the government that requires us to buy insurance. We should not be charged more than what the insurance pays, since so many people with insurance are bankrupted by health care costs. When insurance is mandated, the health care people will earn less since price controls will be instituted.

For the health insurance people, you cannot demand we buy what you are selling without us having some ideas how we want our money managed. Insurance companies must accept controls on pay, number of employees, standards for judging claims, premium price controls and intense oversight. No more golf holidays, spa visits and celebrations of plenty while using premium money to party and gamble.

The domino effect is present here. The strongarm tactic of forcing people to buy insurance creates other hassles. Some of our legislators evidently believe it is easy to force people to buy insurance but in the interests of fairness, the insurance industry and the health care industry will also lose volition. Sure, the insurance companies will have millions more bank accounts to tap into but is it worth the change in our socio-economic structure?

Not one to criticize without offering a solution, here are a few ideas:

The mandatory insurance idea is not free market. Insurance should only be an option, not the only way to achieve affordable health care. Capitalism allows for a variety of approaches, never mandating that one way is the only way. Affordable health care is the real goal, not propping up exorbitant salaries in the insurance and health care arena. As I wrote before, why not use stimulus money to establish low cost clinics in the neighborhoods and to fund nurses in the public schools? Remember, providing health care is the goal.

Wajiristan Earthquake

2009-10-31T07:52:00.000-07:00

Wajiristan earthquake
Portent of future displeasure
2012 AD/BC observable
Synchronous cycles days coincide
Endings and beginnings

Some try to protect a way of life
From change an impossible task
Cannot freeze time
We have no volition in that
Then come the choices

If your heritage is omitted
All are not known
But all are respected
As a choice
Those contributed and succeeded in survival

Tasmanian, Austrailian, Basque, Celt, Jew, Armenian, Pygmies, Persian,
Saami, Tamil, Olmec, Han, Mongols, Shinto, Sikkhs, Hindi, Egypt, Maya, Nazcan, Greece, Buddha, Rome, Teotihuacan
Christ and Mohammed
May we all celebrate and respect heritage

Let no man slay
For the reason of difference
Shame for humans to kill humans
When the relentless environment
Could not as their descendents live today.

As time and environment is in flux
So must be these systems
Time is frozen in memory only
Our lives are not so isolated
As when these belief systems began

Blame time if you are disappointed
Blame not the innocent
Blame the mists of time when chadars
Protected desert women from sun and disease
And males walked with women for safety

Relativism versus moral certainty
Basic right and wrong are known to all
Just excusing those different from the definition
To some all means only those resembling themselves
Is a severely rigid viewpoint

Competition for resources
Disguised as religious persecution
Ethnic hatred and competitive fear
This must be resolved
With land and resources already scarce.

Dorothy Prater Niemi 2009

Tucson City Council Race

2009-10-11T19:41:00.001-07:00

Are the hotel/motel receipts in town down? Should the city of Tucson be borrowing $15,000,000 to tear down the front of the convention center and rebuild it, all before the February opening of the gem show? As Ms. Trasoff indicates, this would provide few jobs. The jobs created would be short term, but the debt she embraces is for the long term, with the rest of us paying for those few quick jobs. Taxpayers will pay for years and years, plus high interest rates siphoned off to the moneylenders. Ms. Trasoff would have us pay and pay while she moves on.

And what about hotel receipts in town? Should the city be funding anything that competes with already struggling businesses? Should the city be going into debt to compete with local businesses?

This is a cynical attempt to gain momentary control over $15,000,000. The construction lobby would have secured one more short term job that will be paid for by the rest of us for a long time. All this without any discernable benefit to the public and the possibility that the convention center will be torn up just in time for the gem show. . Get a restraining order against any destruction of the convention center.

VOTERS! Please vote these people out.

Campaign Statements Mean Nothing

2009-09-11T10:49:00.000-07:00

Since our president has reneged on a campaign declaration against forcing citizens to buy insurance, it is necessary to oppose his position. Forcing citizens to buy anything would raise the price, since the supply is controlled by profit takers while the citizenry is mandated to buy. This sounds like slavery to me. You say we will have an array of choices, but none of these choices is a refusal to buy anything to save the money. If this ‘reform’ goes through, we lose our freedom of choice to buy or not to buy. We can merely choose among an array provided by the insurance companies and the government, because we all know that our politicians and insurance agents know much more about how we should spend our money. We have to spend our money on insurance, whether or not we want to. We are not allowed to save this money and use it for medical costs negotiated at a fair market value.

The free market will not function without freedom of choice on the part of the consumer.

Of course, I have not heard that all health care businesses must honor all these mandatory insurance ‘choices’ we will be so graciously allowed to pay for. Since we are posited to lose our freedom to chose whether to buy insurance or not, the health care businesses should not be allowed to turn away customers, no matter what insurance they have. These health care businesses should be forced to take whatever every insurance pays without charging the patient further costs. If our freedom to bring the medical profession to a fair market value is at an end, then their freedom to pick and choose among patients and insurance plans should be at an end.

Mandatory insurance of any kind is a cash cow for those controlling the insurance companies. The money they siphon off could be better spent on actual healthcare instead of for enriching executives and investors and politicians. What is going on here? These insurance parasites do not deserve the cover of legislation making it mandatory for us to buy what ever makes them the most profit.

Invasive Species

2009-08-28T08:34:00.000-07:00

Invasive Species in North and South America

Pestilence comes to mind first the scourge that hit the new world as we in our history phrase it. The Amerind population decimated by European diseases reduced almost wiped out in successive waves of disease originating at European contact points and spreading out way ahead of any physical meetings. Once the Amerinds caught the diseases, dying spread throughout the trade routes, making it easy for the Europeans to move in to a new territory. So European diseases were invasive species in North and South America, dating from at least 1492 onward. Mayan legend has it that death comes from the East, from across the ocean, which might indicate earlier contacts and bouts of disease originating in Africa.

These epidemics were followed by the introduction of European food plants and animals, hitchhikers like wharf rats, roaches and mosquitos, pets like cane toads, lionfish, English sparrows and starlings, working animals like donkeys and horses, food animals, the list goes on and on. Earlier introduction of invasive species through Chinese contact around 1420 and possibly earlier had brought Asian chickens and ducks, the Cherokee rose and a human intestinal parasite. Invasive grasses include Bermuda grass, pampas grass, fountain grass, rice, barley, wheat and rye, some food crops, some not. The mulberry, chinaberry, eucalyptus and tamarack all came in from Asia and the South Pacific.

Economic practices of humans included clear cut logging, burning, plowing, overgrazing, poisoning and dumping waste, all of which favored the new invasive species, much like the European diseases had prepared the way for European victory in the new world.

So now we worry about buffelgrass? The drought brings change in all species of the desert. The drought plus human destruction of habitat is devastating to the Sonoran Desert. Buffelgrass is used as fodder in Sonora and has been here at least 80 years.

The drought has changed the buffelgrass population. That which I observe appears to be damaged by the drought where continuing drying of the soil will kill it, seeing that the Sonoran Desert is on the edge of the possible range for this grass. So far this year I have seen little replication activity in the plants. These buffelgrass plants near I-10/Valencia are either dormant or dead as of 25 August 09.

The drought will do for free what all this controversy over spraying poison will do at a cost to taxpayers. I would like a cost rundown on this spraying project from all the cooperating entities, just to see how much money is being wasted on this poisoning. How many people could be funded to manually remove the grass, if it is that important to some people? Is spraying really what we want to do here? The Agent Orange personal devastation that many recruits suffered in the aftermath of Vietnam has never left my mind.

How soon some of you forget and accept the assurances of those selling the product.

Health Care Cost Containment

2009-08-17T06:48:00.000-07:00

Institutions have lost flexibility, the ability to adapt to changing conditions. The loss of flexibility comes from rules, laws, policies, taxes and regulation. The purposes of these phenomena vary, but range from addressing public health issues to increasing revenue to policing moral failings expressed in destructive business tactics.

The issues of human fragility, a lack of moral attentiveness, or a combative competitive urge towards anarchy has been dealt with by the creation of governments. A government is created at a point in time from then forward must use the system to meet new situations. The familiar situation will be the most easily solvable and the new variant situations will demand creativity and flexibility in order to survive the new conditions. Maintaining moral values must be imperative as the system morphs enough to meet changing conditions.

As a moral imperative to be honest and trustworthy apparently will not define the current moral atmosphere that if it is not defined as illegal then it is all right to proceed, no matter what earlier moral codes would have prohibited such action on the basis of good or evil. This malfunction of the economic system is a demonstration of a lack of adaptation to changing conditions and a failure of moral predictability. An economic system that is posited on the rule of law, growth and cheap resources worked well in the conditions of Manifest Destiny but may not function so well under population and resource buildout conditions.

The basic tenets of free enterprise were developed under frontier expansionism but were soon diluted by regulations within communities. Free enterprise is exactly that: an individual will have freedom to open a business using their property for that business, barring some public health concerns. Commercial areas are now long distances from the clients, must maintain huge parking lots and must pay exorbitant rent, pay higher taxes and buy insurance for employees. The small entrepreneur working out of a home is priced out of the market due to the money siphon to government assisted by big business. The recent economic downturn has closed down businesses, the city and county are raising taxes and the unemployment level is climbing. The system is so tied up in revenue enhancement, gigantic loan payments, fees and high taxes, all flexibility is lost.

The subprime scandal is an example of maladaptive behavior that some would view as criminal, as that self serving cynicism appeared to rule human behavior, rather than a well considered morality aimed at the good of society. Some confuse free enterprise with a free for all attitude resulting in personal gain without consideration of the peripheral damage. Free enterprise must have rules like chess in order to function. Eliminating competition through buying politicians to install high government fees and taxes on small businesses is not free enterprise. Competing should be based on quality service and quality goods, not manipulating the environment so no others exist. The current economic environment is regulated into sluggishness and rising unemployment, amid the crisis of confidence created by the subprime scandal.

The fewer choices people have, the less free enterprise functions. Government ordered expenditures from the earnings of citizens in the form of mandatory insurance results in price fixing and high prices plus an unwelcome power grab on the part of those anointed to sell this mandatory insurance that can be cancelled with no refund for you. Forcing citizens to buy insurance will tie up more money into the hands of a few.

So what kind of system do we here have? Private profit and subsidized losses for the financials immersed in the subprime morass? That did not please many citizens, whose losses were ignored as the ‘investments’ went under with the money long gone. The bailouts were disliked and resented at the grassroots as the scandal continued in bonus payments promised through the implementation of a business model that was aimed at selling specific debt derivatives to unwary investors, a goal that had nothing to do with the public good, only a short term profit for a few. And now taxpayer money subsidizes these people as they collect high salaries and ‘bonuses’ earned by bankrupting the company. Of course more regulation became reality as a result of this lack of social responsibility. So we have a system that takes from the taxpayer to give to the financials and insurance companies while also forcing the citizenry to buy services from insurance companies, entrusting them to make payments to our health care providers. We subsidize private sector insurance middlemen as required by law.

Using private enterprise to enforce public policy is contrary to the system of free enterprise. The government should not mandate that the citizenry buy from private enterprise or government. If private enterprise needs more clients, the services they are selling should be competitive, not mandated by the government. Free enterprise begins with the consumer and discretionary income and free choice to buy or not to buy. Free enterprise depends on the consumer having freedom of choice to patronize any given business. If discretionary income is so allotted to mandatory programs, fees and taxes, free enterprise suffers.

So are we a free enterprise society or not? The current health insurance debate seems to leave personal choice out of the picture. Bureaucrats and insurance executives have created a system that requires an ever larger percent of the income in order to function, a trend that is obviously unsustainable. Healthcare costs need to be lowered, tort reform accomplished, and voluntary individual insurance must be instituted in order to give the free enterprise system room to function. Competition among insurance companies for business from a captive audience is not to be confused with competition for individual patronage by a legitimate business serving the needs of the people. Let the healthcare providers compete for the peoples’ business by lowering prices. Allow the money to pay for healthcare to remain in the hands of the people and let the insurance companies and government compete for this business. The costs of health insurance and health care will be more affordable because competition and flexibility will be reinstituted into the system.

Trinity of Power

2009-08-10T11:20:00.000-07:00

Health Care

2009-07-22T15:19:00.000-07:00

Health Care Delivery and Payment System Reform

Much is being said but I am not certain those with the highest volume are speaking for their constituencies or for the donor interests possibly aiming at short term profits for themselves at the expense of the actual constituency. If this proves to be the case, then a reevaluation of qualifications is in order.

Individual choice is glibly paid homage to by saying these are the allowed possibilities and you have your freedom to choose by choosing among these. This is not freedom. True freedom would allow for all the choices the individual could imagine or research for the spending of hard earned cash. Being told to buy something created by others for their own profit and using their definition of greater good for all is not freedom.

Money is earned and taxes are paid and insurance is another mandated tax? Or should that insurance money be in the hands of the earner for discretionary spending in healthcare? Discretionary money is the key to competition. Competition eliminated by mandatory insurance and subsequent price fixing has resulted in high prices for the services and huge administrative costs while rates rise and rise, like ticks. Who benefits?

The series of siphons on this insurance money is supporting an edifice of personnel who want to keep their control over the insurance premium money. These people are hiring lobbyists and donating to campaigns. How about health care paid for in cash by people on a discretionary basis? That means cash and competition, which lowers prices. The issue is availability of health care, which I translate as the cost of health care. If the cost for routine care is low, people can afford health care. Sell insurance at a high deductable for catastrophes and if somebody does not buy it and needs specialization, they are referred to social services. Catastrophic insurance should be freely chosen and of low cost.

Tort reform is another need. How about individuals carrying their own insurance against malpractice on a discretionary basis per procedure? Individuals would then only pay for the actual instance involving them, rather than subsidizing high insurance rates. Doctors would be relieved of the burden of malpractice insurance, since the patient would have personal insurance. We should have the right to choose discretionary spending on health care at a reasonable price over mandatory insurance programs with ever rising costs.

Stimulus money could be used to establish clinics in neighborhoods, which would employ people and provide health care at a reasonable cost. Don’t forget that health care is not synonymous with health insurance. We need affordable health care.

Kindle

2009-07-20T12:56:00.000-07:00

Musings on the Kindle

Wonderful feature is the instant download of emergency book supplies and the readable format. I can read faster on the Kindle and find it light and easy to handle.

A download containing charts and graphs had good text quality but the figures were unreadable. This book is formatted for print media. An alternative would be to autoformat the charts into a larger font size. Formatting for Kindle would contain the chart or graph on one frame along with the caption, in a readable font size.

Learning from experience formatting for the Kindle, I came up with the following formula to produce a readable product:

For e-mail or Kindle format

Set line spacing at 1.5

Under Format:
Paragraph Paragraph spacing set at Before=12 or 6, check sample
Set line spacing at 1.5
General Alignment Left, Outline level Body Text

This will produce a readable copy for Kindle, with 1.5 line spacing and more than that between unindented paragraphs

Ask For an FBI/CIA Investigation

2009-07-07T09:26:00.000-07:00

A criminal investigation into the ascendency of certain brokerage/bank institutions is merited by the emerging knowledge that the housing economic bubble was based on wholesale fraud made possible by well intentioned individuals who thought the poor should have a chance at home ownership.

If somebody cannot pay for a debt incurred then that individual should not be loaned money. Seems logical but the optimal outcome for this housing loan activity was only to be able to market the debt at an instant profit for the broker, not to ensure eventual repayment of the loan. Nobody gave a shit if the loans were repaid. These kinds of loans were then bundled together and sold as AAA rated ‘securities’ to investors looking for safe investments. Two more frauds added to the original appraisal fraud, liars at the loan company, loans with inconsistent payments, inflated housing prices, a triumvirate of developer, broker and lender all cooperating to drive housing prices up and sell more housing by enabling incompetent buyers. Who cashed out?

Yet the USA taxpayer is bailing out all these people who perpetuated and made money on this fraud. Why not just give the towns and states and retirement funds and private accounts their principals back? This would stimulate the economy by aiding distressed states. Stop the AIG, CITI etc. payouts. Let them sue for the money. Did they think the insurance on the debt they bought should bail them out of a bad investment? Or was the insurance on the CDOs (collateralized debt obligations) known to pay off due to the poor quality of the mortgages all this was based on? You and me been had. Why would the SEC allow mortgage derivatives they did not understand?

It’s time for an investigation and indictments in the private and public sector…..this public/private partnership did not benefit the taxpayers, who worry about medical costs while these frauds receive billions and more.

Why are all these contracts and ‘securities’ legally binding when it was all based on fraud? Who made the decision to cover this free enterprise bilking by going through the lenders and brokers doing the bilking? The people being bilked, the bilkees should have first shot at the bailout money, not the moneylenders. Let these institutions built up too big to fail on fraudulent schemes based on subprime loans go under. Work with the investors and forget propping up these people who caused the problem. This will get actual money in circulation instead of tying it up. Local lenders who also service the loans can loan to locals to buy homes. No more mortgage derivatives. Mortgage derivatives are like an exported disease and bailout money proves that it isn’t free enterprise either. Let’s separate the housing/loan market from the debt export scene. The purpose of housing is housing, not to be used as a gambling chip.

Free enterprise when profitable but socialized when taking bailout money. Private profit and bailout for losses. Good odds for somebody while the rest of us pay and pay and pay. This horseshit began under President Bush and is happily continuing under President Obama.

MANDATORY INSURANCE RIPOFF!

2009-06-09T08:20:00.000-07:00

The rush to insurance during this healthcare summit seems to make many presumptions, such as that price fixing is good for one industry but not good for another. I am sure that the lobbyists are leading the charge to mandatory insurance for individuals and businesses, letting Congress take control of providing customers for these private businesses through mandates that take civil rights away from the taxpayers.

Being forced to buy anything is not freedom. Price fixing with a guaranteed ever increasing percent of income in perpetuity for insurance companies will not bring health care costs down. Allowing government and insurance companies an automatic draw on paychecks will not bring health care costs down. Freedom of choice and cash in hand will bring health care costs down.

Oh, but the debt load on the medical profession is huge and there is all that malpractice insurance to pay for and these payments must continue….Perhaps more structured bankrupt medical debtors this time, instead of just auto manufacturers. Where is the debt load? Who are the creditors? Should foreign companies be able to own our insurance pools?

Establish low cost clinics in neighborhoods for routine medical visits covered or not by insurance. Reasonable, available low cost health care, payment in cash or card or insurance, but always at a low cost, payment now or jump through social services hoops.

Facilities for these clinics exist in many cities in the form of unused commercial space, empty government buildings, repossessed homes and unused school space.

Insurance companies are tying up huge sums and then using these sums to get tax money to pay off their gambling losses. Now they want to mandate the continuance of this forced obligation so they can take even more money out of the system. Let government, and private enterprise offer non-mandatory insurance choices and allow the individual to seek out low cost heath care on the open market. Use stimulus money to establish the clinics and man them. Give the people the right to buy or not to buy.

Figure it out! A small clinic operating 24 hours a day would see a patient every half hour average @ $10 a visit, $4800 would be generated or $9,600 @ $20 a visit. Enough money to pay a small staff and what a boon to the neighborhood it would be.

Give the people a real chance to choose healthcare, not a series of predesigned choices that enrich others. This is far more important than more roads.

Womens Rights and Mandatory Insurance

2009-06-04T10:41:00.000-07:00

Mr. President: I am pleased that you are an advocate of civil rights, including those of women. My mother was born before suffrage for women in the USA and I came to adulthood amid prejudice against women. I learned along the way to make my own choices, sometimes at odds with male dominated society. Forced choices do not freedom make.

In regards to insurance, I remember disliking Ms. Clinton because she would mandate I buy something, anything, but in this case it was insurance. As a free market advocate, the price fixing brought in by mandatory insurance is dangerous for the economy. As a parallel, possibly it would be decided that all must buy a car, with the prices set by the industry and the government. Let the assessments begin.

Government insurance? Go for it!
Private insurance? Let’s have it!
Mandatory insurance? Cancel it! Let the prices of health care fall to the housing levels. Use stimulus money to establish low cost clinics in neighborhoods.

A post boom-time pullback in expenditures per item. All sectors are influenced by the assumed derivative debt, not just housing. Propping up outlandish medical charges and huge outlays for malpractice insurance by mandating insurance while not allowing the direct pay preference is allowing a few to control huge sums of cash. Direct pay at a low cost in local conditions would free up all the cash held by insurance firms into the economy. Let the free market work.

Crop Failure

2009-05-29T18:49:00.000-07:00

Arizona State University Commencement

2009-05-16T11:12:00.000-07:00

Dear President Obama:

I attended the ASU graduation of my son in law with the greatest pleasure in your speech to the graduates. Thank you.

The economic worries here have created much discussion at local political clubs. I have written my ideas on health care insurance reform, hereupon forwarding them to you from the great state of Arizona…

Healthcare reform can attract votes and free up capital

Healthcare insurance reform is happening. The political parties must assist in the creation of a new system of ideas. The way to achieve influence will be through the possession of new ideas and new solutions to current problems in the healthcare system. The nation must have some ideas that depart from the practices of the past that are proven business failures.

Bipartisan discussions are necessary. Respecting others opinions within the party is necessary. Ideally, individuals who prevent voices from being heard should be relegated to observer status while others discuss these critical issues. Since this is not an ideal world, politicians must have some good health care insurance reform ideas that will garner attention and votes in order to assist in the reform process. From a financial standpoint, considerable capital could be freed up to circulate in the economy, jobs would be created and the employed would have control of their insurance funds in the form of cash if all this required insurance money were turned over to the private sector.

Call for position papers on health care insurance reform. This is not the only idea out there. Campaign contributors cannot control this reform process. Proponents of some reform ideas predicate insurance. Choice of offered plans is not freedom of choice.

An analysis of the present healthcare insurance system reveals some basic facts:

Insurance concerns collect huge sums of cash from the populace
Insurance concerns pay out some of the cash for medical expenses
Insurance concerns invest large sums of cash
Some insurance concerns have required bailout cash from the Feds
The Feds offer medical insurance now

Malpractice insurance is expensive
Insurance takes a discount from stated medical rates
Insurance can pay less or more for a given procedure than is charged the cash customer
Fraud and inflation of costs have been problems in the present system
Mandatory insurance takes several forms: health, automotive, home…
Mandatory health insurance: offered through the employers who must pay for it or pay for a portion of it
Mandatory automotive liability insurance: passed by legislature
Mandatory car and home insurance at the insistence of lienholders
Insurance companies and medical personnel have agreed to slow down rising costs

Now back to ways to attract votes.

Business leaders may be glad to dislodge health insurance requirements from the workplace. Forcing businesses to provide health insurance is tying up huge sums of cash that could be circulating in the economy. Let me say that individual choice is the most sustainable way to have an insurance program. Business votes.

So say that business is relieved of the responsibility of providing health insurance providing the payment that had gone to the insurance company now goes into the worker’s pay as a raise. The worker will have the power to decide to buy insurance or to patronize low cost walk in clinics situated in neighborhoods. The government offers a low cost insurance for claims exceeding x amount, which would leave the patron with a substantial deductable to meet, but the low cost clinic format allows for affordable health care. Private insurance could operate just as now, except that employers will not be obligated to provide customers for them. Private insurers could compete in rates and coverage, just as now. Clinics could compete for customers as well.

The business benefit of this plan is that wages and salaries once again become a predictable expense instead of expenditures at the mercy of insurance companies who now promise to slow down the pace of cost increases. The establishment of low cost walk in clinics has already begun in many neighborhoods. This idea could be expanded to private enterprise and public health clinics through the government. People could purchase health care when needed or would rely on private insurance plans or opt for the low cost, high deductable health care program through the government. There would be choice on the part of individuals and businesses, which should drive the costs down in both insurance and health care.

The costs of malpractice insurance has become self defeating in that the cycle of inflation in health care costs is bolstered by these huge lawsuits. Perhaps legislation can be passed that enables patients to sign legal waivers or limits in lieu of paying exorbitant malpractice insurance rates. Some element of trust should remain between doctor and patient. Once again, the patient is not permitted to decide whether or not to buy malpractice insurance. Patients are forced to pay for it as expressed in the high service rates charged.

This is leading up to the idea of “personal insurance”. Individuals should be able to buy
insurance on themselves (and dependents) that covers various scenarios like accidents, malpractice, cancer and any other insurance they deem necessary. Patients insure themselves or not, as they choose. Doctors are free of insurance demands. Healthcare and insurance costs go down. People regain the right to choose. Government and private enterprise offer affordable routine health care.

Entering indigent care would be like bankruptcy and individuals who claim indigent status will be the subject of social services investigation and payment plans will be developed if warranted. The expense of indigent care will always be there and must be absorbed, just as it now. A forward looking taskforce to avoid increases in indigents must be developed. Claiming indigent status in order to claim free health care is not to be a frivolous step easily taken.

As far as automotive insurance goes, the legislature in Arizona requires it of all motorists. I suggest that free choice be such that an individual can buy or not buy insurance on themselves and dependents to cover accidents, repairs, theft and so on. Auto loans and lienholder agreements on insurance are private enterprise.

The problem with insurance today is the huge sums the insurance institutions are controlling. Abuses of the system include various schemes aimed at ‘investing’ premium money, loses of investor money, high paid executives, bailouts and the taxpayers paying to reimburse the insurance companies for the premium money lost gambling. Mandatory insurance equals loss of control of your own money. Pooling money is a good idea but not if the holding company only has to keep less than 10% of it on hand, while gambling the rest away.

Return the money spent on insurance to the people to invest in what healthcare they need on a cash basis or to purchase healthcare insurance. The money now controlled by insurance companies would be reduced. The consumer would have more disposable income to circulate. Businesses would be free of paperwork and obligation except for industrial insurance.

Business opportunities in the form of low cost health clinics would prosper. A labor pool exists from laid off healthcare workers, job freezes in the healthcare field, plus new graduates who cannot get a job. Private insurance would have opportunities to form money pools addressing the high deductable cost of government insurance. Private insurers could open their own clinics.

Private enterprise would prosper under this plan.

Crucial elements in time order:

Use stimulus money to refurbish vacant buildings into low cost health clinics located every x number of population near transit lines. This action would have several needed results, the establishment of more clinics plus short term construction jobs and long term health care jobs plus utilization of vacant properties. Clinics must be in place, either government or private enterprise, before the rest of the plan is implemented.

Develop guidelines for personal insurance in various categories. Rescind mandatory insurance and watch the market adjust to the new conditions of more circulating capital and more freedom of choice in business and for the individual. The clinics accept business and the people get affordable health care.

Attracting votes with policy change is an old ploy but this reform idea would attract votes from businesses struggling under an insurance load, the worker who wants more money in his pocket, the voter who wants freedom to choose on insurance, unemployed healthcare workers, people who do not have insurance and civic leaders who favor clinics. This could be a popular idea. Did I say the populist word?

Healthcare Insurance Reform

2009-05-12T06:27:00.000-07:00

Healthcare insurance reform can attract votes and free up capital

Healthcare insurance reform is happening. Republicans must assist in the creation of a new system of ideas. The way to achieve influence will be through the possession of new ideas and new solutions to current problems in the healthcare system. Republicans must have some ideas that depart from the practices of the past that are proven business failures.

Bipartisan discussions are necessary. Respecting others opinions within the party is necessary. Ideally, individuals who prevent voices from being heard should be relegated to observer status while others discuss these critical issues. Since this is not an ideal world, Republicans must have some good health care insurance reform ideas that will garner attention and votes in order to assist in the reform process. From a financial standpoint, considerable capital could be freed up to circulate in the economy, jobs would be created and the employed would have control of their insurance funds in the form of cash.

Call for position papers on health care insurance reform. This is not the only idea out there. Campaign contributors cannot control this reform process.

An analysis of the present healthcare insurance system reveals some basic facts:

Insurance concerns collect huge sums of cash from the populace
Insurance concerns pay out some of the cash for medical expenses
Insurance concerns invest large sums of cash
Some insurance concerns have required bailout cash from the Feds
The Feds offer medical insurance now

Malpractice insurance is expensive
Insurance takes a discount from stated medical rates
Insurance can pay less for a given procedure than is charged the cash customer
Fraud and inflation of costs have been problems in the present system
Mandatory insurance takes several forms: health, automotive, home…
Mandatory health insurance: offered through the employers who must pay for it or pay for a portion of it
Mandatory automotive liability insurance: passed by legislature
Mandatory car and home insurance at the insistence of lienholders
Insurance companies and medical personnel have agreed to slow down rising costs

Now back to ways to attract votes.

Business leaders may be glad to dislodge health insurance requirements from the workplace. Forcing businesses to provide health insurance is tying up huge sums of cash that could be circulating in the economy. Let me say that individual choice is the most sustainable way to have an insurance program. Business votes.

So say that business is relieved of the responsibility of providing health insurance providing the payment that had gone to the insurance company now goes into the worker’s pay as a raise. The worker will have the power to decide to buy insurance or to patronize low cost walk in clinics situated in neighborhoods. The government offers a low cost insurance for claims exceeding x amount, which would leave the patron with a substantial deductable to meet, but the low cost clinic format allows for affordable health care. Private insurance could operate just as now, except that employers will not be obligated to provide customers for them. Private insurers could compete in rates and coverage, just as now. Clinics could compete for customers as well.

The business benefit of this plan is that wages and salaries once again become a predictable expense instead of expenditures at the mercy of insurance companies who now promise to slow down the pace of cost increases. The establishment of low cost walk in clinics has already begun in many neighborhoods. This idea could be expanded to private enterprise and public health clinics through the government. People could purchase health care when needed or would rely on private insurance plans or opt for the low cost, high deductable health care program through the government. There would be choice on the part of individuals and businesses, which should drive the costs down in both insurance and health care.

The costs of malpractice insurance has become self defeating in that the cycle of inflation in health care costs is bolstered by these huge lawsuits. Perhaps legislation can be passed that enables patients to sign legal waivers or limits in lieu of paying exorbitant malpractice insurance rates. Some element of trust should remain between doctor and patient. Once again, the patient is not permitted to decide whether or not to buy malpractice insurance. Patients are forced to pay for it as expressed in the high service rates charged.

This is leading up to the idea of “personal insurance”. Individuals should be able to buy
insurance on themselves (and dependents) that covers various scenarios like accidents, malpractice, cancer and any other insurance they deem necessary. Patients insure themselves or not, as they choose. Doctors are free of insurance demands. Healthcare and insurance costs go down. People regain the right to choose. Government and private enterprise offer affordable routine health care.

Entering indigent care would be like bankruptcy and individuals who claim indigent status will be the subject of social services investigation and payment plans will be developed if warranted. The expense of indigent care will always be there and must be absorbed, just as it now. A forward looking taskforce to avoid increases in indigents must be developed. Claiming indigent status in order to claim free health care is not to be a frivolous step easily taken.

As far as automotive insurance goes, the legislature in Arizona requires it of all motorists. I suggest that free choice be such that an individual can buy or not buy insurance on themselves and dependents to cover accidents, repairs, theft and so on. Auto loans and lienholder agreements on insurance are private enterprise.

The problem with insurance today is the huge sums the insurance institutions are controlling. Abuses of the system include various schemes aimed at ‘investing’ premium money, loses of investor money, high paid executives, bailouts and the taxpayers paying to reimburse the insurance companies for the premium money lost gambling. Mandatory insurance equals loss of control of your own money. Pooling money is a good idea but not if the holding company only has to keep less than 10% of it on hand, while gambling the rest away.

Return the money spent on insurance to the people to invest in what healthcare they need on a cash basis or to purchase healthcare insurance. The money now controlled by insurance companies would be reduced. The consumer would have more disposable income to circulate. Businesses would be free of paperwork and obligation except for industrial insurance.

Business opportunities in the form of low cost health clinics would prosper. A labor pool exists from laid off healthcare workers, job freezes in the healthcare field, plus new graduates who cannot get a job. Private insurance would have opportunities to form money pools addressing the high deductable cost of government insurance. Private insurers could open their own clinics.

Private enterprise would prosper under this plan.

Crucial elements in time order:

Use stimulus money to refurbish vacant buildings into low cost health clinics located every x number of population. This action would have several needed results, the establishment of more clinics plus short term construction jobs and long term health care jobs plus utilization of vacant properties. Clinics must be in place, either government or private enterprise, before the rest of the plan is implemented.

Develop guidelines for personal insurance in various categories. Rescind mandatory insurance and watch the market adjust to the new conditions of more circulating capital and more freedom of choice in business and for the individual. The clinics accept business and the people get affordable health care.

Attracting votes with policy change is an old ploy but this reform idea would attract votes from businesses struggling under an insurance load, the worker who wants more money in his pocket, the voter who wants freedom to choose on insurance, unemployed healthcare workers, people who do not have insurance and civic leaders who favor clinics. This could be a popular idea. Did I say the populist word?

Budget Crisis

2009-04-18T17:31:00.000-07:00

Ideas to Solve the Budget Crisis

Solution sets for solving the budget crisis now include generalities like cutting programs, layoffs, and tax increases, which are aimed at preventing money being spent or at gaining more money.

I like the approach of spending less money but not the idea of layoffs. The only solution set for this dilemma is that of cutting the amounts of all these salaries and wages and benefits that are paid by the taxpayers. Given the economic slowdown, demanding more taxes from the people creates a hardship in meeting these new demands for the same or less services. Boomtime pay cannot continue during economic slowdowns. The need for what these people do continues but are they up to do the job for less money? Must the government entities go bankrupt in order to dodge union intransigence?

This is a moral issue. Do these people want us to scrape up more for them so they can continue as they are now? What about the idea that if everyone takes a pay cut, maybe not so many will be fired? These people are paid from taxes. It is not right to take money from one to give to another for no increase in productivity. They are actually promising less productivity instead of more.

There simply is not the money there was during the boom. Sin dinero ahora. Bloated salaries and benefits crowd the budget. We’re being taxed to pay consultants, directors and other bureaucrats. We’re being taxed to build more and more roads when public transportation is the need and would also provide cleaner air and local long term jobs instead of boom construction. We are taxed to provide benefits for government workers when privatizing benefits would relieve the state of insurance responsibilities and would probably result in lower costs for consumers because of competition among insurers or clinics.

People do not want to pay more taxes. Cut the pay of the workers paid by the government, ease off on layoffs whenever possible and use attrition instead for cutbacks in personnel. Keeping money in the hands of more people will result in a more predictable, broad based spending pattern and less unrest among the unemployed and also provides beneficial cuts in unemployment payments and welfare demands. Recent statistics on CNBC might begin a trend to lower prices for consumer goods. Maintaining the standard of living would then be possible after pay cuts if a devaluation trend in USA prices is established. * Debt renegotiation continues in the form of foreclosures, defaults and other failures.

Cutbacks can be made in agencies and programs using a checklist that is doubtless incomplete. Every agency and program and every employee should be subject to cost scrutiny according to this checklist.

Agency and Program cost analysis

Administration: cost amount and as percent of total expenditure
Consultant costs
Employee costs in amount and as compared to program costs as a %
Pay grade analysis as to distribution
Program and agency goals and objectives
Progress achieving those goals and objectives
Union contract demands and renegotiation Etc.

Individual employee charges
Pay grade
Travel
Relocation
Mileage
Cars
Insurance: amount and percent of total costs
Phones
Memberships
Per Diem Ect.
Duties

This same analysis would apply to all the schools, including higher education.
The public schools could be given the responsibility for paying for busing out of the existing budget. This is a positive thing in that this would force the school districts to reconsider busing in an attempt to cut costs. Busing could be mostly eliminated in favor of small schools in neighborhoods, which would cut exorbitant transportation costs now subsidized by the state. Analyze the budgets to obtain amounts spent on busing: insurance, fuel, replacement units, maintenance, and personnel. Give this cost back to the districts. How much would that save?

Several questions must be answered in order to determine the level of cuts in pay that could best assist the budgeting process. These are generalities which would generate base data. What % of the budget is pay and what % is benefits? How much could be saved at ascending percentages of pay cuts?

Another problem is the existence of various budgetary entitlements, some of which are scheduled to infinitely increase. The legislature must work together to devise some way to handle non critical entitlements during times of a budget deficit. The schools budgets needs a complete overhaul and a refocus on the learner instead of the bureaucrats raking in top salaries and benefits at taxpayer expense while test scores remain mediocre at best.

Tax money is precious and should not be wasted. Tax money is also finite.

*Prices as a % of income, whatever the unit of measure is used. Stabilized petro prices are to our benefit, it appears.

MANDATORY INSURANCE

2009-04-03T12:40:00.000-07:00

Ripoffs and Civil Unrest

2009-03-27T09:53:00.000-07:00

I see on the news today that insurance executives have received hairy threats as a result of the publicity surrounding bonuses to them while people invested in their company have lost money.

It appears that civil disobedience stems from lost expectations, cash, opportunities, or from excessive debt and penalties. Pretending that debt is a product will not make it so, but Bernanke and Geithner cannot see another option other than propping up debt derivatives. Just who is benefitting by the continuation of the sale of debt derivatives? Are they or their families in a position of power that influences policy decision making, rather like the Madoff family and the SEC? Debt derivatives produce nothing but brokers fees and insurance obligations. What were the terms of the insurance obligations? 100% of expected profit from the derivative investment? The principal invested in the derivative? What?

Credit card schemes with excessive penalties, automatic interest rate hikes based on other accounts, the punitive attitude taken by these lenders and their predisposition to extend credit to undocumented borrowers has created a mountain of debt. Much of that kind of debt is an obligation plus penalties that are unearned income for lenders and unplanned debt for borrowers on the credit card scene. Bailing out the credit card firms is ridiculous but can turn fraudulent if the bailout funds include unearned lender income projections based on extending credit to anyone. Payday lenders and credit card companies are in the same category, preying on the foolish and desperate in many instances.

Attacks by the ripped off on the wealthy who benefitted by the scam will easily gather steam. Announcement of hearing and indictments would take the edge off, but I can’t help but wonder if returning the principal to the investors might be cheaper than bailing out all these unregulated funds and insurance obligations, particularly foreign entities.

Globalization has turned into a massive fraud perpetuated on the USA taxpayers by domestic and foreign banks and insurance firms who invested in derivative garbage based on fraudulent contracts all the way from the inflated appraisals and undocumented borrowers, the creation of derivatives with unresearched ratings and lax regulation when present at all. Why are USA taxpayers stuck with this tab? Insurance schemes overseas bankrupted a company holding assets obtained through mandatory insurance and retirement accounts in the USA, drained these assets and then demanded more from the US government. Their demands were met at our expense.

I think that insurance is a racket. Legislators have foisted mandatory insurance off on the people and now these insurance firms are using the pool money to gamble and pay themselves huge salaries. They have gambled away retirement funds, IRA accounts and any other money they could get their hands on, even to the point of bankrupting the company and funneling our tax money overseas.

Were members of AIG really brokering these derivatives to banks and then insuring these same derivatives through AIG, receiving a handsome brokers fee in the process? Are the retirement accounts of House and Senate members held by AIG?

Whatever it is, this financial scam and the incredible debt load has created unemployment and anger on the streets of this nation. Were the boomtime profits and the high compensation of irresponsible developers and executives worth the social cost? Are the members of the boards who approved the excessive contract amounts for executives receiving sweetheart loans from the very same companies they represented? How many political figures received cheap loans from these companies? Who sat on the boards of Fannie and Freddie and others when ‘bonus’ schemes were approved? How much were these people paid to rubberstamp any wild scheme the executives deemed a good investment?

And above all, why not review the figures and see if returning the principal might be cheaper than bailing out all these wild schemes? People are angry because their money has been stolen and gambled away, not just the boomlet money but also the principal in many cases.

Civil unrest is not good for the nation.

Pirates of the Economic World

2009-03-22T14:50:00.000-07:00

Design for Stimulus Packages

2009-03-01T13:54:00.000-08:00

ENERGY, EDUCATION, HEALTH CARE

Design for Stimulus Packages

A definition of proposed projects should include a classification of such projects into categories:

Long term stimulus of the economy
Short term stimulus of the economy
Self sustaining stimulus of the economy

Economy should be defined as local, general or group specific when designing projects.

The categories to be discussed are: energy, healthcare, education

Energy

The major focus of the stimulus package should ideally be a self sustaining stimulus of the economy, with short term preparatory activities aimed at energy self sufficiency in the form of limiting use of petroleum products in favor of renewable sources of energy varying on regional levels.

A long term or self sustaining stimulus will be an activity that employs people, retains a monetary benefit long after the initial infusion of cash, continues to employ people in a maintenance/replacement capacity, returns energy production to a local level, and over time provides cheaper, cleaner energy, freeing up cash for other expenditures.

Example: In the SE and SW USA, solar water heaters, solar electric collectors, solar home heaters are feasible as an alternative or augmentation to the all encompassing power grid.

Retrofitting existing homes, schools and commercial properties with solar power items is a business that would employ many. The ultimate value in this is that the utilization of alternative power sources would replace expensive generated electricity with a cheaper, local alternative while providing jobs doing retrofit, new unit construction, maintenance and other associated employment. The monetary value is that the users of the units will have lower electricity costs, the power plants will tie up less of the free cash in the economy and will pollute less. The value in localized energy sources is that some electricity will still be available even if the grid fails.

This same scenario will apply to regional wind utilization, clean coal technology retrofits, nuclear energy, railroad expansion and other unnamed possibilities. These kinds of regional implementation programs should lower energy costs over the long term and will create sustainable businesses and more free cash circulating in the economy.

Electrical production will be as issue as more electric cars come on line. Local solutions to energy production benefit the individual monetarily and for security concerns, local control over some energy needs is desirable (ie: solar generated electricity during the day is better than no electricity at all if the local power grid failed) Create a failsafe for our population. Draining USA cash to pay for petroleum overseas is something that must be lessened. The object is to free up cash to spend elsewhere and lessen critical dependencies on distant power sources.

I reiterate two rules for a successful stimulus device: the ultimate goal will be the lowering of energy costs in order to free up cash to spend elsewhere. Another laudable goal is the localization of energy technology.

The era of limitless cash is over.

Focus on a short term employment solution should be avoided unless civil unrest forces make work projects. Make work projects that contribute nothing or very limited stimulus of the economy should be avoided as dead ends.

An example of a make work project would be building a new road. The local landowners off the new road might benefit financially but the economic stimulus will not be large or long term, particularly when the ultimate goal is another suburb complete with a few service jobs. This creates a strain on the existing infrastructure that must be paid by taxpayers, and now has resulted in widespread fraud, foreclosures and unsold homes. Construction stimulus is short term and cannot be maintained in a finite environment with finite water resources, as in the SW.

A multimillion dollar drainage job in an arid region populated by few people is a good example of a short term limited stimulus that results in no sustainable financial advantage. These kinds of projects should be avoided.

It should be noted that infinite expansion in a finite space is ultimately impossible. We as a species must begin sustainable economic activities in lieu of continuing to locate new cheap resources and exploiting those to our economic advantage. Innovation can be tied to resource availability, which is becoming limited on Earth. Perhaps extraterrestrial sources can be developed.

Thus several things are definitely over: easy cash and credit, cheap resources, cheap land and sparse human populations.

We must adapt to the new conditions.

Health Care

Population growth and immigration has created a need for a more affordable health care system. Note I wrote health care, not health insurance.

The establishment of localized clinics serving Medicare, Medicaid, private insurance and low cost fees for the uninsured must be a priority. Private insurance should be available to all on a regulated fee schedule and should not be mandatory in any form. Employers should not have to provide health insurance for the workers, with the exception of Industrial membership for on the job injuries. It is necessary to take health care benefits out of the workplace and place the money for it in the hands of the private consumer as discretionary funds.

Localized, low cost clinics must be established. These clinics would provide routine illness care, physicals, screening, pregnancy monitoring, well baby checkups etc. and referrals for advanced treatment. Subsidizing this direct health care would provide health care at a reasonable cost and employ people in a sustainable occupation that could become financially self sustaining over time. This approach would be more cost effective than propping up bankrupt insurance companies. We cannot afford the drain on the economy and the huge amount of ready cash these companies absorb.

Key points:

Abolish mandatory insurance for individuals and employers.
Individuals get a raise instead of benefits
Individuals can purchase private insurance if desired
Establish low cost subsidized clinics
Medicare, Medicaid, private insurance and low cost fees qualify at clinics
Clinics would provide sustainable employment
More discretionary cash would circulate in the economy.

Education

Population growth has created a numbers crisis in public education as well as an over saturated job market. We are producing more people than we have employment for in our economy. The economic emphasis on growth comes from historical precedent, the manifest destiny idea to settle the frontier. Growth as an economic solution is outmoded if sustainability issues are taken into account.

As of now, we are still growing the population even though the territory remains the same size, which leaves less per individual than there once was. We also have the unemployment problem. School enrollment can be predicted to rise during economic turmoil, but the question is whether the schools can meet the challenge of economic competition and possible lower wages after graduation.

The traditional liberal arts education derived from state adopted curriculums can be used as a blueprint for teaching basic linguistic and mathematical skills. Mastery learning in reading and mathematics makes sense in a basic education. The learner should develop as much versatility as possible in order to adapt to the sometimes rapidly changing needs of the job market. After a basic education, proficiency in computer based activities should be encouraged.

A charter school or private school that takes public funds should be required to use the state curriculum and the students required to pass state tests.

As far as the schools as a vehicle for an economic stimulus can go without rhetoric about preparing students, the actual physical environment of thee schools should be revealed. In Arizona, charter schools are not required to have the same building standards as the public schools, which raises building costs. I believe that public schools are too large and are too far from the homes of the students. The Gates Foundation is successfully experimenting with smaller schools in New York.

Transportation costs are too high for busing to be a good way to spend the limited funds.
The internet allows for advanced learning with the assistance of an on site teacher, which would allow for the establishment of small, local high schools in the neighborhoods where the students live. Schools should be within walking distance of the students, should foster a sense of community and have good quality equipment and teachers.

Cutting out the transportation costs and mitigating the high mandated costs for school facilities would free up funding for classroom activities instead of buses, insurance, maintenance and other busing costs.

High school sports should be accessible to all students at central locations on public transportation lines, which would eliminate the perceived need for giant high schools for the purposes of champion sports teams. I would favor taking sports out of the schools and putting it under the aegis of the county or city with the eligibility requirements through the schools intact.

At the moment, funding busing through existing public transportation would be cheaper than maintaining a duplication of services through the schools.

The economic stimulus for the schools should be limited to classroom use, not propping up archaic or irresponsible busing of students, not administrative use and certainly not for administrative cars and junketing. The students need new computer equipment and other related equipment, internet hookups for small schools located in commercial buildings, books and teaching materials and lower class sizes. Employ more teachers and aides for one on one working with students.

Key points:

Ease restrictions on public school structures.
Encourage more charter schools
Subsidize the purchase of new computer equipment and teacher training
Use distance learning to augment high school curriculum
Begin phasing out busing
Establish small, local schools K-12
As a long term remedy for excessive population growth, disallow more than two child credits per income tax return, instead of unlimited deductions.

In higher education, the proliferation of specialties requires a broad based curriculum sensitive to the needs of businesses and graduate schools. The community college model is a good one if programs are kept up to date. Subsidizing community college students is a good investment, both as university preparation and job preparation. Stimulate the economy by entering the unemployed in school and keep high school graduates out of the unemployed workforce by keeping them in school.

And of course, subsidize the university students through grants and loans. The universities must cull their own programs and cease the excesses in construction in order to help solve economic problems. We have extensive buildings. Now let’s fill them up with students and invest in the nation’s future. Grant money to the universities and the community colleges to subsidize jobs for graduate students and student aides. Make scholarships available to students and educate!

Bailout Cash

2009-02-14T13:37:00.000-08:00

Outlaw the purchasing of mortgage bundles or derivatives with tarp or stimulus money. Troubled Assets Relief Program can be defined as the review and altering of home loan contracts made under false pretenses, false appraisals, or without documentation of the borrower’s ability to repay the loan.

The relief should be in the form of giving back the principle lost in these mortgage derivative scams. Give it back to the original investors, the pension funds, the cities and states, etc. Giving back the principle would let people have their own money to invest where they want and to use what bank they want. Cancel the bailout funds squandered on paying off bad mortgage derivative debt and return the money to the people who invested in these fraudulent ‘securities’.

The property values will continue to fall to 40% of boom value. That was the runup amount from a slow growing housing market created by the requirement that a responsible borrower will have a cash down payment in order to get a loan. Make too many of anything and the price will drop after market saturation.

Forget the idea that a first time borrower has to buy a new home in order to get the tax credit. If somebody cannot afford to buy any home without a tax credit, possibly they should not be buying until they have a down payment. Forcing people to buy new homes to get the credit is focusing gain once again on the developer rather than on a savings for the home buyer. The market is glutted with new and used homes. We don’t need developers driving up the price because the tax credit is restricted to new housing. Rule by developer is over and the mortgage derivatives scam should be over.

Regional banks can handle local mortgage lending. These reworked and new loans should be serviced locally and the ownership of the loans should remain with the institution that originated them. Close out Fannie and Freddie. They are perpetuating the practice of dealing in mortgage ‘securities’ and derivatives, which is creating havoc in the investment world and shaking faith in these institutions. Perhaps the old bad banks should be closed out in favor of regional banks.

Spending TARP or stimulus money on more mortgage derivatives is pouring money down a rat hole. Give the principal back to the people, not the high rollers who caused the problem.

Another problem rearing its head is credit card debt derivative ‘securities’. The credit card people run up the value of their debt by merely adding interest, fees, penalties on the original charged amount. These people are pretending that these kinds of payday loan type charges are real value and then asking for bailout money to pay for them because of the money they cannot lose because they are too big to fail. The value was never there. No TARP or stimulus money to bailout credit card debt.

The moneylenders are walking the halls of government with their hands out and taxpayer money should not go to support their addiction to mortgage and debt derivatives. Don’t pour tax money into a failed business model. Where are the indictments?

Transparent Bailout Money

2009-01-30T06:41:00.000-08:00

Where will this bailout money come from? Who has enough US dollars to loan money to us? Are we going to print money? Isn’t debt limited to the amount of money in existence? Isn’t value limited to what someone is willing to pay for something?

In a recession, you don’t get to set value and demand taxpayer payments for the difference between what people are willing to pay and what you say the widget is worth. Get out of town. Somebody lost their ass and everybody is making sure it’s not theirs lost too. You might have risked money on an investment recommended by the licensed, respected ones who finally found a way to make it big by gulling people. Are contracts written based on fraud invalid? If so, this mortgage derivative scam could be summarily cancelled and let the civil courts go after the money and the criminal courts go after the fraud. I suspect that the total sold far exceeds the amount in existence, so who will not get the delivery they paid for? That is what is under discussion now, after the moguls who engineered and profited from the boondoggle collected, redefining the old fashioned word ‘bonus’ in the process, collecting a nice cushion against hard times in the form of cold cash, not the promises on paper. They give tapeworm a bad name while the unemployment lines lengthen.

So where is this money coming from? Debt enslavement is a bit out of fashion, as so longterm servitude is not one of our intentions. Spill this information now and maybe we can finally see ourselves as some in other nations see us, according to our Viejo Treasury secretary promising what change? I am glad he is sure of all those national viewpoints, since oversight in that treasury department has been lacking but perhaps the new President will take responsibility. I just hope that propping up a failed business model does not further an ego already quite large while charging it all to the taxpayers. Mortgage derivatives are a failure. Propping up mortgage derivatives is a failure.

Any government entity taking federal funds should not give bonuses, only pay. Particularly if this entity is paying for such unearned money with tax money solicited as too important to fail, then no ‘bonuses’ should be rewarded for this failure of free enterprise. Any bonuses awarded while balance sheets headed for the red should be returned to investors. Perpetrator incomes should perhaps dip to the level of the present income of the poorest investor in the schemes.

But I stray from the topic of where the bailout money and the TARP money is coming from? Are we incurring foreign debt? If so, then to whom? For how long? What variables are being overlooked when predicting payment schedules? What variables were taken into account?

Transparency can be defined many ways. I want to know where this money is coming from, not just where it is going.

OUTLAW MORTGAGE DERIVATIVES

2009-01-21T10:10:00.000-08:00

How to fix the mortgage crisis

Recriminations are ineffective when looking for solutions. Remembering and being watchful are warranted when forging forward though this morass of insolvent debtors.

Too big to fail comes to mind as a warning call that too few are controlling too much, to the detriment of many. These huge ‘lending institutions’ should be disbanded in favor of regional banks. The business model of selling mortgage derivatives and living off the commissions is a failure because it produces nothing.

Mortgage securities bundled and sold make the process of lending into a commodity.

Solve the foreclosure crisis by identifying all the foreclosures in any given area X, assign foreclosures to regional banks located in area X, subsidize new loans to qualified buyers or forclosees for the properties, and the regional banks holding the new mortgages will also manage the collections for these mortgages. Close the books for a percentage return on the subsidy, shared with the bank until the subsidy is paid.

Of course, the powers that be will fiercely defend mortgage derivatives as a logical outgrowth of the old mortgage business that made money by collecting interest on loans made and collected locally. The mortgage business evolved to make land more valuable and to enable citizens to buy land. The mortgage business provides for a need in our society, and should not become a pawn in an easy money policy that enables profit taking and debt spawning for nothing produced.

My suggestion is that mortgage derivatives be outlawed and any instrument using them be declared invalid due to the outlandish methods used to assemble these bundles. Arrests are imminent and I see these bundles are illegal, beginning with the original properties sold to unqualified buyers, inflated appraisals based on a developer-lender-appraiser monopolies, bundled securities given unresearched bogus high ratings by more appraisers, insiders at the SEC turning their heads, fund managers on the lam and no doubt more illegal possibilities.

If foreign governments are holding these bogus derivatives, they bought an illegal ‘product’. Using the generation of mortgages as a commodity is a failed business model that should be outlawed. We need to take care of our own people and handle this real estate overproduction and overpricing in our communities. Work with regional banks, regional foreclosures and regional management of mortgages. Allow the real estate prices to drop until people can afford to buy.

Forget bailing out these huge lenders. Clean the temple of the moneylenders and allow a new regional based banking system to resurface. Too big to fail might really mean too big to succeed.

SAD NEW YEAR

2008-12-31T08:18:00.000-08:00

2009 begins with spilt blood.

TIBET

2008-12-12T10:02:00.001-08:00

More Bailouts

2008-12-03T08:04:00.001-08:00

So the bailout proceeds without oversight. What else is new?

How about more criminal investigations of the SEC and securities appraisers? Investigate the SEC and the securities ratings services and a lack of competition.

Will the bailouts prop up prices? Will that help the little guy? What will help the smallholders?

Assumptions about future financial situations should be absent from mortgage arrangements, which would void any ARM contracts in favor of the teaser rate. Avoiding raising the ARMS is an aim of low interest rates, which leaves depositors taking the low interest rate hit. How about lowering the price instead of the interest rates? More sales would result, while maintaining a reasonable rate of return for depositors. Lowering prices would be more beneficial to more people than lowering interest rates.

Of course, lowering prices would create more upside down debt, where people owe more than the goods they bought with borrowed money are worth. It is safe to say that this posited situation of lower prices for real estate and goods would benefit more people than those who indebted themselves. Fair interest rates for depositors would raise the level of deposits, regaining real capital.

If the people running things profit from higher prices at the expense of most of the rest of us, policy reviews are in order.

Engineered inflation and constant growth are untenable positions in a finite world. Cancel the construction and sale of debt based securities, as they produce nothing of real value, only taxpayer supported gambling debt.

Let Las Vegas handle the gambling.

BAILOUT BLUES

2008-11-24T05:39:00.000-08:00

Another bailout? This time to Citigroup. What’s a few more billion? Job stimulus packages are much smaller, however.

Tell me why this money can’t be funneled directly to the funds put together by the taxpayer? Like in Arizona, the state retirement fund, county funds and other governmental funds lost money on the Lehman bankruptcy.

So bailout the important funds that belong to the taxpayer, not the lending institutions who sold fraudulent securities to USA retirement, state, county and county funds. Give these funds the bailout money. Give them back the money they lost and don’t funnel it through more brokers. The Feds should take applications based on investor losses, skip the corrupt middlemen, and deal with the American citizens represented by their local governments who lost money. This would infuse money into local economies where job losses are escalating. Let these citizen funds decide investment in local projects with projected returns paying into the funds through existing taxes. We need a long term fix on this problem of exporting our local money to be lent out in Ponzi schemes.

How about more criminal investigations of these scams? We need law and order, not more burglary.

We need simplification. We need our money back. Thieves stole our funds as they sold bogus securities to the fund managers, who took the word of appraisers and raters and bought this garbage. Giving the thieves our tax money to give to the lenders to lend to us again to buy price inflated goods again is not an economic system. It’s a milking machine.

Pyrrhic Victory for the UAW

2008-11-19T12:18:00.000-08:00

HOW ABOUT AN OPEN SHOP NATION?