I have no desire at all for a president to fail. But when a president does in fact fail, I think it is all too imperative that the American people recognize this, despite any party affliliations one may have, or any other biases for that matter. To do anything else is to the detriment of the institution of the presidency of the United States, and to the country itself.
I think in the case of president Barack Obama, his failure to the American people is all too obvious, and on many levels. But also obvious is that part of the reason that the president has managed to escape his own failures is that a large population of Americans are simply disengaged from the issues that rule the day. Even worse, I think the pool of these disengaged Americans, whom are otherwise often referred to as the uninformed voter, is a growing pool.
How else could president Barack Obama have been reelected but without the support of uninformed voters?
During his presidency gas prices doubled, and median household income was slashed by a whopping $4,000 a year. Not only that, but unemployment rates were sustained above 8% for a stubborn 40 months or so. And something I find interesting that doesn't seem to get a lot of attention is a statement made by Congressman Betty Sutton that in 2010, on average, 23 manufacturing facilities were permanently shuttered every single day.
The latter I find particularly interesting considering democrats have always been on the side of American labor and jobs. Moreover, manufacturing jobs are the bread and butter of the middle class, and provide good paying jobs to people who perhaps have less opportunity to go to college—in other words, the working class that democrats have always touted being on the side of obviously received no benefit whatsoever from the Obama administration during his first term in office when so many promises were made that he would fix a broken economy, and put hard working middle class America back to work.
Back to work where would be a good question since few businesses were hiring, and any new businesses in the green economy that Barack Obama claimed would provide new jobs with great pay for struggling American workers mostly have all gone bankrupt.
The green economy has produced no real new jobs for anyone, and while unemployment numbers may be showing some indication of improving, we are not even close to replacing the total of lost jobs since the beginning and end of the Great Recession.
And then of course, there was Benghazi, which I think would have been a terrible blow to any president on any side of the aisle seeking reelection. Four Americans died. And it is clear that the Obama administration lied to the American people about what happened. Moreover, the failure by the Administration to keep Americans safe in regions where there were obvious threats to safety, was all but ignored by the people who helped to keep president Obama in the White House.
My point in all of this is that it is okay to give a shot to the new kid in town. Barack Obama came onto the scene almost out of nowhere and was able to connect with the American people, and brought great messages of hope and change, and made a promise to the American people that he would be the great leader in restoring the faith of the American people in their government. He was going to fix things and make life better for everyone. But he did none of these things. And it is not okay to fail to recognize this. It is not okay to overlook failures.
The people did not overlook the failures of Richard Nixon. Nor did they overlook the failures of Jimmy Carter. The American people got it. Something was wrong, and the American people were paying focused attention to the details. The American people on both sides of the aisle did not allow for excuses to be made.
Richard Nixon resigned, in part, because he knew that to do otherwise would damage the country, and he knew that to continue to serve in the office of the president was not in the best interest of the American people. And Jimmy Carter was not reelected because clearly no one was better off than they were when he took office.
As a result of uninformed voters and disengaged Americans, a president was allowed to slide past the radar, and allowed to perpetuate the course of failure, and this may prove a very difficult course to reverse. The impact on the American people and the American way of life has been severely compromised in my opinion, and while I am not suggesting doomsday has arrived, I think it can only get worse.
Now we have the IRS scandal, the AP scandal, and we still don't know what happened in Benghazi. Of course there was Fast and Furious. And the economy is still in the slowest recovery mode in history. Worst of all, the president has only increased his belief in the policies that have yet to be proven to have helped in any way.
Failure is not something to hope for at all. But it is also not something to be ignored.
More Opinion by The Springboard
American Manufacturing Is About More Than Just Jobs
Bringing back American manufacturing is critical to American society in more ways than just economic ones. In order for America to succeed it needs the ability to make things, not only for the stability and good jobs it provides, but for national security as well.
Bringing back American manufacturing is critical to American society in more ways than just economic ones. In order for America to succeed it needs the ability to make things, not only for the stability and good jobs it provides, but for national security as well.
Saturday, June 15, 2013
Monday, April 22, 2013
Pirate Republic Seafood & Grill, Ft. Lauderdale
Recently the wife and I had an opportunity to visit the Pirate Republic Seafood & Grill, located in Ft. Lauderdale, on a recent trip to Florida, and I have to tell you that if you will be in the area anytime soon, this is definitely a place worth visiting. The service was exemplary, and the food was outstanding. Our bill was not outrageous either.

The establishment has two bars. One downstairs in the main restaurant area, and one upstairs where they often have live entertainment. On the night we went they had a Blues Brothers act which was fantastic. If you hadn't have known it you'd have swore that John Belushi had risen from the dead to join with his old sidekick, Dan Ackroyd. The duo had a full backup band, and the show was very lively. Well worth it after our delicious meal.
And of course, the highlight was indeed the meal. I decided on the Anguilla dish and chose the catch of the day for my fish choice, which on this day was catfish. The filet was was sauteed with shrimp, and
included fresh tomatoes, onion, and garlic. It also was topped with fresh green peppercorns, spinach, and layered underneath was a helping of mashed potatoes. The combination of flavors really left me very happy. And the price for the dish was only $22. Very much worth it if you ask me.
My wife enjoyed the Kobe beef burger served up with sweet potato fries. This hamburger, which I did take a bite of, was one of the best burgers I've tasted in a long time. The beef was absolutely delicious, and the burger was served up arugula and a tangy Brazilian Catupiry cream cheese. The $18 price tag was not too much to ask at all considering how good this burger was.

This is a place we will certainly be revisiting on our next trip to Ft. Lauderdale, and I highly recommend it. The staff is friendly and attentive, and I was also very impressed that despite them having a very full house, we were immediately seated, and our food was served hot and fresh in a very short amount of time.
It is an eating experience to please the senses, and a delectable treat that will leave you full and very satisfied. I would rate this a very high 9 on a scale of one to ten, with ten being the best.
Friday, March 8, 2013
Unemployment Numbers May Drive Future Auto Sales
The unemployment numbers released today show some sign that just maybe we may be beginning to see a bit of a turnaround. Certainly the DOW Jones Industrial Average, and frankly all of the indices, have been on fire. The DOW has seen record highs.
This leads to one other thing we know. Auto sales have lagged both in the United States, and big time in Europe. All indicators point to a trend in the United States over the past 5-8 years that says that Americans in particular have been keeping their cars for longer periods of time.
When the economy stinks, who the heck can take the chance to buy a new car? Just drive what you have and run with it.
In fact, if you'd have invested in many of the auto parts companies like O'Reilly, for example, you'd have seen some pretty nice gains. People keeping their cars longer means they'll need parts to keep them running in tip top shape.
Which brings me back to the automakers. If and when, and I really think it is more a matter of when than if, the economy really starts to get some of its legs back, I think the very first thing the average American is going to do is replace their old car.
Sure, houses are nice, and the housing market has been having a pretty good run as well lately. But cars are still at the heart of every single American that drives. A new car is a treat. And if jobs numbers begin to improve, and people feel more secure in the jobs they have, and especially if the economy begins to provide less uncertainty as to where it's headed, Americans will park a shiny new car in their driveway.
It's a high ticket item, but it's not as high a ticket item as a house is. And the interest rates are still running relatively low, making any deal at the dealership even more enticing.
I am focusing on American automakers as well in this idea. I like Ford a lot. Mostly because Ford is the smaller of the Big Three US automakers, and because they have streamlined their business massively, and I think they have the most to gain with market share. Not to mention they are making some pretty nice cars.
Why American as well? I think there is a growing amount of interest in this country to buy American. We are beginning to see many more efforts by retailers to stock their shelves with American made goods. Walmart recently said it would add $50 billion over the next 10 years of American made goods. Big home improvement chains like Menards, which are all over the Midwest states, especially around Minnesota, Illinois, and Wisconsin, has been on a rampage stocking their stores with American made and regularly offering American made sale prices and incentives.
And that's why I think the automakers are good buy right now.
Full disclosure: Jim Bauer currently has stock in the Ford Motor Company.
This leads to one other thing we know. Auto sales have lagged both in the United States, and big time in Europe. All indicators point to a trend in the United States over the past 5-8 years that says that Americans in particular have been keeping their cars for longer periods of time.
When the economy stinks, who the heck can take the chance to buy a new car? Just drive what you have and run with it.
In fact, if you'd have invested in many of the auto parts companies like O'Reilly, for example, you'd have seen some pretty nice gains. People keeping their cars longer means they'll need parts to keep them running in tip top shape.
Which brings me back to the automakers. If and when, and I really think it is more a matter of when than if, the economy really starts to get some of its legs back, I think the very first thing the average American is going to do is replace their old car.
Sure, houses are nice, and the housing market has been having a pretty good run as well lately. But cars are still at the heart of every single American that drives. A new car is a treat. And if jobs numbers begin to improve, and people feel more secure in the jobs they have, and especially if the economy begins to provide less uncertainty as to where it's headed, Americans will park a shiny new car in their driveway.
It's a high ticket item, but it's not as high a ticket item as a house is. And the interest rates are still running relatively low, making any deal at the dealership even more enticing.
I am focusing on American automakers as well in this idea. I like Ford a lot. Mostly because Ford is the smaller of the Big Three US automakers, and because they have streamlined their business massively, and I think they have the most to gain with market share. Not to mention they are making some pretty nice cars.

I just think that more Americans are becoming aware that in order to really seat this country back into a good economic situation, we are going to have to start putting factories back on line, and in turn Americans will have better employment choices in sectors of manufacturing, which historically paid good wages and benefits to the average American. The fact that you can have a good paying job without the need for a college degree is also a plus since more Americans working and making good money no matter their status means many more dollars will flow in the real economy, and ultimately into these American businesses.
Ford Motor Company is my top pick. But I think if you invest in any automaker right now, in 12-24 months, you'll see substantial gains. Maybe the dip in unemployment is just a short term fluke. Or it is something that signals a turnaround. Either way, I don't see this economic downturn as being a permanent thing, and like I said before, the very first treat when all is good will be a shiny new car.
Full disclosure: Jim Bauer currently has stock in the Ford Motor Company.
Sunday, February 10, 2013
Buying American Made Is Easier Than You Think
Every time I bring up the idea of buying more American made goods in order to help supply more cash to the American economy, and encourage businesses to identify demand for goods made in America, and essentially increase efforts to manufacture their products here, and provide more jobs to Americans who still are hard pressed to find meaningful work that pays workers good wages, I get met with dissent.
"Things cost too much to make it here," people say. "American companies cannot compete with lower wages in other countries."
I tend to find these accusations to be false. It sounds good. It's certainly what we have been led to believe by not only the companies who make things, but the government has touted this often as well, and always like to bring up the idea that this is a global economy, and that commerce with other countries is vitally important to the American economy and her people.
Yet the largest employer in the United States is currently Walmart, unemployment remains at considerably high levels, median income is down by nearly $4,000 per year per American, and for the last 30 or so years wages in America for the average worker has either declined, or been stagnant. The middle class is on their death bed, and the gap between the rich and the poor is ever widening.
The fact is that there are still things made in America, and they don't necessarily cost more than goods made elsewhere. It just takes a little extra time to look for things made here. Among some things still made in America, aside certain makes and models of automobiles, are socks, outdoor grills, water heaters, dishwashers and other appliances, plastic containers, glassware, cutlery, shoes, and many other items that people generally have a use for.
Consider something here that I find interesting. That is that there are approximately 300 million people living in America. If each and every American bought just $365 worth of American made goods, this would pour approximately $109.5 billion dollars into U.S. manufacturing. Not only would this provide an incentive for American companies, and even foreign companies, to do business here and employ Americans, but this would also assume that more money would be able to be collected by the IRS. More people working, making higher wages, and essentially having more buying power in the real economy means less people on the dole, less requirement for the government to engage in social programs which cost taxpayers huge dollar amounts, and at the end of the day this means more people able to afford any premiums that may be associated with American made versus foreign made goods.
In America it was fine at one time to think about benefits of globalization. Unfortunately I think we are seeing the proof is in the pudding that what globalization has largely done has been to cost Americans much needed work, benefits, and higher wages, and has forced Americans more than ever to struggle through their own financial woes with less ability to provide for their families and pursue their dreams, desires, and goals.
It's just $365 a year in American made goods. This generates $109.5 billion of revenue for American manufacturing. I think getting to a point where we think more and more about the importance of making things here, the more opportunity Americans will have to have to find American made products, and the easier it will be to slowly inch our way back up to doubling, and even tripling these numbers pouring into the American manufacturing sector of our economy.
"Things cost too much to make it here," people say. "American companies cannot compete with lower wages in other countries."
I tend to find these accusations to be false. It sounds good. It's certainly what we have been led to believe by not only the companies who make things, but the government has touted this often as well, and always like to bring up the idea that this is a global economy, and that commerce with other countries is vitally important to the American economy and her people.
Yet the largest employer in the United States is currently Walmart, unemployment remains at considerably high levels, median income is down by nearly $4,000 per year per American, and for the last 30 or so years wages in America for the average worker has either declined, or been stagnant. The middle class is on their death bed, and the gap between the rich and the poor is ever widening.
The fact is that there are still things made in America, and they don't necessarily cost more than goods made elsewhere. It just takes a little extra time to look for things made here. Among some things still made in America, aside certain makes and models of automobiles, are socks, outdoor grills, water heaters, dishwashers and other appliances, plastic containers, glassware, cutlery, shoes, and many other items that people generally have a use for.
Consider something here that I find interesting. That is that there are approximately 300 million people living in America. If each and every American bought just $365 worth of American made goods, this would pour approximately $109.5 billion dollars into U.S. manufacturing. Not only would this provide an incentive for American companies, and even foreign companies, to do business here and employ Americans, but this would also assume that more money would be able to be collected by the IRS. More people working, making higher wages, and essentially having more buying power in the real economy means less people on the dole, less requirement for the government to engage in social programs which cost taxpayers huge dollar amounts, and at the end of the day this means more people able to afford any premiums that may be associated with American made versus foreign made goods.
In America it was fine at one time to think about benefits of globalization. Unfortunately I think we are seeing the proof is in the pudding that what globalization has largely done has been to cost Americans much needed work, benefits, and higher wages, and has forced Americans more than ever to struggle through their own financial woes with less ability to provide for their families and pursue their dreams, desires, and goals.
It's just $365 a year in American made goods. This generates $109.5 billion of revenue for American manufacturing. I think getting to a point where we think more and more about the importance of making things here, the more opportunity Americans will have to have to find American made products, and the easier it will be to slowly inch our way back up to doubling, and even tripling these numbers pouring into the American manufacturing sector of our economy.
Sunday, November 18, 2012
Tax the Rich?
It's an idea that looks great on paper, and certainly the masses enjoy the idea of taking money out of the pockets of the rich. While the vote in the recent reelection for President Barack Obama was not a clear mandate for higher taxes, the Obama administration is definitely interested in continuing its pursuit of diminishing the wealth of the most wealthy people in the country. In fact, he recently announced that he wants to raise $1.6 trillion in new tax revenues, which is double the amount he originally said he wanted.
The question is who ultimately pays the tax? I think the answer is very clear. It's not the rich.
In order to understand how taxes affect everyone and not just the rich, one has to keep in mind what businesses do when they have to incur higher costs to run their businesses. Higher taxes are costs.
While it is not a direct comparison, I can use my rental property as an example of what happens when the cost of owning and operating that property increases. As a part of the rent I offer my tenants "free" heat. I put the word free in parenthesis because whether or not the heat is truly free is a bit of sleight of hand, is it not? So long as my rental property produces cash flow, the actual cost of the heat is being paid by the tenant. So, what happens when the cost of my heat bill goes up? Of course this cost is ultimately passed on to the tenant in the form of higher rent.
The same applies to the cost to insure my property, or the cost of repairs to the property. You can also apply this to higher costs incurred through higher property taxes. All of these costs are ultimately passed on to the tenant in the form of higher rent as well. Perhaps the costs are not immediately passed on. But at some point they must be, otherwise I have no reason to own the property.
I've made the point before that businesses do not pay their overhead. In fact, they recoup their overhead.
In addition, it's important to note that any money that the government collects from the private sector are essentially removed from the real economy. I've heard many people on the left argue that dollars collected in tax revenues are simply spent by the government, and that those monies ultimately wind up in the economy as a whole inevitably.
The problem with this thinking is that it is not exactly true. Consider that much of the dollars that the government collects must go to repaying debts and interest we owe on those debts. That means that a lot of the money goes to other governments we've borrowed money from—China would be one of the larger ones. We also spend hundreds of billions of dollars a year in foreign aid. Again, that money does not necessarily return to our own economy. The money essentially just disappears.
At the end of the day higher taxes on the rich and on businesses means less money will be spent on investing in new company startups. It means less money will be spent on research and development, and on capital expenditures. It means less money will be available to hire more workers, or provide pay raises. It means less money will be available to pay, for example, certain benefits like healthcare for their workers. It means less money will be available to make matching contributions to their worker's 401k plans. It means less money will be spent on marketing that helps their businesses to grow.
And let's not forget the first example I made about investment. Less money will be in the real economy for people to help companies obtain the funds they need to expand the business. All of this leads to higher unemployment, less job creation, and higher prices for all of the goods and services that the middle class, and the poor buy.
When it comes to taxes, people really need to see the forest for the trees. Sticking it to the rich is sticking it to ourselves, and there really is no way of getting around that. If President Obama does not cut spending, and reduce taxes across the board, the people who will be hit the hardest are the very people who he says he wants to help.
The question is who ultimately pays the tax? I think the answer is very clear. It's not the rich.
In order to understand how taxes affect everyone and not just the rich, one has to keep in mind what businesses do when they have to incur higher costs to run their businesses. Higher taxes are costs.
While it is not a direct comparison, I can use my rental property as an example of what happens when the cost of owning and operating that property increases. As a part of the rent I offer my tenants "free" heat. I put the word free in parenthesis because whether or not the heat is truly free is a bit of sleight of hand, is it not? So long as my rental property produces cash flow, the actual cost of the heat is being paid by the tenant. So, what happens when the cost of my heat bill goes up? Of course this cost is ultimately passed on to the tenant in the form of higher rent.
The same applies to the cost to insure my property, or the cost of repairs to the property. You can also apply this to higher costs incurred through higher property taxes. All of these costs are ultimately passed on to the tenant in the form of higher rent as well. Perhaps the costs are not immediately passed on. But at some point they must be, otherwise I have no reason to own the property.
I've made the point before that businesses do not pay their overhead. In fact, they recoup their overhead.
In addition, it's important to note that any money that the government collects from the private sector are essentially removed from the real economy. I've heard many people on the left argue that dollars collected in tax revenues are simply spent by the government, and that those monies ultimately wind up in the economy as a whole inevitably.
The problem with this thinking is that it is not exactly true. Consider that much of the dollars that the government collects must go to repaying debts and interest we owe on those debts. That means that a lot of the money goes to other governments we've borrowed money from—China would be one of the larger ones. We also spend hundreds of billions of dollars a year in foreign aid. Again, that money does not necessarily return to our own economy. The money essentially just disappears.
At the end of the day higher taxes on the rich and on businesses means less money will be spent on investing in new company startups. It means less money will be spent on research and development, and on capital expenditures. It means less money will be available to hire more workers, or provide pay raises. It means less money will be available to pay, for example, certain benefits like healthcare for their workers. It means less money will be available to make matching contributions to their worker's 401k plans. It means less money will be spent on marketing that helps their businesses to grow.
And let's not forget the first example I made about investment. Less money will be in the real economy for people to help companies obtain the funds they need to expand the business. All of this leads to higher unemployment, less job creation, and higher prices for all of the goods and services that the middle class, and the poor buy.
When it comes to taxes, people really need to see the forest for the trees. Sticking it to the rich is sticking it to ourselves, and there really is no way of getting around that. If President Obama does not cut spending, and reduce taxes across the board, the people who will be hit the hardest are the very people who he says he wants to help.
Labels:
fair share,
paying fair share,
paying taxes,
porwest,
taxation,
taxes,
taxing the rich
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)