news_rss_afp_world

Thanks for the warning...

Rex Bell — Sat, 03 Jan 2009 14:50:26 +0000

It's always nice to get a "heads up" about a potential problem. This morning, I heard on the news that people who received gift cards for Christmas should redeem them as soon as possible. Apparently, people who study such things have predicted that due to business failures, as many as one fourth of the gift cards may be rendered worthless in less than two years. Luckily for me, I didn't get any gift cards for Christmas. One less thing to worry about, I guess.

But, I also heard on the news this morning that the Federal Reserve is going to step in again to help our nation's staggering economy. Now, since 1913, when the Federal Reserve started stepping in to help out, the dollar has lost about 96% of it's purchasing power.

While I didn't get any gift cards for Christmas, I was lucky enough to get a $50.00 bill from my mother-in-law, and since the Fed is making plans to step in again, I think I'll hurry out and make a down payment on that new hammer I've had my eye on for a while.

Oh, and thanks for the "heads up"!

Hey, that's not fair!!..or equal..

Rex Bell — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 12:38:15 +0000

Good news!!

The Indiana General Assembly's efforts to make property taxes fair and equal are about to pay off. Even if they don't agree to allow Hoosiers to vote on making the property tax caps part of the Indiana Constitution, we can still sign up, by December 31st, for an exemption to insure that our property taxes don't increase by more than 2% over the previous year's taxes.

Well, not everybody can sign up for the exemption. The gross assessed value of your homestead can't exceed $160,000.00. Other than that, you're good to go.

Unless you're under 65 years old. If you're 25, and trying to raise a family, you don't qualify. As a matter of fact, if you're any age under 65 you don't qualify. Other than that, you're good to go.

Unless you make more than $30,000. Then you don't qualify for the exemption. Other than that, you're good to go.

So really, the only people that don't qualify are the ones who are under 65, or whose home is assessed at over $160,000.00, or who make over $30,000.

I always wondered how to make property taxes fair and equal.

This must be it.

Not.

Do as I say, not as I do...

Rex Bell — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 15:39:45 +0000

About 40 years ago, Arlo Guthrie blasted his draft board for questioning whether or not he was moral enough to kill people after having been accused of littering. I always thought he raised a valid point, although I still didn't think it excused his littering.

A couple of recent events remind me of Arlo's plight. Illinois Governor Blagojevich has been accused and all but convicted of planning to sell Barak Obama's Senate seat for an undetermined amount of money or favor. A despicable abuse of power, no doubt, and deserving of all of the wrath other officials are heaping on it. But I recall a couple of months ago when 58 members of the House of Representatives turned down an ill-advised bail-out of Wall Street, only to change their votes when offered $130 billion.

I wondered at the time if a Senator cost more than a Representative. Apparently we'll have to wait a little longer for an answer now.

We're also witnessing the prosecution by the government of Bernard Madoff, a con man who bilked investors out of billions of dollars in an elaborate Ponzi scheme, where Madoff used money from current investors to pay previous investors. The plan bears a striking resemblance to the government's Social Security plan, except that under Madoff's scheme, people were not forced to participate.

Still, fraud is fraud, and I hope Madoff is vigorously prosecuted. In fact, I'd be tickled if they went after everybody that commits this type of crime.

I realize that there are a few duties that we should grant to government instead of to individuals.

But there are also some actions that need to be prosecuted, regardless of who or what is guilty of instigating them.

Take that....

Rex Bell — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 01:14:36 +0000

There is a trial going on in Richmond right now, where a young man has been accused of hitting another young man in the head and then taking his laptop computer. I won't speculate on the outcome of the trial, but I imagine if the accused is found guilty, he will probably spend some time in jail. Most civilized societies take a dim view of assault and theft.

Most civilized societies take a dim view of theft even without the assault. When the afore mentioned incident took place, apparently there were 2 people that wanted the computer the victim was carrying. I think most people would agree that just because 2 people wanted what one person had, they still didn't have the right to just take it. And if there had been a group of 3 people, or 100 people, or 1000 people that wanted that computer, they still wouldn't have the right to just take it, no matter how much they wanted it.

I suppose there could be an instance where that same group of people could have hired another group of people to go and just take the computer, but I don't think a civilized society would have stood for that either. As a nation, we have even sometimes went to war to stop someone from just taking something that didn't belong to them, even if they wanted it really bad. (Of course, as a nation, sometimes we've went to war to take something that didn't belong to us, either, but that's for another story.)

I wasn't surprised or disappointed that I didn't get the Palladium-Item's endorsement for the District 54 seat. I was disappointed in their reason. I have been a strong advocate of eliminating property taxes. I understand that property taxes are a stable source of income for governments. I also understand that a lot of people want parks and museums and football fields and gymnasiums and exercise rooms and fishing ponds in their lobbies. I understand that some people want these things really bad. Some people want them so bad that they elect people to go out and threaten to take other peoples property in order to get the money to pay for them.

I don't think they have the right to do that.

Apparently some of the people at the Palladium-Item don't agree with me.

Say it ain't so, Joe, and Randall...

Rex Bell — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 18:09:30 +0000

There is a lot of talk this election season about the Kernan-Shepard report. Every forum and debate I have attended this fall, and every candidate questionnaire I have received (except for the single issue types) have included some reference to some portion of the report.

Most of the voters I have heard from have rejected the part of the report that calls for eliminating elected positions and replacing them with appointed positions. Neither do I find much support for a state mandate calling for the consolidation of school districts to insure at least 2000 students per district. It seems most people in the area believe, correctly I think, that consolidation of schools should remain a local matter. The call for eliminating township government and transferring the duties to the counties receives mixed reviews, with the most vocal opposition coming from township officials.

There is a lot of language in the report about transferring duties from the county to the state, shuffling election cycles, and lifting restrictions on the purchasing ability of local governments and schools that should never have been imposed in the first place.

My opponent in the District 54 House of Representatives race recently added his thoughts on reforming state government, including combining the House and Senate, eliminating state legislative districts, and giving the governor more control over spending.

I’m sure a lot of our legislators have genuine concerns about the proposed consolidation of library services, and maybe some are truly concerned about the number of campaign signs that will no longer be needed if some of the new plans are adopted. But as I read through most of the proposals, the term “red herring” comes to mind. At one time a red herring was used to confuse hunting dogs by masking the scent they were tracking. Today it is often used to divert peoples’ attention from the real issues.

The real issue is that government spends too much money, and it borrows and mortgages our children’s and grandchildren’s futures to pay for programs and promises that they have no say in. Hiring assessors instead of electing them won’t solve the problem, anymore than sending our tax dollars to Indianapolis so they can take their cut and send it back to us will.

The real issue is that government loves property taxes. It is a tax that the government can collect in the worst of times. And if you can’t come up with the funds to pay them in the worst of times, the government gets to take your home. Most officials claim they need that constant, reliable funding source to make their jobs easier.

Governments in the past have laid claim to peoples children. We wouldn’t stand still for that today. We shouldn’t stand still when they lay claim to our property.

We can do away with property taxes. We can do it by eliminating non-essential spending, distributing our sales taxes to legitimate government services, and making sure the user fees we pay, (such as gas and road use taxes) are truly spent on their intended purpose.

There are a lot of things that need to be fixed in state and local government. Finding a fairer and more equitable way to fund a smaller version of that government is a good place to start.

The Barr Necessities...

Rex Bell — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 19:53:47 +0000

I see they're having another Presidential debate between the Republican and Democratic candidates this Wednesday. I doubt if I watch it. I heard enough in the first two debates to convince me that I had made the right decision when I decided that I couldn't support either one of them.

They certainly have a difference in style, and they claim to have a difference in agendas, but I have also heard enough and seen enough to realize that whether John McCain or Barack Obama is elected, upon leaving office, either one will leave the government more costly and more intrusive than when they took office.

Apparently that doesn't bother a lot of people. But it bothers me. And it bothers Bob Barr, the Libertarian candidate for President of the United States of America. Bob Barr favors a Constitutionally limited government. Those Constitutional limits will provide all of the necessary government that we need, while ending most of the outrageous spending and meddlesome interference in our private lives.

Some people contend that voting for Bob Barr amounts to a wasted vote. I'm a firm believer that voting for something you don't want is really a wasted vote.

I don't want higher taxes, or a higher federal debt, or more government in my life.

So I'm not going to vote for them.

If you would like to vote for less government in your life, check out Bob Barr at www.BobBarr2008.com

How much is a Senator?...

Rex Bell — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 01:45:49 +0000

I'm reminded today of the story of the man who asked a woman if she would sleep with him for a million dollars. After she said yes, he asked her if she would sleep with him for a dollar. When the offended lady asked "What do you think I am?!", the man replied, "We've already decided that. Now we're just haggling on the price.

58 representatives that voted against the taxpayer funded bailout changed their minds for $130 billion worth of pork. I guess that means that representatives cost $2,241,379,310.34 each.

I guess that means we also know what they are.

P.J. O'Roarke called them "A Parliment of Whores".

I guess he was right.

A trillion here, and a trillion there...

Rex Bell — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 01:07:19 +0000

The word "trillion" is getting tossed around a lot lately. If you're like me, a trillion is kind of hard to get your head around. I saw something a couple of years ago that compared a million, a billion, and a trillion. It went something like this:

One million seconds = 11 days

One billion seconds = 32 years

One trillion seconds = 317 centuries

The federal government just added $1 trillion to your debt, and Andrew Davis at the Libertarian Party Headquarters reports these figures:

"One trillion dollars ($1,000,000,000,000) is enough money:

To buy everybody living in Los Angeles at least one Lamborghini Gallardo.
To buy 88,052, 394' custom mega yachts; enough to stretch around ¼ of the world.
To buy everyone living in Belize and Malta a Manhattan apartment.
To get half of the Democratic Party into a fundraiser for Barack Obama at the $28,500 admission price.
To give one out of every two men in the United States a Men's Presidential Rolex watch.
To buy every woman in the United States a Tiffany Diamond Starfish Pendant.
To get two Mitsubishi 73" HDTVs for every household in America.
To buy four copies of The Office: Season Four on DVD, to every person on earth.
To send everybody in America on an all-inclusive vacation to Tahiti (and some people can stay a few extra days).

AND…

$1 trillion is enough money for everyone in Buffalo, NY to buy their own 65-acre island in Panama.

This is how much the government is going to cost you (roughly $3,278 for every man, woman and child in the United States).

Barack Obama is for it. John McCain is for it.

But, Bob Barr and Libertarian Party are against it."

Most of the people I've talked to are against it also.

Not that that matters.

The Race Is On....

Rex Bell — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 02:56:26 +0000

There wasn't a lot to do for entertainment when I was a kid growing in Millville. So sometimes, if we got the milking done early enough, my old buddy Stinky Wilmont and I would scrape together 75 cents and catch a ride with my cousin up to the Sun Valley Speedway in Anderson. I wasn't really a big racing fan, but I was as anxious to go somewhere then as I am to stay at home now.

Sometimes, they would have what they called "Figure 8" racing, where all of the cars would hurry around the track and cross each others path in the center. Stinky just loved it. I, on the other hand, never understood the attraction. It just looked like a good way to get your car torn up to me. Still, I guess it was something to do.

I hadn't thought about those trips to Sun Valley for a long time, but a couple of days ago I made my first passage through the new 27 and I-70 interchange in Richmond. I was driving south when I found myself in the middle of a bunch of white and yellow and solid and striped lines running every which direction, with some lights hanging overhead in some various locations throughout the......project.

Now, I know that Mitch and the gang over in Indianapolis are awful proud of this....project. I know that we spent $27 million on it, and I'm sure that if I ever have to drive through it again, I can probably handle it. But probably most of the time I'll just slip up Waterfall Road or the Sim Hodgin Parkway.

There was one good thing that came out of the experience, though. I hadn't seen Stinky for years, but I'm pretty sure he passed me at least twice while I was maneuvering through the.......project.

Keep an eye out for him next time you go through.

Pay 'em now, and pay 'em later....

Rex Bell — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 23:46:59 +0000

I run a small construction company with the help of my brother, my youngest son, and Hank, when he’s not mowing his yard. And Jay when he’s not in school or playing baseball. Or fishing. We try to build a couple of homes a year, sometimes more, sometimes less depending on the size and complexity of the project.

As part of the agreement, if the customers are happy with the final product, they pay us and we move on to the next project. Hopefully I have enough to pay everybody, buy my wife and grandkids something for their birthdays, and then put a little back for a rainy day.

That’s how it works, and that’s how it’s supposed to work The homeowners know that I can’t or won’t come back 15 or 20 years from now and ask them to pay me again, or ask their children or grandchildren to pay me again. The job was completed and the job was paid for. Period. Unfortunately, it doesn’t always work like that when the government is involved.

Most government employees are promised a pension when they retire, just as many private sector employees are promised a pension when they retire. It’s admirable that a person would plan ahead for their retirement, and if part of their pay consists of their employer contributing to and frugally managing their retirement account, they certainly are better off for it.

However, Hoosier taxpayers are justifiably concerned about the ever rising cost of government, even as government is feverishly trying to justify its ever rising cost. There is seldom a day goes by that we don’t hear of some ridiculous government spending program. A couple of weeks ago, the news was filled with the report of state legislators’ pension funds receiving a $4 to $1 match from taxpayers. As maddening as that program is, the $14 million taxpayers have contributed in the last 16 years is small potatoes compared to other pension contributions they are making.

When government promises a pension to its employees, it’s actually promising that taxpayers will continue to fund that pension. The government doesn’t always set the pension money aside, and even when it does, it doesn’t always leave it set aside. In order to feed its insatiable appetite, government often borrows from the pension funds that taxpayers have supported, leaving a massive debt for present and future taxpayers to settle.

Across Indiana, Hoosiers are on the hook for billions of dollars that have been borrowed from teachers and public employee retirement funds, and a lot of the taxes they are paying now, that should be applied to current services, are instead paying interest on borrowed money and repaying benefits that they or their parents have already paid.

And government doesn’t help things with the generous retirement plans it offers. Some departments offer a healthy retirement to employees after only 20 years of service, and at the age of 50. Sometimes less. Here in Wayne County, some members of the sheriff’s department qualify for nearly $35,000.00 a year retirement after only 8 years of service. It’s likely that a lot of these retirees will be drawing benefits for over 40 years. That means there is a real possibility that your great-grandchildren will be paying for the retirement of the current police force. We get a double whammy when an employee retires from one department, and then goes to work for another department, and ends up drawing a retirement from both.

Certainly government employees that provide essential services should be fairly compensated for their efforts, and that compensation should be adequate to fund a reasonable retirement plan. And certainly if they decide they want the government to administer that retirement plan, they certainly have that right, although in view of its past performance, I would question the wisdom of that decision.

One of the best ways to control government spending is to limit its access to the billions and trillions of dollars that should be in these funds, and let employees control their own accounts. Overall, that is the fairest plan for the taxpayers. And their employees.