Mike Russo Expose'

After most recessions, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth comes back with  a strong minimum 5% increase.   But not this time…annual growth is averaging under 2%.  So what’s wrong this time?  Why not the usual strong growth?  Business has a few trillion dollars that it’s holding onto, so why isn’t it spending its money to expand its operations?  There’s a lot of  reasons why business is being cautious in expansion…and we need to understand what the problem is in order to turn around the economy and foster growth in the job market.

But who am I to be pontificating on jobs and the economy?  Well, I do have my masters degree in Government Administration from the University of Pennsylvania.  And my degree is from the Wharton School in the U. of P., which is known for its econometric models of the economy.  To be clear, however, my education was in government, not economics, though I did need to have economics and accounting courses as well as a statistics course in order to graduate from Wharton with my MGA.  I also worked for the Federal government for over40 years in various capacities, and have also worked for the state of Pennsylvania and the city of Philadelphia.

LAST SUCCESSFUL QUICK RECOVERIES

Let’s put aside education and experience qualifications because, from my observations, ideology trumps education.  I’ve seen PhD’s advocate  really stupid positions even in light of contradictory evidence.  So I tend to look at the real world, what actually happens when a particular economic policy is followed and practiced.

I’ll start with the policies used by President John F. Kennedy in the early 1960s.  When confronted with a recession, he cut tax rates which led to increased economic growth and recovery.  In addition, when President Ronald Reagan inherited the worst recession since the Great Depression from President Jimmy Carter in 1980 (unemployment over 10%, inflation 13.5%, mortgage interest rates up to 20%), President Reagan cut tax rates to the extent that GDP almost doubled  and tax revenues to the Federal government greatly increased in the 10 years following the tax rate cuts.  President George W. Bush had a similar experience with tax rate cuts, revenues to the Federal government increased when he decreased the rates.

PAST FAILURES

Let’s look at what actually happened when the opposite approach was used:  it is estimated that President Franklin D. Roosevelt doubled the duration of the Great Depression in the 1930′s by using the John Keynes economic method of increasing government (deficit) spending and the US still did not even get out of the Great Depression until World War II.   Moreover, when Japan’s economy went bust in the 90′s, it spent trillions over a 20-year period trying to stimulate its economy.  The huge deficit spending did nothing except give Japan a large debt.

WHAT PRESIDENT OBAMA TRIED

Which brings us up to today when President Barrack Obama spent almost a trillion dollars in his “stimulus” package in a effort to turn around the economy…and also devalued the dollar by having The Federal Reserve Bank print hundreds of billions of dollars with no backing through it’s so-called Quantitative Easing 1 and 2.  He also tried other short-term Federal spending programs such as his “cash for clunkers” and engaged in huge annual deficit spending, the extent of which has never been seen before ($ 1.65 trillion this fiscal year alone).  His economic policies, based on discredited economist, John Maynard Keynes,  have actually have made the economy worse by piling up huge government debt (over $14 trillion in total national debt which equals the annual GDP in the US or 100% of the GDP), with very little to show for it,  and whose interest is getting close to being unsustainable.

Let’s look at other factors significantly adversely affecting the economy, such as oppressive government regulations.  One of the reasons for President Bill Clinton’s economic success in the 1990s was his significantly cutting back many Federal Regulations (as well as government employment through attrition) as part of his “National Performance Review” initiative.  President Obama’s policy, on the other hand,  on drilling for oil in the Gulf of Mexico, has resulted in 240,000 barrels/day less oil from the Gulf  which has, at least in part, led to the doubling of  gasoline prices.  The Dodd-Frank bill, the purpose of which was to prevent future financial meltdowns, not only did not even deal with the cause of the meltdown, Fannie-Mae and Freddie Mac,  but because of its adverse impacts on small banks, is drying up loan money for small businesses that would have otherwise been available to them to expand.

Then there’s Obamacare looming on the horizon that is being implemented which has been estimated to actually cost the government up to 3 trillion dollars in the first 10 years as well as lead to rationed and inferior health care.   Then, of course, there’s the new EPA regulations on carbon dioxide, which as we all know,  is an inert gas the chief purpose of which is to serve as food for plant life which turns the carbon dioxide into oxygen.  Moreover, let’s not forget how hundreds of thousands of farm hands were suddenly unemployed when the US Department of the Interior shut off the water to California’s Central Valley in an effort to protect the Central Valley Smelt (a small fish)that was on the Endangered Species list.  All of these things have hurt jobs.  Finally, extending unemployment benefits to 99 weeks actually increases unemployment because studies show that, on average, unemployment benefits recipients don’t even begin looking for work until 4 weeks prior to the end of their benefits.

IS CUTTING TAX RATES FAIR?

But cutting tax rates isn’t fair, is it?  Even President Obama said in an interview about a year or so ago, when confronted with the fact that cutting the captain gains tax rate would actually result in increased tax revenues to the Federal government, that he would not cut the capital gains tax rate because is wasn’t fair.

So is it fair to cut tax rates even though we know that the result would be to increase tax revenues?  The nation would then have more money to help the poor, not less, so why not do it?  I can understand the “equality” argument but  is it a good thing if everyone were equally poor as it is in many countries?   “So what?” if there are some super-wealthy people…we know that in the United States they will eventually give most of their money to charity anyway and do it much more wisely than the Federal government!   Winston Churchill said that  capitalism is a bad form of government except that it’s better than all other forms of government.

THE SOLUTION

Cutting  tax rates and regulations have always worked in the past and would simulate the economy and thereby create many jobs.   Political ideology is the only thing preventing our government from following these time-tested strategies.   Presidents Kennedy, Reagan and Bush all increased tax revenues by cutting tax rates for everyone.  The bottom 50% of earners pay no Federal income taxes…the upper 10 %, on the other hand,  pay 70% of Federal income taxes.  If you believe that’s not enough, how much is enough?  The U.S. corporate tax rate is currently 35%, the highest in the entire world and consequently has led to many businesses moving their operations to other countries and has caused the United States to lose many jobs.  It’s estimated that there is at least 3 trillion dollars off-shore that we could entice back to the US if we offered a zero corporate tax rate for the first few years and a contract stating that the businesses would remain in the US for at least another 5 years.  The US needs to put ideology aside and focus on solving the problem.  Although  President Obama can be very friendly, his policies are really hurting the United States, so it’s time for him to try approaches other than very large amounts of Federal deficit spending and to forget about raising taxes on anyone in this under-performing economy.

All Services

I decided to interview Steve De Maura (25-minute audio interview…click on the red “play” button at the bottom of this introduction) because the U.S. economic problems mostly stem from the high unemployment rate which mean less taxes for governments at all levels and high annual deficits for the Federal government (most States may not legally have budget deficits). In addition, US energy policy and using Keynesian economics (e.g., the “Stimulous” package) have made job creation and U.S. economic problems much worse. The interview focuses on the high unemployment rate: why it is so high and what should be done to bring it back down to very low levels.

Mr. De Maura began the non-profit organization “Americans for Job Security” or “AJS” (website www.savejobs.org) in 1997 to promote pro-market, pro-jobs public policy.  He was born in New Hampshire and raised in a small town in that State.  He received his higher education at American University in Washington, DC, after which he worked as a consultant for years before becoming director of “Americans for Job Security”.   AJS has a few thousand members who favor predictable regulations and lower taxes so as to foster job growth.  It funds its activities from member dues.  Read the rest of this entry »

All Services

Doesn’t it make you angry when someone treats you unfairly just because you’re black, brown, white, a woman, a man, homosexual, older, younger, disabled, bald, long-haired, short, fat, poor, wealthy, Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, etc. ?  Doesn’t it make you angry?  What would Dr. Martin Luther King say?

In 1790, George Washington said “The government of the United States …gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution, no assistance….”  In fact, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, and a few other pieces of civil rights legislation such as the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, outlaw discrimination based on: 1) race, 2) color, 3) sex, 4) religion, 5) national origin, 6) age, and 7) handicap.  However, there are many other bases for discrimination which are not illegal and are not obvious and therefore are much more difficult to deal with than those which are illegal.  Because I’ve had a lot of experience in this area I thought I’d share my views on how discrimination works and how best to deal with it. Read the rest of this entry »

All Services

I decided to conduct this conference call on TNR (25-minute audio of interview at the bottom of  written introduction) because it’s the answer to the feral and stray cat population explosion problem.  Ferals and strays starve, thirst,  freeze, are killed by dogs and other cats as well as by cars, and there are very few charitable organizations dealing with the problem.  Moreover, as a bonafide “catman,” who has trapped, neutered, and returned at least 60 cats, this issue is very important to me because I’ve come to know cats as the affectionate (if you feed and water them, scratch their heads, give them a name and talk to them ) creatures that they are.

If you love cats, don’t miss this discussion led by Mike Russo with Alex Mehn and Mark Rheinhardt on the very effective “Trap, Neuter, Return” (TNR) program for feral (afraid of people) cats.  TNR has been questioned recently concerning its effectiveness; however, we in the cat community have first-hand experience and knowledge that it works very well.

Alex Mehn, at the time of the interview, worked for the “Rocky Mountain Alley Cat Alliance” and its low-cost neutering clinic,”The Feline Fix,” as its TNR coordinator.  Mark Rheinhardt is an attorney on the board of the “Devine Feline” which operates a large van/mobile unit that travels around metropolitan Denver where its volunteers humanely trap feral and stray/homeless cats and have them neutered in the van by a volunteer veterinarian, and later returned to where they were trapped.

The discussion examines all facets of how a TNR program for caring for feral and stray-homeless cats could be implemented through local legislation (and uses Denver as an example of a city that needs TNR legislation and why).

In the TNR discussion, many issues are addressed, such as:

1. How TNR helps prevent cat “hoarding”
2. Feline aids and leukemia,
3. Aggressiveness, zoonotic diseases,
4. Curtails hunting and killing birds,
5. The risks to catpeople without TNR, and much more.

To listen to this conference call, please click the red Play button below.

Conducted by Mike Russo on 10/13/10.

All Services

Not long from now… November 6, will be here and with it the Presidential election.  In the 2008 Presidential election I was troubled about who to vote for and consequently gave it a lot of serious thought, going so far as listing the top 10 issues facing the U.S. and analyzing the positions on each of the issues by both candidates, Barack Obama and John McCain.

But the re-election of a President is far different from an initial election.  For re-election you look at the incumbent’s record, not promises, rhetoric or great speeches.  In addition, I don’t believe in using personal issues when evaluating worthiness of either election or re-election.  I look at policies and actions  taken in carrying out Presidential duties.   In a previous Post on this Blog I listed and explained the 6 criteria that I believe should be used in determining who would make a good President.  I’ll list my reasons (citing the most important first and the least important last) for electing or not re-electing the President under each of my six criteria, as follows: 1)Integrity, 2)Experience, 3)Education, 4)Positions on Issues, 5)Open-mindedness, and 6)Public Speaking and Charisma.  This Post is difficult for me to write because I really like the President personally, so being objective is a challenge.

1. INTEGRITY 

I’ve listened to most of Obama’s speeches since he was elected President in November 2008.  As a member of  Toastmasters International, a public speaking organization, I love hearing a good speech, and the President can give a good speech.  However, tied to the ability to speak well, is speaking truth and not hyperbole, and meaning what you say.  For this criterium I have to give the President below average to the extent that I no longer enjoy listening to him because most of what he says is misleading, deceitful or simply lies.  It really disturbs me because I want to like and support the President but cannot do so in good conscience.  To cite just one example of the hundreds I’m personally aware of  that demonstrate how the President is deceitful, he has frequently said that the U.S. is now producing more oil than ever.  While this statement is technically true, the reason for this is the large amount of oil being produced on privately-owned and State land, not Federal land.  Oil production from Federal land is significantly down and the reason is the President’s curtailing granting permits in the Gulf and on Federal lands.  I have numerous examples of the President lying, being deceitful, and hypocritical.

2. EXPERIENCE

When Barack Obama was elected President the Country was hopeful that he would unite us and work with everyone to achieve great things.  His experience was a community organizer and a law instructor, neither of which is relevant to governing a huge economy and military.  One third of our presidents have been governors of a State prior to their becoming  president.  Being a Governor is widely accepted as the very best experience that a presidential nominee can bring to the job.   In analyzing issues, this kind of experience is invaluable.  Really tough problems are nothing to solve when you know how to analyze them.  However, the President didn’t have this or any comparable experience and therefore didn’t know how to stimulate job creation and fix the economy.  He has ignored past U.S. and foreign experience and consequently has wasted trillions of dollars of borrowed money.

3. EDUCATION  

President Obama’s education is in law.  However, it’s highly desirable that the Chief Executive of the United States has education in governing or management, either in business or government.  If not governing, then extensive legislative experience would be useful.  Ideally, the five functions of management (planning, organizing, directing, coordinating, controlling) would be as familiar to the chief executive of the U.S. as his/her own name because this skill is needed by a President of the United States.

4. POSITIONS ON ISSUES

Voters find candidates appealing for many different reasons, most of which have nothing to do with whether the candidate would make a good president.  President Obama has a great smile, is a great speaker, and appears to be a good father and husband, most of which are irrelevant to Presidential job performance,   In the 2008 election I was torn, especially because I wanted to vote for the first African-American President.  To solve my dlilemma I listed the top 10 issues facing the U.S. and McCain’s and Obama’s position on each of the ten.  Using this system enabled me to make a clear-headed decision and not be swayed by irrelevant factors.  However, Obama’s actions after he was elected President were even further to the far left than those that he had stated during his Presidential campaign.   In other words, what he foretold he would do if he were elected President were “just words” to him.  In particular, the President has added $5 trillion to the national debt and is still adding $1.5 trillion each year in annual deficits to it.  His misunderstanding of basic economics was demonstrated when the presidential candidate  told journalist Charles Gibson in 2008 that raising the capital gains tax rate was “a matter of fairness,” even though past experience has shown that lower rates actually increase total revenues to the government because it increases the rewards of investing and makes it attractive for investors to risk their money.  An ideal position is to increase government revenues and then use this larger amount of money to do whatever needs to be done.

5. OPEN-MINDEDNESS

Politicians usually have a political  ideology that places them in either the liberal or conservative camp.  However, often their stance on national issues and their consequent actions may not be appropriate for effectively addressing a specific issue…therefore a politician must be open to all possible remedies, including those that are not in accord with his/her ideology.  President Obama did demonstrate this openness once during his Presidency, but only once, and it (compromise) should have been done a lot more for the good of the country.   The one time was when he compromised to keep the “Bush Tax Cuts” for two more years because at the time it would have been devastating to the economy to remove them during the recession.

6. PUBLIC SPEAKING and CHARISMA

This quality of a president is a two-edged sword because, on the one hand it can make the President much more effective, and on the other hand, if the President lacks integrity, being more effective is actually a bad thing.  A great example of what I’m talking about is Adolph Hitler.  His oratorical skills helped him whip up the German citizentry into a frenzy and consequently support his draconian policies.  The President obviously is no Adolph Hitler, but his public speaking ability enables him to get away with lies, deceit, and hypocrisy.

                                                                                              CONCLUSION

The media loves the President so when they’re not singing his praises, they’re simply silent on anything and everything that makes him look bad.  The media is not doing its job of keeping everyone honest by reporting the facts and crying “foul” when they see improprieties.  Because of this, it’s very difficult for anyone to get the information needed to make an informed decision on who to vote for (they just don’t even know about many issues).  I spend many hours a day trying to find out what’s really happening in the country and the world and checking on how the government is responding.  To ease this burden, a good starting point for voters I believe is to set forth some guidelines or criteria for judging a President, like the six that I enumerated above.

The November election is the most important in my lifetime.  It will determine whether the U.S. remains a constitutional republic.  Because of the challenges of voter identification laws in many States around the country by U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, the President may still win re-election even if it’s actually a landslide for his opponent (because of rampant voter fraud enabled by no/very weak voter ID) in many States.  If you think this is impossible, consider how comedian Al Franken stole the Minnesota Senatorial election from Senator Norm Coleman.  However, even if this Presidential election is tragically stolen and the United States slides into a depression our military turned into a  Troop of Boy Scouts,  Israel is destroyed, and China and Russia re-emerge ,you can sleep a little better knowing that you did your part in doing your civic duty to not simply vote, but doing your best in voting for a candidate that could help the United States.

All Services

When the President vetoed the TransCanada Company’s proposed $7 billion Keystone XL Tar Sands Pipeline (also known as the Keystone Gulf Coast Expansion Project),  830,000 barrels of oil a day will now not travel from Alberta, Canada to the Gulf’s oil refineries.  Though a politically popular decision with environmentalists,  it was very unpopular with construction unions, as well as most Americans.

To counter criticism, some from leaders in his own political party, the President made an appearance in Cushing Oklahoma on March 22 saying that he would fast-track any required permitting of the 485 miles of pipeline traveling from Cushing down to the Gulf.  That part of the proposed pipeline is on privately-owned land so the President couldn’t do much to stop its construction even if he wanted to.  Without the northern leg of the pipeline, however, the 830,000 barrels of much-needed oil/day won’t be coming from Canada and this leg of the pipeline the President could and did stop because the pipeline would cross the Canadian-American border.

Recently, TransCanada has modified its proposed route through the environmentally-sensitive areas of Nebraska and resubmitted its application.  There is not much remaining that is controversial so it hopefully will be approved…we’ll see.

The Keystone pipeline is not simply about oil, but also about  thousands of jobs (estimated to be 20,000  construction and 100,000 indirect jobs) and significant effects on the economy.  It’s therefore important to analyze the President’s decision.

It’s no secret that the far left is anti-fossil fuel because of what it perceives as unacceptable pollution.  To this end, the Obama Administration came out with 5 sets of anti-coal regulations which are estimated to cost the United States  the loss of over one million jobs.  In addition, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is zeroing in on anti-fracking regulations to control the utilization of the huge natural gas reserves (over a 100-years worth) in the U.S.; however,  the far-left contends that its opposition to the Keystone Pipeline  is mainly because of possible leaks from the line.  Energy Secretary Chu, however, has stated that it would be desirable to have U.S. gas prices at European levels ($8-10), so that alternative fuels would be more price-competitive.

Carbon emissions have been drastically reduced over the past 50 years.  Autos emit only a tiny fraction of what they used to.  Coal-fired power plants have been cleaned up.  In contrast, China brings on-line  two new coal-fired power plants a week and these plants, unlike U.S. plants, emit lots of pollution.  Air pollution knows no boundaries, so it’s a lot less polluting to the earth for the U.S. to burn its coal rather than for China.

Solar and wind sources of energy only supply 3.6% of the nation’s energy needs.  Hydroelectric supplies less than 10%, nuclear about 19% (France gets 80% of  its energy from nuclear).  So for the foreseeable future the U.S. still needs fossil fuels.  Therefore this dilemma is not really a dilemma at all.  If the U.S. cannot get the oil it needs from domestic sources and help improve the economy and create thousands of jobs at the same time, it will get it from foreign sources and give up to $500 billion a year of its wealth to countries that don’t like us and in some instances mean us harm, and to the detriment of the economy as well.

The United States is constantly improving  extraction and utilization methods for fossil fuels, while continuing to develop alternative and nuclear energy.  The potential for Keystone Pipeline leakage can be mitigated through built-in protective redundancies.  The Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), prepared pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act…(NEPA) was just published in late August 2011 after three years of preparation and found “no significant impacts” from the pipeline.  If a pipeline oil leak did occur, it’s far easier to stop it and then clean it up, than if a leak occurred from an offshore pipeline.

There’s simply not enough alternative and nuclear energy currently available and it will be decades before there is, so for now we need fossil fuels and the United States has more natural gas, coal, and oil than any other country in the world, but it also has an array of laws and regulations preventing its access and use.  The pipeline could be raised off the ground, as was the Alaska pipeline, or it could detour around the major 200,000-square- mile Ogallala or High Plains Aquifer in Nebraska and other surrounding States.

It appears that Canada will now build the pipeline to its west coast and the 830,00 barrels of oil a day will be sold to China and an additional 150,000 barrels of oil a day from the Bakken Formation in North Dakota  will have to continue to use trucks to haul its oil south to the Gulf refineries rather than simply using the Keystone Pipeline to transport it.  U.S. gas prices will consequently likely be over $5 gallon no later than this summer, not simply because of the loss of the Canadian oil, but also because of “slow-walking” the permitting of wells in the Gulf,  not allowing drilling in ANWAR and on most of the Outer Continental Shelf, and OPEC (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries) who sets world oil prices based on world supply and demand.  In addition, the price of oil will also skyrocket because the oil futures market is negatively affected by the strong signals that the U.S. is not serious about developing its vast oil resources and that future oil shortages are therefore likely (and higher prices are therefore warranted now).

All Services

Global warming or climate change: both terms have been politicized to the extent that one has to question the sources of all data and facts cited to prove or disprove: 1) whether global warming even exits, and if it does, 2) is it man-made or caused by something else or a combination of both.  Further, if it does exist and is mostly man-made, 3) how bad is it and, 4) can anything be done to significantly stop it if it’s  bad enough to warrant being stopped.  If we can answer each of these concerns, then we’ll know what to do, if anything, about global warming.  Here’s my analysis:

1) Whether the earth is warming, cooling or staying the same basically depends on the point in time you select to compare this year’s  earth’s temperature to.  For example, a few hundred years ago the earth went through a “Little Ice Age” (1280-1850 AD) so of course today’s temperature would be  warmer than then.  You may cite the melting Arctic glaciers as other evidence of global warming. Read the rest of this entry »

All Services

I watched Sunday morning’s political talk shows which made me sick at the inarticulateness  of some journalists and ignorance by many of all aspects of the issues.  So I thought, as a non-partisan, I’d toss in my two cents worth of analysis since the analysis I heard this morning was unimpressive.

Let’s focus on the most important issues currently in the U.S.:  jobs and the economy.  I’ll attempt to accuraely state the Democrat positions and the Republican positions, and then give my analysis.

DEMOCRAT ARGUMENT: 1. The Tea Party has swayed the Republican party to its  its extremist positions…if they would support the President in what he wants to do, the economy would improve and job growth would increase.   A Republican Senator said a year or so ago that the number one job was to make Barrack Obama a one-term President.  Democrats also believe that  the Tea Party is racist and it doesn’t like the President because he is Black.

2. The Republicans want to eliminate or drastically reduce Social Security and Medicare while cutting taxes on millionaires and billionaires.  If we would increase taxes on the wealthy,  the U.S. would be O.K. plus the wealthy pay lower tax rates than their employees.

3. Through his 800 billion “Stimulus Package”, President Obama turned the economy around.  Things would have been much worse if we didn’t have the Stimulus Package.

REPUBLICAN ARGUMENT: 1.  President Obama’s Stimulus helped a little but it was President Bush’s $700 billion “TARP” (Troubled Assets Recovery Program) that preceded President Obama’s Stimulus that fixed the financial markets (1/2 of it was spent by Bush, 1/2 spent by Obama

2. The Republican plan for Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid simply makes these programs more efficient and this needs to be done because they are currently bankrupting the the U.S. to the extent that soon the it will no longer be able to afford them.  And these efficiences are minor  like raising the retirement age a few years for people currently under 55 years of age, turning the administration of Medicaid over to the States, and Medicare recipients given vouchers so they could purchase private insurance (and save over $6,000 per recipient from the resulting efficiencies).

3. No one’s taxes should be increased in our bad economy…it would make it even worse.  By millionaires and billionaires you are really referring to anyone making more than $250,00/year and this is not a millionaire but is an income level that many business owners fall into (and you’ll be hurting them, the job creators).  The top ten percent (over around $350,000/year) pay about 70 % of Federal income taxes.   Their tax rates are lower because tax on captal gains (from stocks) is lower and is lower as an intended incentive for investors to risk their money by buying stocks.

4. Republican .Senator Mitch McConnell remarked that he wanted to make Barrack Obama a one-term President because he thought that this was the only way to fix the economy and create jobs…nothing to do with racism.  Morever, that the President is the cause of the continued economnic problems in the U.S. (current 2% GDP growth vs. what it usually is at this point after a recession, 5%) with “Obamacare,” Dodd-Frank, etc.

MY ANALYSIS

While the President has tried to fix the economy, it  clearly has not worked and the Stimulus has added almost a trillion dollars to our national debt with very little to show for it.  No one even asked basic questions prior to the passage of the “Stimulus,”  such as, “is it worth the cost?”  The President needs to try other approaches.  He has added $5 trillion to the National debt in just over 3 years, which is now over $15 trillion.  Last year’s deficit spending alone was about $1.6 trillion.  This is unsustainable.

1. I’m non-partisan and as such believe that it might be a good thing for everyone to have health insurance.  Presently, the poor receive their health care at hospital Emergency Rooms since Federal law mandates that hospitals treat people who can’t pay for free.  The kindest thing that I can say about Obamacare is that, as currently configured, it is unaffordable to the U.S. (estimated to really cost up to $3 trillion the first 10 years).  However, it is much worse than simply being unaffordable,  but that’s  a future article.   Obamacare is stifling job creation and really needs to be repealed and replaced by something much better.

2.  The recent Dodd-Frank bill that is forcing small community banks out of business and the small loans to small businesses disappearing with those banks thus stifling job creation.  This bill, authored by the two people most responsible for the economic meltdown, needs to be repealed…it didn’t even address the cause of the meltdown, Freddie-Mac and Fannie-Mae quasi-governmental mortgage lending institutions.

3. Many new regulations have been and are being created and implemented by the Obama Administration which have and will continue to kill jobs, hamper new job creation and seriously hurt the economy.  Others fortunately have been defeated, such as Cap & Trade, Card Check, etc.  It really does appear that the Obama Administration simply does not know how to foster job growth in our economy.

The above should be enough information to decide who has the better plan for creating jobs and fixing the economy.  You can easily verify on the Net any of the information in my analysis.  However, stay away from political websites if you want objective information and data.

All Services

I decided to interview Mr. Horowitz (25-minute audio at the bottom of this introduction…click the red “play” button) because I wanted to know what happened to change him from left to right.  Moreover, I read some of his books and publications from his Freedom Center and wanted clarification of some of his positions and statements.  In addition, I heard Mr. Horowitz speak on several occasions and therefore knew that he was a compelling speaker with a fascinating past.

Mr. David Horowitz is a prolific author, speaker and political activist. He currently is the director of “The Freedom Center” which he created in 1988.  He went to Columbia University as well as the University of California at Berkeley and was the editor of the left’s leading magazine, “Ramparts.”  I believe Mr. Horowitz’ greatest asset is his insight into leftist politics.

In my interview with him, he explains why he changed from being a revered and high-level far-left socialist from 1956 to 1975 to a conservative in the late 70′s, especially considering that his parents were members of The American Communist Party.  Mr. Horowitz tells his spell-binding and compelling story with names, dates, and places.  He tells what motivates the left and gives his views on leftist positions.

In the interview, Mr. Horowitz explains:

1. Why and what the left hates.
2. How and why he knows that the Black Panthers murdered his accountant, Betty.
3. The anti-war activists’ change in their protests against the Vietnam war once the draft was ended in 1974, why many left leaders of the 70′s (John Kerry) have ”blood on their hands,” and much more.

If you enjoy following politics, you should enjoy this interview.  Click on the red Play button below.

Interview by Mike Russo on 8/10/10

All Services

I decided to interview Dr. Michael Smith, MD  of the Life Extension Foundation (25-minute audio of interview at the bottom of this introduction…click the red “play” button), because the tons of scientific research and findings on vitamin D is not getting out to the general public from the medical profession and this is leading to millions of excess deaths each year in the United States alone. I also asked Dr. Smith, the most important facts that you should know about fish oil, vitamin K and Co-Enzyme Q10 because these nutritional supplements are extremely important to heart health and you won’t hear much from the medical profession about them.

Dr. Michel Smith is a medical doctor with specialties in radiology and internal medicine, and currently serving as the clinical information specialist with The Life Extension Foundation, a non-profit organization devoted to researching and disseminating information on preventing disease and medical disorders.

Dr. Smith has been with the Life Extension Foundation for four years. Dr. Smith received his MD from the Southwest Medical Center at the University of Texas in Dallas

If you listen to the interview with Dr. Michel Smith of the Life Extension Foundation, you will have the opportunity to know the truth about: Read the rest of this entry »

All Services

I decided to interview Mr. Jackson, author of the book “The Big Black Lie, How I Learned the Truth about the Democractic Party”, (25-minute audio of interview at the bottom of this introduction…click on the red “play” button) because he is rare indeed…an unabashed African-American conservative.  Moreover, one won’t hear his views from traditional black leaders or the mainstream media and his views are worth listening to because they have a unique perspective and are interesting.

Mr. Jackson has degrees in Electrical Engineering and Mathematics, was a management consultant for some of the world’s largest companies, ran his own sales organization, and has his own Blog and radio show.  He is a dynamic and elegant speaker who is in high demand for his clarity of thought and expression.

The interview with Mr. Jackson focuses on African-American politics and explores why Mr. Jackson holds the views that he does. He has been on MSNBC, O’Reilly, and Cavuto,  among many others, and has a clear and studied loud message for African-Americans.

In the interview, Mr. Jackson tells us about:  Read the rest of this entry »

All Services

I decided to interview Dr. Michael Smith (25-minute audio at bottom of this introduction) on this subject because the scientific literature shows that certain lifestyle choices and nutritional supplements can help, so I wanted to ask a medical doctor, who’s knowledgeable on the latest research in this area, what he thinks.

UPDATE SINCE INTERVIEW:  1) Scientific research conducted at MIT developed and tested Magnesium L-Threonate which allegedly doubles long-term memory and increases short-term memory by 20% by increasing the density in the synapses between brain cells;  2) a supplement called PQQ (Pyrroloquinoline Quinone) has been researched and allegedly found to foster the growth of new brain cells, something that had been thought to be impossible; researchers have found that people who ate the most strawberries or blueberries delayed the onset of Alzheimer’s by 2 1/2 years; to keep the brain from shrinking as you age, high-dose DHA (a transfatty acid in fish oil) or walking 6-9 miles/week are both effective.  The latest promising research on reversing Alzheimer’s, the FDA-approved cancer drug, Bexarocarotene has reversed it in 2 weeks in mice.

Dr. Smith is a medical doctor (MD) with specialties in internal medicine and radiology, and currently serves as the clinical information specialist with the Life Extension Foundation, a non-profit organization devoted to researching and disseminating information on preventing diseases and medical disorders.

Dr. Michael Smith, physician and medical researcher with “The Life Extension Foundation” (LEF.org), discusses preventing neurological disorders such as Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, dementia, and mild cognitive impairment (MCI), He received his MD from Southwest Medical Center at the University of Texas in Dallas and has been with The Life Extension Foundation for 4 years.

In my interview with Dr. Smith, various nutritional supplements and lifestyle choices are discussed as ways of helping prevent the onset of neurological disorders. You will hear about how nerve cell structure is the focus of prevention, not function, which traditional medicine focuses on.  You will hear about the benefits of phosphatidylserine, phosphoryl choline, coenzyme Q10, vitamin B-12 under-the-tongue lozenges, vitamin D3, fish oil, R Lipoic Acid, etc.  Also discussed are lifestyle choices such as your cookware, baking powder with aluminum in it, and more.

Neurological disorders are so devastating that all avenues must be pursued and traditional medicine has very little to offer with its 4 prescription drugs that don’t work very well and it has very little on prevention. If you have any neurological disorders in your family, this audio should be listened to, clicking on the red Play button below.

Interview by Mike Russo on 10/10/10

All Services

The EPA-sponsored government ban on incandescent light bulbs, scheduled to begin on January 1, 2012, was put on hold on December 16, 2011, via de-funding of its enforcement that was contained in the legislation that funds the government for 2012.

Compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFL)  and light-emitting diodes (LED) will replace incandescent bulbs.  CLF’s use only about 25% of the energy that incandescent bulbs use and LED’s last 10 times CLF’s. That’s why EPA wants them to replace incandescent bulbs…to save energy.  However, CLF’s have a problem: they contain the potent neurotoxin, mercury.  No amount of mercury is safe.

There are provisions for burned-out CLF bulbs to be safely discarded, but I estimate that at least 75% will end up in the trash, where they will shatter and the mercury leaked out.   The mercury will end up polluting our air, water and soil and neurological disorders will consequently increase.  With Alzheimer’s now affecting about 1/2 of people over 84 years of age, that age threshold for Alzheimer’s will get younger as incandescent bulbs are replaced with Compact Fluorescent Light bulbs.

I think we need to ask: what is worse, mercury poisoning or the carbon emissions from carbon-based fuel burned to power incandescent lights.  So what should Congress do?  There’s no way that mercury-containing CFLs should be allowed into the environment.  Be sure to thank Congress and the President for this predicament.  It would be very enlightening to analyze mercury contamination in those countries that have already enacted anti-incandescent light bulb laws, like Brazil, Venezuela, Australia, Switzerland, and the European Union.

All Services

This coming November 6 we Americans will make a decision that will likely be the most important decision of our lifetime: who to vote for to be the next President of the United States.  Many believe that politics is stupid because of all of the partisan bickering that goes on.  That may or may not be true, but it’s irrelevant…our next President will make decisions that will affect not only us, but our children and grandchildren as well.

The following criteria for selecting a President is non-partisan.  I came up with them after looking at everyone else’s and concluding that they are inadequate. I’ve been following politics for over 50 years, my Masters degree from the University of Pennsylvania is in Government Administration, and I’ve worked for the Federal, State and local governments for 44 years, so I should know what I’m talking about.  My 6 criteria listed below for choosing a President are prioritized and listed in the order of their importance, so #1 is the most important and #6 the least important.

1. INTEGRITY: the most important quality but perhaps not so common in politicians.  This is important because the President may ask us to go to war or to make some other sacrifice, so we need to be able to trust him or her and not think that whatever is being done is for political purposes.

2. EXPERIENCE: there is no job exactly like the presidency but there are some jobs that provide relevant experience.  It’s not a coincidence that seventeen of our U.S. Presidents have been Governors of a State.  Being a Governor provides the best experience  for the presidency, however any executive or managerial experience is relevant and useful.  Legislative and legal experience is desirable.

3. EDUCATION: A masters degree in either Business or Government Administration is probably the most relevant education a President could have.  A law degree is helpful.

4. POSITIONS ON ISSUES: this criterium might also be called “ideology” and is really the heart of why one might select one candidate over another.  Problem is, politicians are adroit at lying, at obfuscating issues, at pretending righteous indignation,  so as a check on yourself, you should be able to delineate both sides of the top ten issues…and your understanding of an issue should have as its source a proponent of that side.  In other words, you want a Democrat telling you his/her side and a Republican telling you his/her side.

5. OPEN-MINDEDNESS:  In U.S. politics, the politician is either on the left or the right and this ideology  can be constraining at times for finding the best solutions to a problem or dilemma.

6. PUBLIC SPEAKING and CHARISMA: for his “bully pulpit” duties, a President would be well-served by being a master of the spoken word…and if he or she is charismatic as well, so much the better.

You may agree or disagree with my 6 criteria or perhaps you simply may want to add a few more.  Whatever…but it is important to have criteria (or standards) to use, otherwise you’ might do what many people do: vote solely by political party, vote because of something irrelevant like age, gender, physical appearance, ethnicity, race, or emotions.  While most elections don’t matter that much, the upcoming Presidential election will determine if our huge $15+ trillion National indebtedness, which is neither a conservative nor liberal belief,  puts us into the league of all of the great civilizations that eventually bit the dust by going bankrupt.

All Services

The National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 was signed by the President on January 2.  It basically funds our military for this year and also contains provisions for apprehending and detaining indefinitely any U.S. citizen suspected of terrorim without charging him/her with any crime or giving a trial.

It is understandable why the President wants such power, however, this is not in accordance with the U.S. Constitution and could be that slippery slope, where a well-meaning law, eventually morphs into something sinister.  The President added a “Signing Statement” specifying when he might use the authority, but even if you take him at his word, opponents ask “how about future presidents?”  Might they use it?  The Authorization, however, is for only one year, so doesn’t this provision expire at the end of the year?

What makes this interesting is that the President stopped the U.S. using water-boarding and other harsh interrogation methods because he said he thought they were unconstitutional, but his abundant use of drones in blowing up foreign combatants is OK with him.  Nearby innocent civilians, referred to as “collateral damage” are also inadvertently killed when an enemy combatant is killed with a drone.

Because the President can be so charming and is such a persuasive speaker, it’s hard to believe anything negative about him, so one must look at his actions  and not simply listen to his rhetoric.  A number of civil rights organizations, including the ACLU and Human Rights Watch, have denounced his signing the Bill into law.  We’ll just have to wait and see how the President uses this authority.

All Services

The golden goose (the U.S. economy) is badly hurt.  It needs resuscitation soon or it is going to get cooked (become another Greece).   So what’s to be done?  There are many ideas on how to revive the goose but what’s already been done hasn’t helped much.  To arrive at an effective solution on how to help this particular goose, one must discover the reasons that initially caused and is still causing its problems.

The initial causes were finally spelled out clearly in the book, Reckless Endangerment, by Gretchen Morgenson and Joshua Rosner:  the quasi-government mortgage institutions, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  Basically, they forced banks to loan mortgage money to people who could not repay them, and they did this because of the amendments to the Community Reinvestment  Act that President Clinton pushed through and that Representative Barney Frank and Senator Chris Dodd, as Committee Chairmen in the House and Senate in 2006 would not allow to be changed to make them fiscally sound.

But that’s “water under the bridge” so to speak, or is it?  The Dodd-Frank bill which was supposed to add regulations mostly on banks to prevent the economic downturn from happening again, does not even address Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  It does ensure the failure of small community banks by placing  reporting burdens on them that only large banks could afford to comply with and making the penalties to banks so severe (the government would  take over the bank) that banks are afraid to make loans.  But Dodd-Frank is just one minor peg in the goose’s coffin.

Other factors hurting our goose is Obamacare which is slowly going into effect.  Obamacare affects everyone in the United States.  The President said it was based on Romney-care, or the medical insurance system put into place under then-Massachusetts-governor Mitt Romney.   Romney-care, however, only affected the 8% of Massachusettes residents who were not covered by medical insurance.

Then there’s the huge increase in deficit spending which is quickly bankrupting the U.S. and thrusting a knife in the heart of the goose.  Positive,  job-creating actions, like the Keystone Pipeline , which would also provide much-needed oil, looks like it will either be defeated or delayed until after the Presidential election, by which time Canada will have made a deal with China and started the pipeline going west to the Pacific ocean where China will take it in oil tankers to its homeland.

I could go on and on and on, but I think you have the idea…policy after policy, each hurting the economy, is fatally hurting our friend, the golden goose.  If things are not turned around soon , this goose will be cooked.

All Services

Robyn Garner is gone.  Natalee Holloway is gone.  Many others, whom you’ll rarely hear about from the media,  are gone as well.   Aruba is known as a center for human trafficking and date-rape drugs.  Incompetence of  law enforcement, the Aruban legal system, and Aruba’s location are mostly to blame.  But I find it inconceivable that any young woman would even travel there…and if for some reason she had to vacation there, not to take special precautions, like not getting drunk or taking drugs, by being accompanied by someone whenever she left her hotel,  by being careful whom she befriended in Aruba, etc., etc., etc.

Few knew about the Aruban problem prior to Natalee disappearing and Joran Van der sloot being implicated in her disappearance.  But now the world knows.  Perhaps it is Gary Giordano who is responsible for Ms. Gardiner’s disappearnce, but listening to his being interviewed and answering tough questions, I think he’s telling the truth and is not responsible for Robyn’s disappearance, but I don’t know that for sure.  I believed Bill Clinton when he told the entire country, via TV, that he “did not have sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinski,” so perhaps I’m not a good judge of determining who’s lying.

Men abuse and con women.  Women do likewise to men.  So who can you trust?  Trust is developed over time as you observe someone react to various situations.  But then there’s about 5-10% of the population that has something called “Intermittent Explosive Disorder” or IED.    Something sets off  people afflicted with IED and they lose all control of their emotions.  A good example of IED is in the first “Godfather” movie where a woman receives a phone call from her husband’s mistress and learns that he is cheating on her and she consequently throws a fit of fury and attempts to destroy everything in her home.

You may never see a significant other with this problem display such a fit rage until after the wedding.  That’s why you need to be around someone for a sufficient amount of time so you  can witness any really bad behavior prior to making any committment.  Was Robyn around Gary long enough to see if  he was sane,  was she kidnapped into a lifetime of multiple daily rapes, or did she simply drown?  I don’t know but for sure, if you’re a young woman, you really should consider vacationing somewhere other than Aruba.

All Services

Talk around town is that Israel is going to bomb Iran’s underground nuclear facilities before the end of the year, or at the beginning of the new year at the latest. Henry Kissinger has said that if Iran gets the bomb it will use it.  The United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)  has recently reported that Iran is getting very close to getting the bomb.   Given all of these facts, as well as the fact that Israel’s very survival is at stake, it seems likely that Israel will strike.

Of course, if the Unites States, with its formidable military arsenal, helps Israel, there would be a greater likelihood that significant damage would be done to Iran’s nuclear facilities to set it back at least 3 years.

As bad as this scenario is, if nothing else works in deterring Iran, whose leader (Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad) promised to wipe Israel off the face of the earth, it’s obviously a better option than allowing the lunatic fringe (Iran’s leaders) to get the bomb.  So the big question is,  will President Obama allow the U.S. to assist Israel or will Israel have to go it alone.

This is important not only because of the increased likelihood of success if the U.S. helps Israel, but also because Israel’s actions would initiate a much greater worldwide political firestorm if it bombs Iran’s nuclear facilities without U.S. participation.  The United Nations would go bonkers.   Arab countries would threaten retaliation, even though most of them would be secretly relieved that the Region’s Crazy (Iran) was de-fanged.

U.S. involvement depends on the President.  Obama must be mindful of his diminishing popularity among America’s Jewish population and has consequently become much nicer to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.  However, the President’s childhood includes time being raised as a Muslim.  Like all Muslims, he must have been taught to hate Israel and all Jewish people.  So given this: his politics versus his early training, what would he do?  We’ll soon find out.  Let’s hope he makes the right decision and that the “Great Satan” (radical Islam’s name for the U.S.) helps the  ”Little Satan” (radical Islam’s name for Israel) in destroying Iran’s underground nuclear facilities so that not only Israel, but the entire world, would be much safer.

All Services

Dead people voting.  Inmates in prison voting.  People voting more than once, some voting much more than once.  Politicians pushing to eliminate all voter identification prior to voting.  Voting machines in Philadelphia being abused when the poll watcher momentarily leaves to go to the bathroom.  Voters in Philadelphia being intimidated by New Black Panther party members who were not  prosecuted by the U.S. Justice Department (see J. Christian Adams’ book, Injustice).  Men and women in the military routinely being sent ballots so late that it’s impossible for their votes to be counted in time.  More votes being cast in many Pennsylvania counties than the number of people residing in those counties.   Elections at Federal, State and local levels being stolen (see John Fund’s Stealing Elections: How Voter Fraud Threatens Our Democracy).

Who’s responsible for this National disgrace and travesty?  The government at the Federal, State and local levels is the culprit!  It’s not due to incompetence but to politics and it’s long overdue to be corrected before Americans lose all faith in the integrity of their elections.

Even in the Iraqi elections voting was much more honest than the United States.  How can that be?  Iraq had a very simple but effective system which was devised by the U.S. military: when Iraqis voted they had to dip their index finger into a jar of indelible purple ink…and this was solid evidence that they had voted.  In the United States, on the other hand, registration proving that you’re eligible to vote is required first.   What evidence is required to register to vote?  In Colorado, a utility bill with your name on it was sufficient.  Of course this is ridiculous because you  don’t have to be a citizen in order to receive a utility bill…and in addition, if you have more than one home in different counties, you’ll have separate utility bills for each home (you get vote twice if you’re dishonest).

Of course, authorities don’t want to place an undue burden on its citizens by actually requiring a photo ID, such as a drivers license.  What a crock!  Does anyone except a child actually believe that lax registration standards have any purpose other than facilitating fraudulent voting?  Voting is important so care must be taken that it’s done honestly and that politicians are kept far away from the process.

Perhaps a slight revision and an addition could be made to the on-line E-Verify system created by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services in concert with the Social Security Administration that is currently used by employers to ascertain whether someone is in the U.S. legally.  Something like a “Voter Authentication.”  Something must be done to prevent criminal politicians from continuing to corrupt our elections and it’s governments’ fault that it got this way and it’s  governments’ responsibility to clean it up.

All Services

One difficult area in managing programs and supervising people is fairly compensating them, especially compensating them fairly in relation to each other.  Most managers believe in the idea of using pay increases as an incentive for motivating employees to do good work.   However, “pay-for-performance”  has embedded within it an intrinsic unfairness which I’m not sure can be fully overcome.

Basically, supervisors within an organization each rate with differing degrees of difficulty.  Though logistically impossible, theoretically it would be ideal to have one person rate everyone in an organization because this would guarantee that everyone was rated with the same degree of difficulty.   But even then, because some employees are favored by a supervisor over others, bias  creeps into the rating system.

If a performance rating had no consequences, a good or bad rating wouldn’t matter much.  However, it’s  frequently used for determining monetary increases, awards, and even used in deciding who goes and who stays when an organization is downsized.  So performance rating systems are important.

The origins of the Federal employee performance rating systems reside in the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978.   Having worked for the Federal government for over 40 years, I know that many Federal agencies do have relatively good systems because  most describe in detail what fully-successful performance is for each job.   However, even with built-in safeguards, the Federal systems still still contain  the hazards enumerated above.  So what’s to be done?  I believe that performance ratings, while potentially important and useful, should not be used for anything too important because they’re simply not accurate enough.   By important, I mean being used to determine who gets the pink slips when an organization is downsized.  Awards are fine, even small monetary awards, but nothing that determines who loses their job, because none of  the systems I’ve seen  are fair and accurate enough to be used for this purpose.  So how does a supervisor/manager determine who stays and who goes?

To do the job right takes a lot of savvy…and it’s complex…because you’re potentially adversely affecting someone’s life, so you should be cautious.  First is something that appears in no performance rating system but is commonly used in making personnel decisions.  Of course, that’s “loyalty”.  A manager/supervisor does not want an employee badmouthing him/her, not simply for personal reasons, but also because this undercuts the supervisor’s/manager’s effectiveness.   But if an employee does have legitimate criticism, s/he  should do it behind closed doors (“praise in public, criticize in private”).  This actually is then a good thing for a supervisor/manager…getting feedback, positive and negative,  from employees, though some supervisors might not like it and retaliate later.

The next important consideration is the employee’s “attitude.”  This is important because employees will need to work in teams, at least occasionally, and most likely much more than occasionally.  A “can-do” attitude and one of “perseverance” and “realistic optimism” is important.

After these two factors are met, then it’s time to examine job performance closely.  The first two factors alone are not good enough.  Competency is critically important, but only after “loyalty” and “attitude” are deemed at least O.K.

All Services