Why is the economy a mess and businesses going under? A reason. by Bob Hubbard

Why is the economy a mess and businesses going under? A reason.
by Bob Hubbard

I recently got married. As part of that life's journey, one contacts a number of businesses and key people to make the day run smoothly. We contacted several facilities, visited 3. We received no call backs or follow ups from any of the places, other than the 1 we ultimately chose. We contacted several photographers, and were waiting on a promised call back from one when another contacted us out of the blue. We went with her and its a good thing we did as we still haven't heard from the one who promised to call us. We left messages with several dj's, tux rental places, and 2 hotels. Not a single call back. Are you seeing a trend here? All over the place people are crying "business is down", "I'm not sure if I'll make it" and similar. Yet we had a hard time finding anyone to take our money.

We stopped at a local fast food chain the other day. Place was empty. We waited 5 minutes before walking out, as no one felt like taking our order. Cleaning the back counter was more important, as obviously was the smoke break. A few days earlier, another chain store, we got indifferent service, mediocre "food", and a shrug when I complained about it.

Last year I made several calls to the management of a local mall, looking for information about possibly renting space there. Despite calling every day for 2 weeks, I never managed to reach the one single person there who could talk to me about anything rental related. He was always "just stepped out" or "gone for the day". I finally asked if he ever comes in, and when the person expressed surprise, I said I'd been calling all week, leaving messages and hadnt heard back. They said that was common. The mall has quite a few vacancies. I wonder why. Another local mall has a waiting list as it's full. They answered their phone and were available to talk. Big difference.

A couple months ago a family member had a plumbing emergency. We called at least a dozen plumbers (with the 24 hr service ads) before reaching a live person. We left messages at the earlier ones, and not a single one ever called back.

The economy may be shaky, a few large companies may be facing ugly restructuring, but the core of the economy has always been the small businesses. Maybe the reason why the core is seems to be rotting lies with the core it self. Maybe, it's shooting itself in the foot by failing to follow up, provide quality service and a quality product, and failing to follow through. Maybe, the solution to the economic mess isn't trillions in bailouts to a few big names, but for consumers to find and reward those companies that do go the extra mile, that do care about their product, that deserve to survive.

Maybe then the slackers, drifters, and such will wake up and step up, or die out like they deserve to make way for the real economic stimulus.

Maine Legalizes Same-Sex Marriage

Maine Legalizes Same-Sex Marriage


Same-sex marriage became legal in Maine on Wednesday as Gov. John Baldacci signed a bill less than an hour after the state legislature approved it.

"I have come to believe that this is a question of fairness and of equal protection under the law and that a civil union is not equal to civil marriage," said Baldacci, a Democrat.

But he raised the possibility that the residents of the state would overturn the law.
[Read Full Story]
=====

About time. Maine joins Vermont, Connecticut and Massachusetts, as well as Iowa in allowing same-sex marriages. California s still thinking on the matter, and New Hampshire, Rhode Island and New York are considering the matter.

Re: "Redistribute the Wealth"

Re: "Redistribute the Wealth"

---

Quote:

How many Americans here have friends and associates who's deepest concern is who won what game or who's topic of conversation is always "man I got so wasted last night"?

But that's ok. Those of us who work hard, educate ourselves, start businesses, or work 2-3 jobs while putting ourselves through higher education....we can pay more taxes so that lazybones and slacker can have government subsidized health care (while we pay top dollar for ours), government subsidized heating and electric (while we pay for ours), and even free money to spend on lotto and lobster (while we watch our money and live frugally). It's ok. It's our "Civic Duty" to help those "unfortunates".

On education: I read several hundred books every year, own a thousand+, read 4 newspapers (onliine) daily (SF CA, Austin TX (2), Buffalo NY), plus dozens of discussions like this one every day. I've taken extra training classes, community ed courses, online training, and am at Borders/Barnes & Nobel or my local ibraries weekly. I also run history chanel, food network, HGTV, DIY and Discovery as background. If our "unfortunates" did 10% of that, they'd be miles ahead.

Schools today in the US are woefully behind the technical requirements. Teaching methods in many cases are outdated, classes are over crowded, and teachers are still using maps that show the Soviet Union, and still using text books that list Sadamn as the head of Iraq. Unfortunately, even if they were up to date, balanced, and truely designed to learn, even the best teacher can't teach when the student isn't open to learn, or isn't there in the first place. Kids don't want to learn because they know they can grow up, go on welfare and have the government pay for everything. They have no idea of the value of a dollar, not because it's arbitrary imaginary money, but because they aren't required to know how to manage it.

We argue people go bankrupt because of medical bills. Those lotto winners went bankrupt because they were incapable of handling money.

Before you redistribute the wealth, maybe you need to revamp your education system so that people will be able to handle that which you give them.

Then again, maybe it's time that kids learn that they aren't entitled to anything, anything! that they didn't earn themselves.

"Redistribute the Wealth"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJyS1WJNisM

In this video clip Democrat Congressman Jim Moran expresses his disdain for people who want to keep what they have earned.


"...because we've been guided by a Republican administration who believes in this simplistic notion that people who have wealth are entitled to keep it...."

Considering that over 70% of lottery winners end up broke, bankrupt, divorced, etc within a few years of getting their winnings, maybe the reason alot of people are broke isn't because Bill Gates wasn't forced to hand over 85% of his money to people who didn't earn it, but because alot of people are really bad at managing what they have in the first place.

Do US Citizens have Rights?

Do US Citizens have Rights?
(MartialTalk 12-03-2008)

---

Found elsewhere, chew on it a bit.....

Quote:

A Natural Right is a liberty that is granted to us by our creator (God). It is inalienable part of our being (it cannot be taken or given away). Our” rights” are evidenced by the actions we take in exercising these liberties. To be considered a “right,” an action must be something we can do entirely by ourselves. If we need the help of others in any way, either actively or passively, that action cannot be considered a right. An action cannot be considered a “right” if it harms another innocent person, damages their property or prohibits another person from freely exercising their liberties. An inherent part of Natural Rights is the duty to respect the rights of others and not to infringe on the free exercise of those rights by other free people. We can all use logic and reason to determine what these rights are, and to figure out how far our liberties extend.

Quote:

Blacks Law Dictionary. Words are defined quite differently sometimes in the legal sense. Take the word "person" for instance...the legal definition of "person" is: person: In general usage, a human being (ie natural person), though by statue (the) term may include labor organizations, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers (see 29 USC 152) (The) scope and delineation of (the) term is necessary for determining those to whom (the) Fourteenth Amendment of (the) Constitution affords protection since this Amendment expressly applies to "person". A corporation is a "person" within (the) meaning of (the) Fourteenth Amendment equal protection and due process provisions of the United States Constitution. (Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Ward, Ala, 470 US 869 We can also look at corporation: Corporation: An artificial PERSON or legal entity created by or under the authority of the laws of a state. An association of PERSON created by statute as a legal entity. Now. Keep this definition in mind as you read the 14th Amendment: 14th Amendment, Section I: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. (CONGRESS redefined us as CITIZENS rather than WE THE PEOPLE..congress CREATED US CITIZENS) Jefferson said in the Declaration of Independence : Unalienable. Many believe it is inalienable..but it is unalienable. The Founding Fathers were all about property rights and contracts. The entire Constitution is concerned with property rights, to include your body, your person, which is your private property. So we conclude, that this amendment refers to all "persons" , which "may include labor organizations, partnerships, associations"- and "corporations". These persons are "citizens of the United States and (citizens) of the State wherein they reside." This clause establishes dual citizenship, with "citizens of the United States" apparently taking precedence. Remember that the CREATOR is always held to be more powerful than the created. Becuse Congress has CREATED juristic citizens, they are "subject to the jurisdiction" of Congress.

Follow this timeline:

Key

• AR: Date an Amendment was ratified
• AP: Date of the passage of a Constitutional Amendment
• NA: Notable American event
• NW: Notable World event
• PR: Presidential term begins
• SH: Statehood (for original 13 colonies, date Constitution was ratified)
• WR: An event in a U.S. war

1765/03/22 NA - Declaration of Rights is passed
1770/03/05 NA - Boston Massacre
1773/12/16 NA - Boston Tea Party
1774/03/31 NA - Boston Port Act is passed by Parliament
1774/05/20 NA - Administration of Justice and Massachusetts Government Acts are passed by Parliament
1774/06/02 NA - Quartering Act is passed by Parliament
1774/09/05 NA - First Continental Congress convenes
1774/10/07 NA - Quebec Act is passed by Parliament
1774/10/14 NA - Declaration of Rights and Grievances is passed
1774/10/20 NA - Articles of Association are signed
1775/04/18 WR - American Revolution begins
1775/05/10 NA - Second Continental Congress convenes
1775/07/21 NA - Ben Franklin presents a plan for confederation
1776/06/07 NA - Richard Henry Lee introduces independence resolution
1776/07/04 NA - Declaration of Independence adopted
1776/12/20 NA - Third Continental Congress convenes
1777/11/15 NA - Articles of Confederation proposed
1781/03/01 NA - Articles of Confederation ratified
1783/02/04 WR - English declare hostilities at an end
1783/04/11 WR - America declares hostilities at an end
1784/01/14 WR - Revolutionary War Ends (Treaty of Paris)
1787/05/25 NA - Constitutional Convention opens
1787/09/17 NA - Final draft of the Constitution sent to Congress
1787/12/07 SH - Delaware
1787/12/12 SH - Pennsylvania
1787/12/18 SH - New Jersey
1788/01/02 SH - Georgia
1788/01/09 SH - Connecticut
1788/02/06 SH - Massachusetts
1788/04/28 SH - Maryland
1788/05/23 SH - South Carolina
1788/06/21 SH - New Hampshire
1788/06/21 NA - Constitution Ratified
1788/06/25 SH - Virginia
1788/07/26 SH - New York
1789/03/04 NA - The Constitution goes into effect
1789/04/30 PR - George Washington
1789/07/14 NW - French Revolution
1789/09/25 AP - Amendments 1-10, 27, one unratified amendment
1789/11/21 SH - North Carolina
1790/05/29 SH - Rhode Island
1791/03/04 SH - Vermont
1791/12/15 AR - Amendments 1-10
.....
1866/06/13 AP - Amendment 14
.....
1868/07/09 AR - Amendment 14

"We The People" declared independence from England, fought a war and entered into a confederation consisting of the 13 former colonies. A convention was called to fix the AoC, and instead they scrapped it and created the Constitution. "We" then created Congress, who passed the 14th Amendment.

Quote:

WE THE PEOPLE created Congress. CONGRESS created US Citizens. WE THE PEOPLE have a right to keep and bear arms. US CITIZENS must obtain a concealed carry permit. WE THE PEOPLE have a right to travel. US CITIZENS must obtain a drivers license. WE THE PEOPLE have a right to live with whomever we wish. US CITIZENS are expected to get a marriage license. WE THE PEOPLE have RIGHTS. US CITIZENS are granted PRIVILEGES. In other words. US CITIZENS have no rights.

When you're done chewing, let me know how it tasted. LOL!

Michael Badnarik Quote

I have the right to do whatever I wish with my property. If I own a pile of wood, I can set fire to it even if it is currently nailed together in the shape of a barn. Cigarettes may not be healthy for me in the long run, but I have the freedom to smoke them anyway. Drinking alcohol may or may not have negative side effects, but even if it does, the government has no authority to prohibit you from consuming it, even if it is "in your own best interest." Since when do we let the government decide what is or isn't good for us? What the hell does Congress know about nutrition, anyway? (For that matter, what does Congress know about the Constitution?) If the government can use force whenever something is "in our best interest" then government should force everyone to wake up at 6am every morning for calisthenics in the front yard. Fast food establishments should be torn down and replaced with bars that serve carrot juice and alfalfa sprouts, since - "it's in your best interest." This paternalistic attitude that "the government knows best" and that you are merely a helpless child is insulting and reprehensible. Hitler used the same attitude to persuade the Germans to subjugate themselves to the "Fatherland."

• Source: Good to be King (2004)

2nd Amendment - Michael Badnarik Bill of Rights Class

2nd Amendment - Michael Badnarik Bill of Rights Class
Michael Badnarik teaching the Bill of Rights at the Libertarian Party of Illinois 2007 Convention.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57lo7n4thFw

The Second American Revolution

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKFKGrmsBDk

Texas continues to hint Secession.

Texas continues to hint Secession.

Recently martial arts expert and actor Chuck Norris said in a few interviews that he's willing to take up the mantle as President of the Republic of Texas, should Texas decide it's had enough of Washington's continued defecating on the US Constitution and leave.

On April 15th, Texas Gov. Rick Perry suggested Texans might at some point get so fed up they would want to secede from the union.

"There's a lot of different scenarios," Perry said. "We've got a great union. There's absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, you know, who knows what might come out of that. But Texas is a very unique place, and we're a pretty independent lot to boot."

When Texas entered the union in 1845 there was an understanding it could pull out at a later time if it decided to. However when it did secede in 1861, is was forced back into the Union by force of arms. Currently, according to the Texas State Library and Archives Commission, Texas negotiated the power to divide into four additional states at some point if it wanted to but not the right to secede.

The debate over the legality of secession has been ongoing as nothing within the US Constitution specifically states that a member State can not do this, indicating it is a valid option.

Texas has a history of being a very independent and freedom loving place. Concerns over the US Economy, the continued mortgaging of our future to bail out failing businesses and saddling taxpayers with mounting debt, as well as serious concern over Federal abuse of the Second Amendment and rumors of mandatory gun registration and confiscation, are pushing the people of Texas towards a hard choice.

If it happens, I doubt it will be a peaceful exit.

It is Un-American not to want to pay taxes???

It is Un-American not to want to pay taxes???

In reply to this article at IReport.
http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-244320

Yes, roads are crumbling, bridges are decaying, our health care system isn't perfect, people are homeless and hungry, etc.

At the risk of sounding callus, so what?

In 1773 British colonists in 3 colonies blocked the unloading of taxed tea, while those in Boston destroyed the tea in defiance of the Royal Governor. This was the famous "Boston Tea Party". Colonists were angered because they were being subjected to taxes from a government that didn't allow them a voice. This was a major point in the road to revolution, and the creation of the United States.

The commenter's points are valid. We need infrastructure repair. There is however more than enough money in the system to provide for all of that. If only our government would spend it wisely. I believe we are in a dangerous fall, heading towards the same type of unrest that led to the Revolution. One only has to look at how few American's were behind the over 15 Trillion dollars in bailouts that have so far been pass out to poorly managed big businesses to shore them up lest they fail. One only has to question the government or not blindly agree with it, to be labeled a traitor nowadays. The current tax code is so complex, even the IRS isn't certain about it. One only has to look at how many recnt goveernment appointees failed to pay to see a dual standard. They get forgiven, yet we mere serfs get fined and possibly imprisoned.

Not pay your taxes? How Un-American? No, How American!

Not paying taxes was a foundation stone of this nation. There is questionable legality to many of the taxes and fees (taxes in all but name) we are hit with. Our so called leaders no longer care what we want. They spend OUR money on their pet projects, at insanely bloated prices, to curry favor with each other. There isn't a single government agency in the US that doesn't have at least 1 political appointee who gathers a pay check yet does no real work. I've read countless cases where people are being paid yet haven't clocked in or shown up to the office in months, or where they sit and web surf or write their novels, because they fill a mandatory position yet have nothing work related to do because they are left over from the last administration.

In NY alone, we could return billions of much needed dollars to our general fund if we would eliminate the patronage jobs, cut government pay to the realistic yet very livable level of $50k per year per person, and require all hires and expenditures to be justified. Bids must be on par with what a civilian would pay, or less, to reflect bulk purchase. No more $1,000 hammers when you can get one just as good for under $25.

Another point is simply this. The argument goes that if we don't pay taxes, then others won't have shelter, or food, or medical treatment. I'm sorry, but that's not y faultand it's not my problem. More to the point, that is not the government's job either. "But if the governmt doesn't help them, who will?" you say? Feel free to help them all you want, out of your own pocket. Stop reaching into mine to finance it though. Taking something without permission has always been called theft. What is it when the government takes it without consent? It's still theft.

American's are a very giving people. The People don't have a problem paying a reasonable amount, for needed things. We do however take issue more and more with being seen as little more than a never ending supply of free cash to fund pork and keep an elite fat and rosy cheeked.

It's time to speak up and shout until the fat cats and career politicians hear us.

Visit http://taxdayteaparty.com/ and find a protest near you.
Add your voice to those who are tired of a deaf government.
Only you can retake your country from those who consider you litle more than an ATM.
=====

Should the U.S. move the battle against pirates to shore?

CNN is asking "Should the U.S. move the battle against pirates to shore?"

I say yes.

It was due to the actions of one group of pirates that the US Navy and US Marine Corp were created in 1794. Taking the fight against the Somali pirates would be a worthy action for both forces today, provided they are allowed to engage and destroy the pirates, and not handcuffed by politicians.

Piracy is glamorous when it's Johnny Depp. Reality, is far uglier.

New York governor to propose legalizing same-sex marriage

New York governor to propose legalizing same-sex marriage

• Story Highlights
• Assemblyman says governor's office asked him to attend announcement of bill
  
• Previous governor filed same bill, which passed Assembly but not Senate
  
• Gov. Paterson has said he is committed to "full marriage equality in New York State"
  
• "We hope to have this bill passed at the end of June," assemblyman says

If the legislation passes, it would make New York the fifth state to legalize same sex-marriage. Similar measures have been approved by courts or lawmakers in Connecticut, Vermont, Massachusetts and Iowa.

=====

It would be nice to see NY do the right thing here, and give people a reason to come here, rather than leave for a change.

Do you really own your car?

Do you really own your car? (Originally posted at MartialTalk 11-07-2008)

---

Found something interesting.

I've always thought that I owned my cars. Seems that I was wrong.

I bought em, and eventually got a "Certificate of Title" from the state.

I'm now reading that this "Certificate of Title" only lets me operate the car, not actually own it.

Here's a bits on it.

Quote:

The certificate of title is a piece of paper that only represents the title of the car. Each car that is manufactured has an MCO, or “manufacturer’s certificate of origin,” that is the true title for the car. Because most cars are purchased on a payment plan, the dealer sends the MCO to the state agency that controls the registration of vehicles. The MCO is microfilmed and then shredded to make it much more difficult for you to obtain the actual title.

Supposedly, this MSO or “manufacturer’s certificate of origin” is the true title to the vehicle. You don't get that, the state does.

Quote:

you dont OWN your car if you live in the U.S A. you own the RIGHT to posess and drive it you pay for that right each and every year above and beyond the purchase price the MSO you seek is purposely not issued and even if it is you will have to surrender it to the state in which you register the vehicle in essence GIVING UP ownership to the state

A rather LONG! read of 8 months worth or exchanges between someone and the Missouri Department of Revenue Motor Vehicle Bureau on this matter seems to indicate that you do not need to register, license, etc your car until you apply for a title and surrender the MSO to the state.

A shorter bit is at http://www.hiddenmysteries.org/consp...ps/titles.html

Quote:

Tennessee Department of Revenue Operations Supervisor, Denise Rottero, told Judge Greer how Tennessee's (and EVERY OTHER STATE'S) auto registration process works. The process begins with the "surrender" of the Manufacturer's Statement of Origin (MSO) by the auto dealer to the Department of Revenue in exchange for a Certificate of Title. Asked if a Manufacturer's Statement of Origin is proof of ownership, legal title to the automobile, Ms. Rottero said, "Yes". "Are you telling me that ownership of an automobile must be surrendered to the State before it can be registered?" she was asked. "Surrender title, yes'" Rottero said. The certificate of title to your automobile is NOT title, it's merely evidence that title exists. Your car's legal TITLE is the MSO, which the dealer surrendered to the State. Ms. Rottero said the MSO is put on microfilm for permanent keeping, the original is destroyed. After the trial, spectators expressed shock that their personal automobiles were actually owned by the state.

I'm finding more on this, but curious on what others think.

Redistribute the wealth.

Redistribute the wealth. (originally posted on MartialTalk 09-30-2008)

---

People look at things like the following, decide that wealth in the US is unfairly distributed, and look for more ways to take money from the top 10% and pass it out to the bottom 10%, usually without the bottom having to actually earn it.

Quote:

Here are some published numbers, taken fom Forbes magazine. This would be the top 10 on their 400 list....1. Bill Gates Net Worth $57.0 billion 2. Warren Buffett Net Worth $50.0 billion 3. Lawrence Ellison Net Worth $27.0 billion 4. Jim Walton Net Worth $23.4 billion 5. S Robson Walton Net Worth $23.3 billion 6. Alice Walton Net Worth $23.2 billion 7. Christy Walton Net Worth $23.2 billion 8. Michael Bloomberg Net Worth $20.0 billion 9. Charles Koch Net Worth $19.0 billion 10. David Koch Net Worth $19.0 billion 'The rich haven't gotten richer--or poorer--this year. The price of admission to this, the 27th edition of The Forbes 400, is $1.3 billion for the second year in a row. The assembled net worth of America's wealthiest rose by $30 billion--only 2%--to $1.57 trillion.' (quoted from Forbes) Now, take that in perspective. The 400 richest americans have a net worth of 1.57 trillion dollars. The entire GDP of Canada from a 2007 estimate, as found in teh CIA world factbook (correct or not?) https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat.../print/ca.html is listed as being 1.432 trillion dollars. Really... stop and think about that. The accrued wealth of 400 people essentially exceeds the annual value of the national economy of 33 million people. You would really have us believe that there is NOT an uneven distribution of wealth? Whether it's right or wrong is an entire other debate, but I don't think the numbers or the fact of the matter is a subject of much informed debate. Rod

A reply to the above was this

Quote:

How about, it's their money, and you don't have any right to it. You want more money, go work for it.

A statement I agree with.

Having worked retail in supermarkets, convenience stores and the like, I can say that simply giving people money won't make them suddenly know how to manage it, or even appreciate it. Many arguments occur over people trying to use welfare and food stamps for beer, lotto and cigarettes.

A discussion I had on the idea of taking money from the top earners and passing it out included comments like "they owe it to us", and "they have plenty" and similar. Bill Gates, who isn't one of my favorite people, earned his money. He already gives plenty to charity. The Walton's inherited theirs from their father Sam, who earned it. Sam you may recall drove a pickup truck and not a Caddie because "you can't put hunting dogs in a Cadillac.".

People rarely appreciate something that is given to them unearned. The gift is usually squandered, and all that has happened is they have been trained to expect a handout.

One comment is that if you evened out the bank acounts so that everyone had the same amount, within a short period of time, the previously rich will be so again, and the previously poor will be so again. One only has to look at the bankrupsty rate of lottery winners (80%) to see that wealth without understanding causes wealth to vanish.

Rather than taking cash from the wealthy, a better system would be to encourage a voluntary system that would teach people how to manage their money, and become self sufficient. As someone once wrote, teaching someone to fish sustains them for life, giving the a fish only feeds them for today.