COLOR CODING FOR FULL DISCLOSURE

Back in the 20th Century, financial statements that were prepared by CPA's were considered the standard for accuracy and honesty. The Accountant's creed was Full Disclosure; anticipate all losses and take up no gains until they are realized. Relaxed government regulations for approved accounting practices near the end of the century have led to "cover up and corruption," with one of the biggest CPA firms in America found guilty of fraud and deceit. Now. the political scene is promoting "transparency," another term for full disclosure. Regulations are being instituted and a new dimension is coming into the mix - Color Coding. Like math, color is a universal language and it is capable of absolute accuracy.

Color is being introduced into the accounting process through a publication from University Press of America that is coordinated with an educational game that defines color coded accounts and precedes the development of Color Coded Financial Statements.

Assets are Blue, Liabilities are Red, Net Worth Accounts are Yellow, Income is Green and Expenses and Costs are Orange. Technology has advance to where this innovation can be simply incorporated into the system. Financial practices and schemes have advanced to the point where old tried and true accounting practices are inadequate to produce the goal of "full disclosure." Something new is needed to keep pace with the business world, and that new dimension is "Color Coding."

AN ESP APPROACH TO BUDGETING

A recent comprehensive study on budgeting published by University Press of America features a three part budget plan to produce a balanced budget. The plan is called "An ESP Approach to Budgeting." The plan has little to do with Extrasensory Perception; E stands for Existence, S for Survival and P for Progressive. Simply put, rather than plan spending and hope for income to cover costs, spending is planned and expedited as income warrants.

In the first stage, E, a budget is planned with the most conservative income and only the absolutely essential costs necessary for existence are included. This is a down hill budget that would lead to future bankruptcy but it allows the enterprise to exist in hope. In the second stage. S, enough income is budgeted to cover the expenses necessary to maintain operations and survive. In the final stage, P, spending is prioritized and activities are expedited as income allows. This is an Ultra-conservative approach and is perhaps more acceptable for "out of control" government entities than for high risk, low security entrepreneurs. It discourages the "fast buck, pot of gold" dream, but it reduces the catastrophic failure syndrome.

The ESP approach may be the road to recovery for bankrupt states and local authorities across the country who are apparently stagnated in the tax/benefit dilemma. Slowly developing activities in the progressive budget stage could not only stimulate tighter financial control, it could also portray a vivid picture to the public of the correlation between taxes paid and the benefits received, giving the public a more realistic understanding of how tax monies are used.

The study suggests that a total involvement of everyone effected by the budget in the budget process produces a more effective and efficient financial operation. Skillful monitoring of the budget is essential for adjustment to unanticipated conditions and circumstances.

Notre Dame Football

Although the arrogance of fans and players have turned me off at times, I have always admired the Spirit of the Fighting Irish. Consequently, I was shocked in the last seconds of the game against Stanford when the Irish actually gave up and let Stanford walk into the end zone for a touchdown without a hand raised to stop them. They said that it was a strategy to have time to score a touchdown and tie the game into overtime.

The game was already tied. Where was that famous Fighting Irish goal line stand, or the famous Fighting Irish strip the ball and recover the fumble? Evidentally win or loose, it's how you play the game that counts is not in the Fighting Irish spirit. What a shame.

Actually I thought that the Fighting Irish had a very good season. They played one of the toughest schedules of any team and they were in the fight every second until the final whistle, except in the last game against Stanford when they just gave up. They won as many games as they lost. Not bad at all.

The Fighting Irish started down hill when a "not the best" Southern Cal team just barely beat them. With a little bit of luck it could have been the other way. Then a Navy team with the "Fighting Irish Spirit" put the nail in the coffin.

Notre Dame will have winning seasons again,but it won't be the Coach that will bring it, it will be the Fighting Irish Spirit.

WHAT HAS OBAMA DONE?

Pundits claim that Obama hasn't done anything that he has promised. He promised 1)Universal Health Care, 2) Closing of Guantanamo and the end of the torturing of prisoners, 3) Reversal of the economic down fall, 4) Lower taxes for those making 250,000 or less, 5) Withdrawal of our troops in Iraq, and 6) A conclusion to the War in Afghanistan.

We do not have a Universal Health Care Program, but concentrated action to produce such a program has been pursued 24/7 and proposals are being considered in both the House and Senate; Guantanamo has not been completely closed but key prisoners have been removed and scheduled for trial and the torturing of prisoners has been outlawed; We are still in a "mild" economic depression, but stimulus packages have been enacted and a number of banks and two automobile industries have started a recovery with one reporting a one billion profit in the last quarter; the tax forms have not yet been released to the public so no valid judgment could be made at this point; troops have been withdrawn from Iraq and more are scheduled; and serious negotiations for resolving the war in Afghanistan are underway. Obama's term of office is yet to reach the halfway point so it would be premature to make a responsible judgment of success or failure. However to conclude that Obama hasn't done anything is completely irresponsible.

WHEN IS A COMPUTER A COMPUTER?

Leading scientists warned us that computers were reaching the point of thinking for themselves and could get out of control if something wasn't done. The situation was serious enough for the White House to set up a committee to study the issue. The committee took their findings to Congress to let the law makers debate a solution and Congress was in a heated dead lock for several weeks before a religious leader proposed that before anything could be done, the Congress had to determine when a computer became a valid computer.

There was an unusual hush over the floor before a strong voice shouted, "A computer becomes a computer when it is turned on."

"You fool," retorted a Representative from the South. "A computer becomes a computer when the creator makes the blue print." A bitter war has been waged along party lines behind the scene ever since.

Meanwhile the computers became smarter and smarter and took over the Democratic Party, gaining control of both Houses of Congress in the following election. Unfortunately the Congress has still failed to determine when a computer becomes a valid computer.

THE STRAIGHT FACTS ON UNIVERSAL HEALTH INSURANCE

There is no way that in a capitalistic society such as ours, will a politician, up to their belt buckle in debt to the well to do, pass any kind of universal healh insurance program that will give the homeless the same benefits that will equal the benefits of the well to do.

First of all the cost would be beyond all reason, and second, the medical profession would be called upon to do more than they would possibly be able to do.

In a Capitalistic Republic, just what are members of the Republic entitled to? Perhaps the children are enitled to food, shelter, clothing ,education, and health care until they are ready to make their own way in the society; but adults are expected to provide for themselves, AND make a contribution to the society as well. Normally the parents have the responsibility to provide for their children, but under current law, all children are "a ward of the State," and consequently the State (the Government) may be responsible to provide these BASIC needs to all children. But even for children, in a Capitalistic Republic, no politician, up to their belt buckle in debt to the well to do, will pass any kind of universal program for children benefits that will give the children from poor families benefits equal to those given to the children of the well to do. If this were a Christian Democracy as so many fooishly dream that it is, universal treatment for children might be a possibility; but it isn't and it won't be.

Taking a realistic approach, even in a Capitalistic Republic, there is a moral responsibility for the Society to provide the basic needs of its members, and health care is a basic need. Perhaps the Government is responsible for a BASIC health care insurance program to the extent that it can reasonably afford. Any care beyond basic, under insurance or not, might be the personal responsibility of the members of the society. The problem may come in determining a BASIC health insurance program. Of course, there is also the problem of funding the program.

ORGANIZED RELIGION HAS CORRUPTED CHRISTIANITY

The Christian Faith is a simple philosophy, to love one another. It is a philosophy of peace and of doing for others. Much of Organized Religion has centered on correographed rituals and bilaws for membership. There are a mirad of Christian "Churches," each with special rules and regulions with each one claiming to be the "true" religion. The "Churches" have supported wars and in many cases they have promoted wars in the name of the Prince of Peace. Extremists have even murdered their neighbors for not following their particular code of morals.

Organized religion has made Churches a social club and a very important element of society. One who is not a member of a church is widely considered a person without character or morals. On the positive side, they perpetuate the name of Christ and there are members in most all of the denominations that are truly devoted to peace and love.

US SOCIALIST?

Democracy is a socialistic form of government. Capitalism is a dictatorship of the elite. It appears that our founding fathers felt that competition was key to a balanced community. Congress was organized with a House of Representatives representing the people, and the Senate representing the State with the Judiciary maintaining law and order. Traditionally there is a two party system, one representing the people and one representing capitalism with a legal system maintaining law and order. When FDR won four presidential elections in a row, Presidental terms were limited to two to maintain a balance. After eight years of unpresidented abuse of power allowed by a Congress that failed to function to maintain a balance and a Judiciary that failed to maintain law and order, perhaps members of Congress should be limited to two terms and consideration made to prevent unchecked power in the Judiciary.

With access to unlimited terms, political office has become a personal career opportunity rather than a service to the country, as it was intended. In such a case the focus of leadership centers on the welfare of the person in office rather than the welfare of the nation. Civil Service is a career opportunity to maintain stability in the government and is under the direction of the elected officials.

To make a democracy work, all citizens must participate in the political process. Power must be balanced for the welfare of all. As the population participates in the political process, the power of the people will focus on the welfare of the people. Will the country become socialistic? Probably not, for as the population becomes educated, they will most likely support a fairly regulated capitalic system as a vital force for the welfare of the people.

Will it become a perfect sociey? Probably not. As competition is the key to balance, it is also the source of conflict with winners and loosers. The struggle will go on but more loosers might more often become winners some of the time as well if power is more balanced.

OBAMA FINANCIAL REGULATION PLAN MISSES TWO CRUCIAL ELEMENTS!

Two crucial elements are missing from the proposed "Financial Regulation Plan."

1) Separation of "Banking" and "Investment Banking."
The Bank is an institution of security. Investment Baking includes risk, the antithesis of security. The two are like apples and oranges and must be considered seperately. (Obviously an oversight)

2) Making it against the law to take risks without security for loss to anyone not a consenting party to the risk.
It is immoral and a violation of personal rights to allow anyone to gamble with other people's money for personal gain and/or without personal liability. Risk is undoubtedly a vital element for progress. Irresponsible risk is foolhardy. Irresponsible risk without full consent of the person(s) with liability under the risk is akin to theft.
Corporate Officials, without personal liability and in pursuit of personal bonuses who took irresponsible risks, are responsible for the crisis that requires this financial regulation reform. Any reform that does not address this action cannot be expected to prevent a similar crisis in the future.(This is obviously politics. Politicans are heavily in debt to CEO.s who give them corporate funds. To prevent CEO"s from the authority to arbitarily give corporate funds as they choose would take away the politicans receipt of these corporate funds from the CEO's

Wall Street OR Las Vegas!

The average investor's purchase of stock is no longer an invesment in business enterprise, it is a gamble with a bookie broker!

In the pre Regan area, the purchase of stock in a company was a purchase of a part of that company entitling the stock holder to a return of a portion of the profits of the company in the form of dividends. Theoretically, at least, the common stock holder had a right to vote for the "Directors" of the Company who represented the rights of the stockholders and appointed a CEO to operate the Company for the benefit of the owners.

Somewhere along the line the CEO's became the "Owner's" of the company. Directors did little directing and received lucrative compensation. CEO's tried to expand the company gaining enormous compensation in the form of Bonuses and "Stock Rights" (too complicated to explain) giving the Investors (now gamblers) inflated imaginary earnings called growth stock. This imaginary "growth stock" was "traded" (gambled) to produce enormous amounts of "paper money." Companies (Corporate Congloberates) became so big that even the IRS couldn't figure out the proper tax that was to be paid, and imaginary off shore holding companies were formed to confuse the issue even more and line the pockets of the creators of the inflated imaginary economy that was supposed to be the greatest private, free market business enterprise system that ever existed. Credit was extended beyond reason and the government set up "Insurance Entities" to guanantee the value of the inflated economy. A super insurance entity was established to insure the insurance entities. This super insurance entity was backed by solid imaginary credit. Then, Hell broke loose, and imagination turned to reality and the government turned to the taxpayers, who had lost their shirts, to further mortgage their future and their children's future to help out the gamblers and give them money to reimburse them for the loss of their imaginary paper gains. What a system!

CONTROLLING THE COST OF HEALTH CARE

Can the Private, Free Market, Business Enterprise System keep the cost of Healh Care in the range of all citizens in the society? The Private, Free Market Business Enterprise System in simple terms it is only a system to determine price/cost based upon supply and demand with a little manipulation from business and the government, but, it is the foundation for the entire economy. This system has worked near perfection in distributing the Nation's wealth in a peaceful, equitable manner with the exception of a few recessions and a couple of depressions, but can it work to control a necessity of life like Health Care where the common place side effect of bankruptcy is not an acceptable condition?

The government and some business leaders inspired by the American Dream of finding a pot of gold came up with a solution to the problem with a number of agencies under the heading of "Health Care Insurance." This "solution" has not been as successful as hoped for and has not only failed to control the health care costs, it has conflicted with the Health Care Provider's practice of administering health care. Providers claim that this system of health care insurance takes health care decisions out of the hands of the doctors and places these decisions on a profit and loss basis. It also leaves a large portion of the popultion without any health care protection. The cost of the management of this current health care system appears to be nearly as high as the cost of providing the actual health care.

Government "Medicare" for all citizens appears to be the best solution to keep health care affordable for all and to keep the actual health care system in the private, free market, business enterprise system. Health care decisions would be in the hands of the doctors and their patients, and payments would be made to private, free market, business enterprises.

AN ADDED BONUS! Under a national medicare system; private, free market business enterprises (both small businesses and corporations) would no longer be burdened with employee health care costs and this would give them a fair field to compete with foreign enterprises that do not have this cost. For example, Foreign autos have outsold domestic autos due mainly to their lower prices which were helped by not having to pay health costs for their employees. This of course would also allow domestic small businesses to offer lower prices and increase their own profit as well.

It should be noted that many skilled and caring workers in the current health insurance agencies could conveniently transfer into the expanded government universal health care plan. The only loosers would appear to be the politicians who would no longer receive their generus campaign gifts from the Insurance Agencies, (which, incidentally, have added to the cost of health care)
and of course the executive officers in the health insurance agencies would loose their "bonuses."

The "Change" to government reform and control from the "out of control" Health Care Insurance System could be the key to our economic recovery and may even make us a healthier and more caring society.

THE FIRST 100 DAYS OF CHANGE

The current administration has initiated a number of promised positive changes to give America back to the people (middle class) but one major problem remains in force --The Government continues to support Wall Street at the Expense of the Middle Class.

America's obsession with investment as the answer to a successful economy continues to cause a neglect of the basic force for success in our Republican Democracy - -the Middle Class. It is the energy of the middle class that fuels our economy.

The solution to the crisis presented by the Secretary of the Treasury was consistent for what one would expect from a former President of a Federal Reserve Bank (NY) --Bailout the Banks at the expense of the Taxpayers. (All the hype about putting the tax burden on the rich is a subterfuge. A small percentage of the ill gotten gains of the rich will go toward the enormous debt undertaken. The middle class will bear the huge burden that will be taken out of their modest income, requiring extensive restraint and hardship.

Why not consider the middle class in the bailout picture "for a change." A Patriot Bond Issue similar to the Savings Bonds that financed WWII could switch the bailout from the Government to a loan to the Banks and the Auto Industry from the taxpayers. Banks and Auto Manufacturers could pay back the taxpayers with interest in a secured program that would be more compatible with the Private Free Market Business Enterprise System than the present program of government intervention (Nationalizing the Banks and Auto Industry.)

Perhaps we could continue the change to "transparency" and "Reform" and add a change to recognizing the middle class as the driving force in our economy. Let Wall Street make their honest gains and take their losses as the middle class is forced to do. Hold Ceo's responsible for their management of the people's investment in the corporations and more responsible management will result. Enact reasonable credit restrictions on loans and a more reasonable rate of mortgages will be foreclosed.

Gambling should only be allowed with "cash in the hand of the gambler that belongs solely to the gambler!

A TAXPAYER BAILOUT!

The Government has tried unconditional bailouts, loans and investment in stock to benefit Wall Street, the Banks and the Auto Companies in trying to solve the credit crisis; and reportedly some progress is being made, all at the expense of the taxpayer. Perhaps we should try a plan that would also be a benefit to the taxpayers? Perhaps something like a "Patriot Bond Issue" backed by the government and drawn on the bailout recipients. The bonds could yield reasonable interest (3-4% paid by the bailout recipients) with the interest tax exempt to a reasonsable annual limit of $10,000 or so, and the bonds would be made available for purchase by US taxpayers.

This private investment could wipe out the enormous debt the government has taken on and it would be more compatible with our private business enterprise system while affording the taxpayers a safe investment opportunity to supplement social security.

It is obvious that the stock market is not a reliable plan for retirement security and perhaps a safer, less ambitious investment plan would be a more realistic approach.

PULL OUT OF IRAQ

There is little to be gained by leaving "Advisors" in Iraq. Combat troops could at least try to protect themselves, but advisors are just sitting ducks.

There are extreemists that will resist until they are put under control by the Iraqi Government. These extreemists consider the US as their main enemy and will not yield as long as we are in Iraq. Our presence simply gives them another cause to pursue.

Every country has its Rebels and it is an internal problem that each country has to solve for itself.

The Mexican drug problem is another issue. Gun dealers and drug pushers in the US have caused the problem and continue to contribute to the problem. Actually, we are one of the main contributers to the drug problem in Afghanistan as well; and ironically the Teliban would probably do a better job of controlling this problem than we have done, or will do.

God help us to tackle the problems that we can solve and stay away from the problems that we cannot solve; and help us to know which is which.

THE AUDACITY OF CREDIT

Credit, like hope is a major element for achievement in our society and culture; but without substance they become the hollow cry of defeat; a prologue to disaster. Hope, without the effort to achieve the prize hoped for is meaningless. Credit, without the security for repayment is a frivolous gamble.

While investment is a financial risk for the investor; credit is a double risk; a financial risk for the party giving credit, and a financial risk for the party receiving credit. Insurers of the risk for the party giving credit has tended to encourage less responsible issuance of credit. The insurers of the insurers guaranteeing credit have created a false illusion of security that has produced grossly irresponsible issuance of credit, resulting in the crisis we now face.

Government bailout for irresponsible credit to restore credit will not solve the crisis. The only solution to credit failure is government regulation to require more responsible issuance of initial credit. Insuring credit by a third party passes the liability to a party once removed from the transaction. Insuring the Insurers passes the liability to a party twice removed from the transaction. The government proposal to establish the FDIC as the insurer of the insurer brings up the question, who is to insure the insurer of the insurer. That of course would be the taxpayer, a most audacious injustice.

THE FREE MARKET IS DROWNING IN CREDIT!

With a futile effort to eliminate Bankruptcy and Depression, the merger of Big Business and Government has the Economy taking its last gasps for freedom.

The ingenious Free Business Enterprise system that has produced the wealthiest nation in the world is destroying itself with the ambition to become perfect and to make the world perfect as well.

The free market system, which was a plan to distribute the wealth of the material world by non-violent means, has expanded and conquered the frontiers into outer space,and may have extended itself beyond the gravity of reality.

The "Free Market" was built on progress through risk. Forces competed with each other to explore and exploit the unknown. In this environment some forces fail and the total market tends to over produce causing a Recession; that could lead to a Depression. The process developed into what has been called the : Business Cycle.(ie Progress, Recession, Depression and Recovery)

Depression has been recognized as a "bad" thing, and the forces desired to "insure" against this dreaded disaster. Investment (Risk) was joined by the other "eye" of the system, Insurance, to lead to the promised land of constant prosperity.

In the first Depression, the banks failed and the masses lost their savings, which was determined a national disaster. The FDIC was enacted and regulations were put onto effect to curb irresponsible risks and insure against this disaster ever happening again. This conservatism slowed progress and impatience fought against the regulations to guard against the irresponsible risks. The merger of Big Business and Government (called by many, Government intervention) slowly
eroded rational responsibility until the "brilliant" idea of insuring insurers made billionaires out of some and victims out of the masses. The big question was "who is going to insure the insurers of the insurers? The foolhardy answer was "credit!"

Just as the government had established an artificial person created by law (The Dartmouth College case defining a Corporation) the government now created an artificial insurer called credit. This "scheme" has now collapsed and panic has set in. Some feel that more credit disguised as "private-Public Investment" (risk) will solve the problem. A few others feel that it is time to take a pause and recognize the Free Business Enterprise System and the Business Cycle for what it is. The only way to avoid depression in this system is to regulate the system (without government intervention) and outlaw unreasonable risk (investment). One of the major unreasonable investments is the Conglomerate Corporation. a monster that manipulates the wealth of many by a few to reward the few. As a starter, these monsters must be divested into manageable units that would be unable to bring the economy to its knees. Of course, the return of integrity to Big Business and Government would be an enormous help as well.

IT'S THE TAXPAYER, STUPID

Is the government expanding the role of the FDIC to become the new AIG? The FDIC currently insures Deposits in Banks up to $250,000. The new proposal wants to expand the FDIC's role to include insuring high risk loans to public-private investment funds. If the Goverment guarantees against any loss on these high risk investments, who will bear the risk? Of course, it's the taxpayer, stupid.

Proponents of this "plan" claim to be able to "regulate" these high risk investments, but the only way to regulate high risk is to lower the risk. Schemes like this (to insure the insurer) are either wishful thinking or attempts to confuse the potential victim, the taxpayer.

IS THE HONEYMOON OVER?

Did the President's March 24th Press Conference indicate that his honeymoon is over? Although the President held his ground against some very challenging "questions," Mr. Cool wasn't his coolest in response to a "question" that criticized his two day delay in reacting to the outrageous AIG Bonuses. "I like to know what I am talking about before I talk," does not quite squelch the criticism.

The AIG Bonus problem is not a simple issue. While the bonuses may be ethically wrong, they are legally right, especially the ones contracted well before the "Bailout" was considered. To break the law just because you are in command goes back to the criticism of the Bush/Cheney Administration that this Administration was supposed to change.

The problem lies in the quick enactment of a bailout before THE LAW, and all contingencies and possible abuses were addressed and considered. The panic button usually creates more problems than it solves. Perhaps knowing what you are doing before you do something is a good policy after all.

Perhaps a pause to deal with a problem as it presents itself is a better approach than trying to solve the problem so it won't errupt in presumed disaster. Although quickly trying to avert a disaster may sound like the simplest approach, it may be foolhardy in a complex issue like the AIG affair.

Simply stated, AIG has insured the insurers of loans that are defaulting. Instead of a shot gun approach at the top, perhaps a rifle shot at the bottom might be more effective. The government might put a moratorium on foreclosures and 'responsibly' bailout foreclosures that meet established criteria for bailout. Let the Insurers perform their legal responsibility under their contracts and then let the Insurers seek damages under their contract with AIG. If AIG cannot meet their contract obligations, perhaps they should go bankrupt and remove a cancer in our economic system.

Those who are not held responsible for their actions tend to act irresponsibly! Passing on the responsibility for insuring loans to another insurer only appears to relieve the insurer from the responsibility that they contacted to accept. UNDER THE LAW,THIS DOES NOT LEGALLY RELIEVE THEM FROM THEIR RESPONSIBILITY! BAILOUT AT THE TOP VIOLATES THIS PRINCIPLE OF LAW.

ie. Under the law, if a company has an insured liability, they are responsible to the injured party for the determined loss, AND THEN the insurance company reimburses them to the extent of their insurance contract. If the insurance company secures an insurance company to insure them against losses that they cannot cover, it does not negate their responsibility to honor their contract with the company they insure; it simply gives them the right to reimbursement for their losses to the extent of their insurance contract. You can't just pass the buck, legally. (This is available to politicians only)

Unfortunately, first the Bush Administration and now the Obama Administration have ignored the law and have made panic attempts to solve the crisis in an illegal manner. Perhaps the law is not adequate, but it is the law, and perhaps attempts should be made legally until we find that we must break the law to survive. (Rob the bakery to keep from starving?)

(To my friend Marty)

WE ARE NOT COWARDS!

Mr. Attorney General, we are not cowards, we are simply a nation of selfish individuals; the degree of selfishness varying from individual to individual.

There are many negative terms to describe Americans; such as Hippocrates and bigots, but we are also industrious and generous.

We completely distort the concepts of Democracy and Freedom. We are not a Democracy of the people, by the people and for the people. We are a Republic managed by the elite in a society favoring the elite.

Freedom is a myth. Our freedom depends upon the restrictions of others. Consequently the freedom of others depends upon our restrictions as well. Our goal in life is to get more than we have to give. The Economy is our basis of life. All else is window dressing. Every business transaction is made to gain a profit; to receive greater value than the value of what we give. Guilt sometimes makes us charitable.

We are not ideal, Mr. Attorney General, but we are not cowards. Regardless of race, religion or creed, we have limitless courage and we will tackle any goal and perform any task to satisfy our limitless desires.

FINE TUNING THE STIMULUS

If the bailout for Free Business Enterprise Businesses is to save jobs, then shouldn't funding to these businesses be limited to Payroll expenses?

And, if the bailout for Banks is to stop the foreclosures, why not limit the funding to the interest on foreclosed loans with interest set at the current interest rate? Banks cannot foreclose on a mortgage if interest payments are made, and if the mortgagee cannot afford the interest on the mortgage, they are in a house that they cannot afford.

Responsible credit regulations should be enacted and enforced to prevent a credit crisis in the future. Responsible regulations for corporations should be enacted holding Executive Officers responsible for irresponsible actions that lead to a similar crisis in the future.

Too Simple???

"JOBS"

The cry for "jobs" seems to be the accepted solution to the current crisis facing our nation today. Perhaps, "career opportunities" would be a better solution.

At first glance, it may seem to be a small play on words, but a more serious thought might show the difference to be enormous.

A job is work to do to make a living. A career opportunity is work to do that will make living better. The difference lies in the attitude of the worker. The businessman who works to simply make a profit has a job. The businessman who works to give a service to others has a career. The waitress who works for tips, has a job. A waitress who works to help provide a pleasant experience for the customer has a career.

An amazing difference in this change of attitude is that careers not only give a greater satisfaction for life, they tend to yield greater monitary income as well.

The "Green Jobs" alleged to be created by the Obama Administration might better be promoted as "Career Opportunities" to promote the desired spirit for this program.

ACCOUNTABILITY

The Key for a successful Stimulis Package is to monitor the use of the funds given and to hold the receiver responsible for its proper use. Those in charge of deciding where funds should be given should also be responsible for their decisions.

The issues of poor judgment, incompetence, and malfeasance are seldom used against government officials in the discharge of their responsibilities unless fraud or immorality is involved. A lie under oath and an immoral sex act are the primary charges that elected officials are held accountable for. Poor judgment and incompetence are never a consideration.

Age and criminal conviction are the only visible qualification to disallow a citizen from running for public office. Theoretically, the public holds elected officials accountable for their actions and non actions, but in a practical sense, elected officials police themselves and determine their own remuneration and perks. Basically, elected officials are not strictly held responsible for their actions or non actions, and consequently there is a tendency for many of them to act irresponsibility. The success of the latest stimulus package appears to lie in the hands of the Obama/Biden Administration. (The failure of the prior stimulus package appears to lie with the Bush/Cheney Administration.)

TAX INCENTVES

Tax incentives could be one of the most effective means to stimulate the economy. For example, a $1000 or $2000 tax CREDIT to taxpayers for purchasing a fuel efficient auto would be far more effective than several billions given to the auto makers to produce more autos that are not being sold. This is just the tip of the tax incentive iceberg.

KEY TO CRISIS SOLUTION

The key for a solution to the current crisis is to hold those in charge responsible for their decisions and actions. Congress is responsible for the irresponsible 700 Billion bailout and they pass on the blame to others. Until members of Congress are held personally responsible for their actions they will continue to make irresponsible decisions.

This same is true for the CEO's who "plundered Wall Street." This concept of giving immunity for irresponsible management of a business and the authority to name their own remuneration and bonuses even when their business has suffered a loss is insane. When leaders are not held responsible for their actions, they tend to act irresponsibly.

ABORTION

Abortion is a human rights issue and should not be decided by Government Officials, elected or appointed. At the present, a Mother has the right to decide whether on not to have an abortion. If the law is to be changed, it should be changed by the people via a Consitutional Amendment. Such an amendment should start in Congress.

COMPLETE PULLOUT OF IRAQ

Rumor has it that President Obama is going to keep his promise to pull out of Iraq by pulling out all Combat Troops but leave 50,000 troops there to help control the terrorists. To some, troops with a mission to help control terrorists could be called combat troops.

The administration could pull out all of our troops as promised, and cooperate with the UN to take over the mission of helping to control terrorists in Iraq, providing perhaps 50% of the force until the UN decides that this mission is no longer necessary.

It might be adviseable for the administration to consider working with the UN to work out all of our foreign affairs requiring military action. Foreign bases such as the one in South Korea could also be turned over to UN control with a maximum 50% participation. This same policy could be enacted in the Israel/Palestine conflict. Such a policy could cut our foreign military aid costs by at least 50% plus cutting our troop casualties by at least 50% as well. --------------
It may also be the right thing to do.

U. S. NEEDS A SPECIAL FEDERAL GASOLINE TAX

After years of promoting cigarette consumption that caused countless deaths, a heavy tax was placed on cigarettes to curb the consumption. The tax was accepted and it not only helped to curb consumption, it gave consiberable funds to the government that could have been and and may have been put to good use.

Now we are faced with another problem that may be eased with another Federal Tax. The new administration is committed to relieving Global Warming by promoting the production of automobiles with reduced gas consumption; which was readily accepted when the price of gasoline soared at the pump. The success of the automobile companies with the new production will be a major factor in the recovery of our economy. The lower price of gasoline will jeopardize the new production success. An added substantial tax could bring the price at the pump to a level that would again motivate the promotion of automobiles with reduced gas consumption, thus assisting the success of the automobile companies and a recovery of the economy. The funds generated could also be used to help pay for the stimulation package.

An added gasoline tax is not only smart, it may be necessary.

POLITICAL CAMPAIGN PROMISES

Will Obama become the typical politician and forget his campaign promses?

Rumor has been spreading that the Obama Administration may not repeal the Bush Tax Break to the wealthy , "right away." Forget the fact that the government desperately needs funds to help with the massive stimulus packages to revitalize the economy; what is the motivation to continue to subsidize those who unfairly gained so much and helped bring about the financial crisis with their greed?

Perhaps, most important would be the disappointment that the "man of change" would not keep his campaign promises, and be like the typical politician.