Assistance To Keep Politicians Honest

The issue is that most politicians listen to the money and the money comes from people who are not eligible to vote for the politician.

Auto makers "donate" to the campaign funds of US Senators and Representative from states where auto manufacturing is the major industry and the jobs go overseas.

Beef importers (Walmart) buys politicians from beef producing states and the citizens get modified atmospheric packaging.

Doctors pay for the re-election campaign of State Representatives and the citizens have no recourse from malpractice.

That is not representative democracy. This proposal would force politicians to get their financial support from the people they are supposed to represent.

17 votes

#1 - Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:00 PM EDT

I believe that this minor change would produce some rather remarkable effects.

Me too. A severe shortage of crooked candidates, a complete reversal to a people controled government, and a widening of the selection of candidates for office.

I would attach an addendum though.

Political races may not begin until 270 days before the election. There will be no monetary fees to qualify to run for office. No candidate may accept direct contributions for the first 90 days of a race. All contributions during the first 90 days are to be placed in a general fund for the use of all candidates regardless of party affiliation. During the second 90 days half of all collected funds will be evenly distributed to those who have declared themselves as candidates and must be used for campaigning only. After the second 90 days any remaing funds will be distributed to the candidates based upon their total contribution percentages made to the general fund on their behalf. No candidate may accept more than 4 times the amount received in the general election fund by way of direct contributions in the last 90 days of a political race. Anyone retiring from the race prior to election day shall return all remaining funds to the general fund to be redistributed equally to the remaining candidates.

So much for "buying" the race with the biggest war chest!

By linking the total direct contibutions you ensure donations to the general fund. Even a poor man with good ideas will have an equal chance to be heard.

16 votes

#1.1 - Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:58 PM EDT

roadlesstraveled

I like it! You did your homework, and it should be considered.

But at the same time, I think it(candidate/position) should be treated as a high priority job. A resume, biography, ONE statement on where he/she stands on issues/bills sent out to every registered voter for pres. and every registered voter in state/distract for local politicians. No commercials, no money, no donations. Televised debate a must. But ultimately the process of elections has turned into a popularity contest of the wealthy..I think leveling the playing field by eliminating the need for money to campaign would allow brilliant minds to be discovered and allow for a much more diverse Wallshington. How cool would it be for someone who is brilliant but only makes what he/she needs to become someone in congress. I would feel much better represented. Plus, all this would be in writing so no one could spin, no one could lie or cheat and if they did, we would all know about it.

11 votes

#1.2 - Mon May 4, 2009 5:35 PM EDT

No commercials, no money, no donations.

Mordecai, that's even more radical than what I proposed in your seed, The Case for a Federalism Amendment. But it's the same line of thinking I'm putting forward.

...the process of elections has turned into a popularity contest of the wealthy.

I think leveling the playing field by eliminating the need for money to campaign would allow brilliant minds to be discovered and allow for a much more diverse Wallshington.

There it is again.

roadlesstraveled, you and I are thinking the same thoughts.

8 votes

#1.3 - Mon May 4, 2009 6:38 PM EDT

VisionCoast: I agree that it is a very common opinion and held by many intelligent people. I don't doubt that at all. I will respond but right now I am pretty tired - been working on the roof all day.

8 votes

#1.4 - Mon May 4, 2009 7:13 PM EDT

I like it, good ideas and thoughts. KUDOS to you Mordecai and Citizen and Roadlesstraveled. Being an independent conservative, I would vote for this as it works for all to the benefit of all.

When you get it to the final draft, let me know--I'll help to get a petition for signatures out and get it to the legislature!!

Anyone else want to help?

7 votes

#1.5 - Mon May 4, 2009 11:03 PM EDT

Any way I can...

5 votes

#1.6 - Tue May 5, 2009 11:24 AM EDT

Citizen Kane: in re (#1.1) Given that I want Lotta Power elected. I would simply not donate to the campaign fund.

Because I have no control over the ultimate destination of my donation and thereby my support, I would exit the system and follow my own plan of attack to get the job done.

I would begin by promoting obvious difficulties that the incumbent is having that could be better handled by somebody like Lotta Power. Letters to the editor in several different names, etc. I am not a candidate so I don't come under your rules. I would then begin a smear attack on potential candidates, police history of traffic tickets or other misdemeanors, family difficulties, youthful indiscretions etc to discourage them from running for public office due to the cost to them and their family personally. I would be sure to distance myself from Lotta Power in this.

I would then go to a few local politically involved wingnuts to encourage them to run on their fringe platforms. Again I am not a candidate: I am just an average citizen exercising my right to freedom of speech and buying dinner for a really odd wingnut. After lining up 3 or 4 hopeless candidates whom Lotta Power could defeat easily, I would begin to directly promote Lotta Power by making donations to churches and civic groups and having discussions with the Pastors and group leaders about how they should consider supporting somebody like Lotta Power.

I would be sure to maintain my distance from Lotta Power so as to maintain plausible deniability. As the election approached I would offer to run a few newspaper ads for civic groups who want to advertise for members if they will endorse Lotta Power in the ad.

I would then go back to my wingnuts and assist them in causing the opponents to run up as much in expenses as I can so as to drain the election fund. As the election approached I would help the wingnuts who realized that they can't win to concede that Lotta Power is the more qualified candidate who will represent everyone, even the wingnuts and ask them to endorse Lotta Power to their few supporters.

I would make sure that my friends, as third party intermediaries, let Lotta Power know that I am a supporter and that they make sure that what i have done in other elections is perfectly clear. I would not meet with Lotta Power until after a successful election.

I have no obligation to play by rules that are designed to eliminate my voice in who represents me. i am already outside the system so why should I play by anybodys rules?

Can you tell I am not a team player? I was a Golden Gloves boxer though. Nobody in the ring but me and my opponent.

It is lots of fun doing this and you would not believe how well it works. It is called modern American survival politics. It is amazing what people will believe without being told anything directly. Innuendo works.

A lie will make it around the world in the time it takes for the truth to get its boots on" Winston Churchill

8 votes

#1.7 - Wed May 6, 2009 12:06 AM EDT

ROFLMAO!!! You just described a typical election! That is the way we do things now. Part of reform will have to address such issues as well. In an attempt to stay on the topic of campaign finance reform as part of keeping politicians honest I will avoid the minefield of what has been going on outside of their control. My concern is the selling of their votes on issues in order to obtain donations to their campaigns. Some one coming in after the election and saying Lotta Power owes me because I did this, this, and this during the campaign without any one knowing it. "Thanks for the help, but I didn't ask for it so I don't "owe" you anything. How do you know I couldn't have gotten elected on my own without your interference?" says Lotta Power (most political candidates have big egos and really would think this way).

3 votes

#1.8 - Wed May 6, 2009 9:15 AM EDT

Mordecai (#1.7),

I thought your agenda was to change the system. Or do I need to go retrieve my sense of humor?

3 votes

#1.9 - Wed May 6, 2009 12:09 PM EDT

knight-403465

The 28th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States

This will work and it will be ratified.

Thanks Mordecai.

From what I see on NewsVine most are ready to come together on this question of special interests and their influence on our entire society. Election reform by the 28th Amendment will (not might or could but will) be the best reform/reset Americans could possibly make. It should be done with all haste. It will leave us with a firm base to build on.

I can see it already - Life without Corporations as "Persons" and Legislators who are beholden only to the people. Less but more efficient Government. There will be problems but the people say "Bring Them On". Let us vote on it.

Credit Default Swaps are still being traded in the dark. OTC derivatives is a $600 Trillion dollar market.

4 votes

#1.10 - Fri Jan 1, 2010 8:40 PM EST

Sell it to Billy Boy Gates and the rest of Dem der varmits will tag along...:)

Wonder if he`s a Democrat?

4 votes

#1.11 - Fri Jan 1, 2010 8:44 PM EST

knight-403465

Vote this article up the Vine.

4 votes

#1.12 - Fri Jan 1, 2010 8:45 PM EST

Mordecai! Excellent post, well thought out. Of course this is what we should do! It seems too simple though, who are the ones who will come to fight against this and why? What would be the ulterior motive but to push forth their own agenda. To continue in the fight to systematically bring down our government of the people for nothing more than external gain.

I have also thought that each candidate be given the exact same amount of money to campaign. This would give us insight into how they manage their money as they bring forth their ideas and ideals to the American people.

9 votes

#2 - Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:25 PM EDT

JustDucki

Excellent! Logical...sensible. People will never go for it.

One of the loopholes that is used is that gifts are also given to families of candidates. It doesn't count if bribe, er, campaign contribution or donation, is given to family members. Something needs to be done to close that up as well, no?

9 votes

#3 - Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:56 PM EDT

Amen and amen. Campaign finance reform is sorely needed, and we cannot look to our government officials to execute it since they are the ones who benefit from it.

So, any ideas on how to push this idea forward to a place where it may have a chance to come into effect?

9 votes

#4 - Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:41 PM EDT

roadlesstraveled

opencongress.org?

Good question.

5 votes

#4.1 - Mon May 4, 2009 5:40 PM EDT

That might be a good start. It would definitely have to be a non-profit, non-partisan watchdog group.

Good suggestion there, roadlesstraveled.

5 votes

#4.2 - Mon May 4, 2009 7:00 PM EDT

A watchdog group? You mean a self-appointed regulatory agency?

4 votes

#4.3 - Mon May 4, 2009 7:14 PM EDT

Aside from what I already described, I don't know what I mean. How does one put together a group of trustworthy people charged with a task like this when there is so much at stake? I don't have a clue.

1 vote

#4.4 - Mon May 4, 2009 7:19 PM EDT

No we mean a group that reports in laymens terms what the he!! is going on to the rest of us to busy earning a living to babysit these fools!

6 votes

#4.5 - Mon May 4, 2009 8:48 PM EDT

Isn't that what a free press is supposed to do?

6 votes

#4.6 - Mon May 4, 2009 10:49 PM EDT

Why not add an article to impeach if the articles are not followed with forfeiture of all monies earned during office and community service of not less than 2 years as a sanitation engineer (Trash person)? This gives time for watchdogs or free press to do the research, report and fact finding. (I like the sanitation engineer part, let them clean up other peoples messes as We the People are having to clean up theirs.)

Get it on the ballot of every state by petition, once it is ready and finalized. I'll volunteer a couple of weekends at the mall or even door to door for that matter to get this voted on.

2 votes

#4.7 - Mon May 4, 2009 11:12 PM EDT

The penalty provisions are embedded in Federal and State law.

5 votes

#4.8 - Mon May 4, 2009 11:51 PM EDT

There is no such thing as "free press" any more. Most if not all of main stream media is corporate owned and follows the behest of advertisers who in turn curry political favor to further their business goals by kow towing to the politicians. Two dirty hands scratching each others backs. I would much rather a citizens oversight commitee made up of lawyer, accountant, average citizen, and a cop. Between them they could keep an eye on all the double speak and give us the real low down on the budgets and laws being passed.

4 votes

#4.9 - Tue May 5, 2009 11:30 AM EDT

The Press has always been owed by someone. The problem now in this country is the too big to fail mentality.

6 votes

#4.10 - Tue May 5, 2009 11:34 AM EDT

Mordecai wrote:

Isn't that what a free press is supposed to do?

Ah, now you've picked the scab called the Fourth Estate. We don't have one anymore. It's been all bought up by General Electric, Disney, CBS, News Corp., Time Warner and Viacom. Please see Who Owns The Media? for more information.

Without an independent Fourth Estate, we're screwed (even worse than we thought we were).

4 votes

#4.11 - Tue May 5, 2009 1:50 PM EDT

So start a newspaper! Why is it always somebody elses responsibility?

Go door to door and get names for an email list. Get a website going. Write articles for Newsvine and learn how to attract a readership.

How do you run an independent free press on somebody elses money?

You are not looking for government funded free press to make things equal are you?

10 votes

#4.12 - Tue May 5, 2009 3:09 PM EDT

So start a newspaper! Why is it always somebody elses responsibility?

I've obviously found at least one of your weaknesses. If you like newspapers, the kind printed on paper with ink, you'd better read fast. They are going away. The New York Times has already announced it's closing the Boston Globe, a paper that is (or, was) 137 years old.

I already did the publishing route. My small company published a high-end niché magazine. It had promotions, web advertising, an extensive mailing list, subscribers, newsstand presence, a huge website with a very active forum, interactive multimedia CD-ROMs produced exclusively as companion media for the high-quality printed magazine. The venture failed, in part because of an SEC that doesn't do its job (read: sanctioning unfair corporate (as in h-u-g-e) mergers that muscle out the independent publisher with a flick of their fingernail). Been there, won't go back again. Lost gobs of money.

How do you run an independent free press on somebody elses money?

Real easy if you have the right staff and can take full advantage of new media and can actually capture an audience that isn't busy texting or talking on their cell phones or Twittering. The biggest challenge is this: 1) How do you break through the drone and banality of everyday life; 2) How do you make people care?

You are not looking for government funded free press to make things equal are you?

Not hardly.

3 votes

#4.13 - Tue May 5, 2009 5:00 PM EDT

VisionCoast: I like newspapers. As I said before they are good for lining bird cages, protecting the floor from puppy's, and work fairly well a packing material although the electrostatic ink rubs off and makes a mess, but newspapers work well as temporary sun shades.

1) by either knowing your audience or finding an audience that is receptive to what you present.

2) You cannot make people care any more than you can push a chain. You can educate your audience and an educated audience will care about what they are interested in.

Anybody can be an idealist - the tough part is remaining an idealist.

7 votes

#4.14 - Tue May 5, 2009 5:11 PM EDT

Newspapers have seen their day I'm afraid. I expect a domino effect if the Boston Globe does in fact close shop. Magazines aren't far behind. I see the distribution and sell-through numbers. They're baaaad.

1. Knowing this audience we're talking about is difficult; it's a very broad demographic that includes anyone who is displeased with our current governmental systems. That is probably the majority of our citizens. The audience is the uninformed who need to be informed. They are the apathetic who need to be ignited to action because it's in their best interest to do so.

2. An audience will be educated only if they're 1) interested and 2) willing to invest their time. Also at question is, where do you find this audience? It's scattered across the entire country, so any such venture would have to be national. To embark on a regional attempt at this, which would probably more effective to drive home the issues that people might know something about (their local issues), would be monumental, requiring significant manpower, and likely volunteer manpower unless somebody's got some very deep pockets.

It sounds like you're suggesting an activist group, which is a good idea. These are difficult subjects, though, and I question whether the majority of people would be willing to apply the time and brain energy required to fully understand the issues and then be successfully prompted to take action.

You're talking about a full-blown grassroots campaign to reform government. This would require writers, researchers, designers for print, web and mobile, copywriters, editors, administration, a lawyer or two or three, a CPA, et cetera.

This also requires dedicated, competent organization, a mission of purpose, attainable goals and the ability to withstand any interference from all levels of government.

It makes me tired just to think about it. Probably because I just released my own similar effort less than a year ago. Working 24/7/365 is no fun.

All suggestions are welcome.

3 votes

#4.15 - Tue May 5, 2009 10:01 PM EDT

VisionCoast: I will respond if you can show me how the issue of a obscure newspaper that hardly anyone buys connects to an amendment about keeping politicians honest.

You wouldn't be looking to hijack the thread, would you?

I am easily suckered into irrelevant side issues and that is my weakness. I think it is appropriate for me to ask since this is happening on all three posts.

4 votes

#4.16 - Tue May 5, 2009 11:13 PM EDT

I will respond if you can show me how the issue of a obscure newspaper that hardly anyone buys connects to an amendment about keeping politicians honest.

I was responding to your #4.12...

So start a newspaper! Why is it always somebody elses responsibility?

...which was your response to my mention of the loss of the Fourth Estate when you asked...

Isn't that what a free press is supposed to do?

...in response to Citizen Kane's #4.5.

See how easy it is to go off-topic? I too often fall into it till somebody turns me around.

I thought maybe you were trying to get around the idea of using media (print, web, whatever) to promote the organization of the subject of this article. That was the only relevancy I could see.

3 votes

#4.17 - Wed May 6, 2009 12:16 PM EDT

It sounds like you're suggesting an activist group, which is a good idea.

This also requires dedicated, competent organization, a mission of purpose, attainable goals and the ability to withstand any interference from all levels of government.

Sounds to me like one should start a community organization, it is working well for ACORN, LaRaza, and others. The government funds them.

5 votes

#4.18 - Sat May 9, 2009 12:51 PM EDT

I agree, a citizens group to spread understanding of how the government works.

6 votes

#4.19 - Sat May 9, 2009 1:18 PM EDT

riskybusiness

or how it doesn't work :)

1 vote

#4.20 - Mon May 11, 2009 11:38 PM EDT

Concerned Citizen-1303521

riskybusiness: That could be but rest assured that it is always working for somebody.

3 votes

#4.21 - Tue May 12, 2009 12:21 AM EDT

So start a newspaper! Why is it always somebody elses responsibility?

Go door to door and get names for an email list. Get a website going. Write articles for Newsvine and learn how to attract a readership.

Don't want to sidetrack from this seed, but this does bring up the issue of allowing ISPs to discriminate information packets. Then again, if we had less government corruption this might fix itself =)

Thanks for the article. +1 vote

2 votes

#4.22 - Thu Jan 21, 2010 8:40 PM EST

Commented deleted. Duplicate.

2 votes

#5 - Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:42 PM EDT

VisionCoast: I would like to get through the six article that I have written before I start on how to go about actually getting to real change. There is an issue that is underlying this that the Federal Rulers really don't want discussed. Stay tuned.

Would everybody do me the favor of promoting these as much as you can?

9 votes

#6 - Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:46 PM EDT

Mordecai ... I think Carloz is in complete opposition to your point of view, perhaps you should invite him over to give his take on this?

5 votes

#6.1 - Thu Apr 30, 2009 11:25 PM EDT

VisionCoast: How do you do that? When make the mistake of double posting I can't figure out how to get rid of the second ( or third) post. How do you do that?

2 votes

#6.2 - Mon May 4, 2009 7:15 PM EDT

Arizona: ¡No le hace! The every politician in the entire US government disagrees with my point of view so he has plenty of company.

I have been fortunate in having been told by some fine honorable politicians that I am a disreputable scoundrel and an outrageous rascal, including a US Secretary of State and his owner.

8 votes

#6.3 - Mon May 4, 2009 7:20 PM EDT

Mordecai,

Look at the bottom-right buttons on any of the comments in an article you've seeded or written. There's an arrow, an exclamation point and a trash can. As the seeder, you are the only person who can see the trash can, which is a delete button. If you click the trash can, you will be asked if you want to delete the comment. If you say yes, the comment will go away altogether.

I couldn't delete my comment #5 because I'm not the seeder. All I could do was edit it to remove the contents of the comment (the edit function is only there for a few minutes, then it goes away and is irretrievable). You can delete a comment entirely in any seed that is your own.

If you're in someone else's seed or article, you will only have the edit option. This option appears under your comment in gray italic type after you post a comment and lasts about five minutes. Once you've made your edits, click the "Save Changes" button on the bottom left of the comment box. If you wait beyond the five minutes, the edit option will no longer be available.

3 votes

#6.4 - Mon May 4, 2009 7:27 PM EDT

Which is why some times you see a post following a post by the same poster with just a " . " in it.

3 votes

#6.5 - Mon May 4, 2009 8:52 PM EDT

Oh, duh! I suppose that was just too much of a simplew straight forward common sense solution for me to see..

5 votes

#6.6 - Mon May 4, 2009 10:52 PM EDT

Carloz

Hi Mordecai (and Arizona), Thanks for the article. I have not read all the others, but the things your propose in your 28th amendment sound good to me.

6 votes

#6.7 - Tue May 5, 2009 6:11 AM EDT

Carloz: Thanks for stopping by. I appreciate the interest.

7 votes

#6.8 - Tue May 5, 2009 9:47 AM EDT

I would be glad to hear from Carloz - how does one go about this?

6 votes

#7 - Thu Apr 30, 2009 11:41 PM EDT

Mordecai ... I sent him your link, he said he would check you out this weekend. Here is his Carloz

curious have you been following Mordecai Jones at all and his posts?

No, I have not. I will give them a look this weekend. (Tomorrow is a holiday here, so I'll have a long one.) Thanks.

4 votes

#8 - Fri May 1, 2009 12:01 AM EDT

"Happy for us that when we find our constitutions defective and insufficient to secure the happiness of our people, we can assemble with all the coolness of philosophers and set it to rights, while every other nation on earth must have recourse to arms to amend or to restore their constitutions." --Thomas Jefferson to C. W. F. Dumas, 1787. ME 6:295, Papers 12:113

I think it is time for the common citizen to educate themselves on the powers they maintain as the owners of the Constitution.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union,
establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common
defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to
ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the
United States of America.

Reasserting our ownership, reestablishing our superiority to the Congress, the President, and our Supreme Court is long past due. My mother would say from time to time, usually tongue in cheek, "I brought you into this world, I can sure take you out of it!" Now my mother didn't mean that literally, and neither do we the people intend to dissolve the constitution. Yet, when government becomes so big -- that government rules the people, instead of the people ruling the government, something must be done. There is a general disregard for we the people in Congress, and has been for quite some time. The only time Congress even pretends to listen to the people is during elections. For me personally, when Congress and the President speak out against United States Citizens, when they no longer follow the rule of law, when 50% or more of we the people are ignored as irrelevant, then we the people need to take actions to ensure that Congress and the President realize we are not only relevant, we are their creators and they rule by our grace.

11 votes

#9 - Fri May 1, 2009 11:16 AM EDT

Great post, Uni. It is encouraging to se that there are people out there who are sincere people with a concern for their fellow human beings, who also understand the obligations of government.

10 votes

#10 - Fri May 1, 2009 12:03 PM EDT

EllieP

Great conversation, all. Mordecai, you might want to check out Tom Bombadil's seed, Gingrich Blasts RNC. I've linked to one your seeds from one of his today.

6 votes

#10.1 - Sat May 2, 2009 10:18 AM EDT

I`m posting this mainly to keep track. Which leads me to a question. Is it possible to get lobbiest to somehow show their sources in the manner food lableing. Where/what/who/etc. So that all voters can be aware of their proposals more fully?

5 votes

#11 - Sun May 3, 2009 10:35 PM EDT

jbdaad: Absolutely, in order to prove that funds were not improperly received under section 2 the candidate would have to keep complete documentary evidence in the form of traceable records.

Section 1 would remove the tax deduction for donations made by entities not qualified to vote for the candidate. This would raise the effective cost to the donor by making it a gift that could not be written off as a 501c# donation, or as a business expense.

8 votes

#11.1 - Sun May 3, 2009 10:45 PM EDT

Mordecai Jones

Absolutely, in order to prove that funds were not improperly received under section 2 the candidate would have to keep complete documentary evidence in the form of traceable records.

Article 3.

(a) All records related to the expenditure, distribution, preservation or conservation of any and all donated services or things of value, or amounts of money shall be accounted for by making a physical record which shall then be filed for record with the office of the Secretary of State of the state in which the candidate campaigned for office.

Do you mean three?

2 votes

#11.2 - Sun May 3, 2009 10:55 PM EDT

No, Three is the location of the records, two is what would force a politician to keep the records and three defines where he would have to keep them to make them available for public inspection.

5 votes

#11.3 - Sun May 3, 2009 10:58 PM EDT

No, Three is the location of the records, two is what would force a politician to keep the records and three

Good start. Continue please. Good quick rreference for me.

4 votes

#11.4 - Mon May 4, 2009 6:20 AM EDT

Mordecai ... it sounds like you will be going to Washington soon. Or is this a thesis?

2 votes

#12 - Mon May 4, 2009 12:09 AM EDT

I don't like cities, espicially Washington. It is full of .. of... those politicians!

9 votes

#12.1 - Mon May 4, 2009 12:14 AM EDT

LOL ...

3 votes

#12.2 - Mon May 4, 2009 12:38 AM EDT

What he said!(LOL)

2 votes

#12.3 - Mon May 4, 2009 6:21 AM EDT

Mordecai Ifind your aversion for snakes, rats, and slime reprehensible.

6 votes

#12.4 - Mon May 4, 2009 8:24 AM EDT

sneilarreal

I will be in Washington on the 12th of September. With my copy of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, firmly in hand.

7 votes

#12.5 - Mon May 4, 2009 10:19 AM EDT

neenie1991

Guard it with your life! You'll be the only one with a copy!

5 votes

#12.6 - Mon May 4, 2009 12:03 PM EDT

roadlesstraveled

sneilarreal

Could you bring 300 million copies, I think so many forgot what the Constitution and Bill of Rights was for.

5 votes

#12.7 - Mon May 4, 2009 5:45 PM EDT

"Forgot" what they were for? Like they forgot Fourier Transforms in Calculus? Or the mroal arguments of Emmanuel Kant?

Did they ever know? How many ever cared to just read the stuff that people died for?

6 votes

#12.8 - Mon May 4, 2009 7:25 PM EDT

neenie1991

Mordecai,

I found your article fascinating and I have learned alot from reading the (very civilized) posts. I'm wondering what your thoughts are on term limits.

3 votes

#12.9 - Mon May 4, 2009 7:43 PM EDT

neenie1991: I am not really a fan of term limits. Term limits force out people that the voters keep wanting to send back to represent them in government. I have not encountered what I would consider to be a reasonable argument for taking away the right of the people to be represented by the elected politician of their choice no matter how dumb I think it is.

Thank you for joining this discussion - I am truly pleased to have such intelligent people join in discussing these issues.

5 votes

#12.10 - Mon May 4, 2009 7:57 PM EDT

I am a big fan of term limits. People keep voting the same people in because of committee seniority and position. They see the corruption of Washington, and realize that the only way for their state to stay in the money is to have a congressman with years of seniority. Eliminate that seniority and things would improve. This crap about - but they are experts! .. Look at Joe Biden. o.0 Look at Ted Kennedy. Experts in what exactly?

5 votes

#12.11 - Tue May 5, 2009 7:08 AM EDT

Hmmm ... Ted Kennedy? The guy who strolled away from a plane crash that smushed the pilot? And survived the fatal drowning that killed Mary Jo Kopechne and then swam the channel at Martha's Vineyard in a business suit and shoes? I'd say that he is an expert at survival other people's convenient death.

Joe Biden? He seems to be an expert at being a contortionist. He can walk around with both feet in his mouth.

Uni: You are assigning a reason to the vote cast by most people yet most people cannot tell you what committees which politicians are on. Seniority is based on the self imposed rules that govern the Senate and a separate set that govern the House in the conduct of their business.

By way of an example, Mexico has term limits and incredible corruption. Currently, Mexico has a President who is an intelligent and dedicated man. Calderon is working on the pernicious corruption that has plagued Mexico for years and he is making head way against the corrupt local government and the drug cartels. They are not really too concerned because they know he will be gone for good in 2012 due to term limits. Term limits get rid of the good with the bad.

6 votes

#12.12 - Tue May 5, 2009 10:01 AM EDT

I would give up the representation of a million good men to not have to endure one who is corrupt and evil.

6 votes

#12.13 - Tue May 5, 2009 10:41 AM EDT

Hmmm ... Ted Kennedy? The guy who strolled away from a plane crash that smushed the pilot? And survived the fatal drowning that killed Mary Jo Kopechne and then swam the channel at Martha's Vineyard in a business suit and shoes? I'd say that he is an expert at survival other people's convenient death.

Perhaps one day the Democratic Senator will own up or dispel the stories surrounding this treacherous death. I fear that people like Ted Kennedy, Hillary, and others of the not so Democratic party have only one agenda...and it is not The American way all. They have established systems that only serve to further their own goals no matter who they tramp along the way. No matter who they torture, maim, separate, or lead into whatever slavery serves their purpose.

For this and more I stand by your Amendment Mordicai as a step in the right direction to begin the process of reparation to or countries disgustingly lob-sided not so just system. Anyone who wants to study where a lot of things started to go wrong, feel free to study the effects of 300 laws passed by the Democrats in the Hitler like State of Maryland.

Take fair warning not so Democrats. Some in America are on to you!

3 votes

#12.14 - Wed May 13, 2009 1:16 PM EDT

jbdaad: Thank you. There are Democrats and Republicans who are not what America thinks they should be. We need to make changes to bring the government back to where there is no room for the venial and the corrupt.

3 votes

#12.15 - Wed May 13, 2009 4:46 PM EDT

A country changes when the people that live in it change. For the good or the bad. I feel our country is close to bankrupt in more ways than one. I have a true sadness.

2 votes

#12.16 - Thu May 14, 2009 12:26 AM EDT

Cheer up Uni. If we can get these third and fourth parties together we might have a chance.

1 vote

#12.17 - Thu May 14, 2009 6:52 AM EDT

Uni: When fate closes the door, fortune opens the window. Think of it as an opportunity to put things back to right.

1 vote

#12.18 - Thu May 14, 2009 7:26 AM EDT

EllieP

Hang in there Uni*!!!

1 vote

#12.19 - Thu May 14, 2009 8:35 AM EDT

Mike-584822

jbdaad wrote "Hmmm ... Ted Kennedy? The guy who strolled away from a plane crash that smushed the pilot? And survived the fatal drowning that killed Mary Jo Kopechne and then swam the channel at Martha's Vineyard in a business suit and shoes? I'd say that he is an expert at survival other people's convenient death.
Perhaps one day the Democratic Senator will own up or dispel the stories surrounding this treacherous death. "

Well since he passed we will never know the real truth of the accident.

2 votes

#12.20 - Wed Jan 20, 2010 9:10 AM EST

Mike ... curious so no disrespect meant or implied, but why do you care? It was a long, long time ago and it was ruled an accident due to alcohol. They are both now gone so why still the interest? Is it because he was a Kennedy? Did you know MaryJo? Like I said, just curious.

#12.21 - Thu Jan 21, 2010 8:17 AM EST

Murder should never be allowed to just dissipate. Kennedy clearly lied about the events of that night and the Chief of the Edgartown contradicted statements made on the morning after. The evidence from the hotel just vanished.

Kennedy claimed he swan the channel across to Edgartown in a three piece business suit and shoes against a 5 knot outgoing current. Even Coast Guard rescue swimmers will tell you that is stretching a tall tales into the whopper of a life time of crimes.

Mary Jo Kopechne should not have to have people know her in order for her death under suspicious circumstances to be investigated.

After all this isn't the first or even the tenth person to die around one of the Kennedy Klan under suspicious circumstances.

3 votes

#12.22 - Thu Jan 21, 2010 9:06 PM EST

I agree murder should never be allowed to just dissipate. But we see it all the time. JFK was murdered has anyone ever received a satisfactory answer on the who, what, where, and why? Bobby Kennedy also are you satified that Sirhan Sirhan had no background on the who, what, where, and why? How about the death of Marilyn Monroe? The guy who played Superman, Steve Reeve wasn't it, many do not believe he put a bullet in his own head but was killed by the very influential husband of a lover. How about 9/11 ...

My point is whether Chappiquidak was an accident waiting to happen because of a drunk getting behind the wheel, a conspiracy, or a young woman being in the wrong place at the wrong time does not amount to a hill of beans at this point in time. He got off and there will always be those who will believe he got away with murder. Sadly that is the way of the world when you are that powerful is the way I look at it. Doesn't make it right, but I don't lose sleep over it either.

As I've mentioned before the Kennedy clan was not a blessed family. As the saying goes ... the sins of the father ....

#12.23 - Thu Jan 21, 2010 10:57 PM EST

It isn't about what people believe. Lee Harvey Oswald is dead. Sirhan Sirhan went to prison. George Reeves death was shown to be a suicide. Marilynn Monroe was killed by one of the Kennedys and as usual nobody was held responsible.

Mary Jo Kopechne died at the hands of Ted Kennedy and as usual when somebody dies around one of the Kennedys no one is held to account.

The practice of excusing murder and accepting it as "just part of life in Massachusetts" may work for some people but there are a lot of us who think it is wrong to just accept the criminal actions of crime families just becasue they are rich and powerful in State where the people don't have the courage of any convictions theirs or anybody elses.

the sins of the Father ...? Yup, Joe Kennedy was a gun runner for the mafia and the rest of the organized crime groups during the 1920s and 30s.

Like father - like son.

2 votes

#12.24 - Fri Jan 22, 2010 2:59 PM EST

I didn't mean to come off as heartless, I don't accept it as "just part of life in Massachusetts" but I do believe some deaths are intentional and others are accidents. I saw JFK get shot on TV no doubt in my mind he was murdered. I saw Bobby K. get shot live on TV, I was sitting right there in the comfort of my own home when it happend and couldn't believe it! He also was murdered and I am not satisfied that justice was served in either incident.

But, the incident of Teddy K. wasn't captured live on TV or replayed over and over again when Mary Jo died other than simulations of what they think happened. Many believe it was a accident and many like yourself believe it wasn't. I'm not sure if I am using the correct terminology, but I believe he was guilty of leaving the scene of an accident in which someone died. I don't believe he swam across that canal but I do believe he was disoriented, drunk, and scared. I just don't know if it was murder and yes I do believe he should have been held accountable, I was perhaps just as shocked as you that he did not receive some type of sentencing. I think many of the laws were changed after that so nobody again can walk away like he did.

I had a brother killed and I know it was an accident and not murder ... sometimes that is exactly what it is, an accident. Do I believe MM was killed by the Kennedy's? Not by one of them personally, but yup, I think she was. Do I know how the Kennedy's made their fortune yes I do ... do I believe that getting into politics was just an extension of what they were, and that their background was valuable to them will training to become politicians, yes I do.

1 vote

#12.25 - Fri Jan 22, 2010 5:48 PM EST

This is not the thread to debate the criminal nature of the Kennedy clan.

JFK was murdered and it was probably an act of his business connections. That happens alot in crime families. The same thing happened to RFK. And the Gambinos, than the Bonnano family and it happened to many others in the various sections of organized crime.

The murder of Mary Jo Kopechne was not investigated. Kennedy claimed that he swam the 1 1/2 miles of open channel in a business suit went to his hotel and went to bed for the night. That stretches my credibility, but then again I am from Texas.

2 votes

#12.26 - Fri Jan 22, 2010 9:04 PM EST

It stretches my credibility and I'm from Massachusetts! Thanks for the discussion it will always be one of life's thorns in one's side. But, can't say the family didn't pay for their crimes in one way or another. I just now I'd never vote for anyone in the family no matter which side they came from ... be it Kennedy, Lawford, Shriner, or Swartzenegger.

2 votes

#12.27 - Fri Jan 22, 2010 10:49 PM EST

sneilarreal: Thank you for your support. What is your opinion and point of view on this topic?

6 votes

#13 - Mon May 4, 2009 10:56 AM EDT

neenie1991

Unicorn,

As to term limits, after I asked Mordecai my question, and his response, I realized that if his 28th amendment were put into place, it would or could, effectively eliminate some of the individuals you were mentioning.

3 votes

#13.1 - Tue May 5, 2009 11:15 AM EDT

Effectively eliminate - I like the sound of that! Thank you, neenie. :)

6 votes

#13.2 - Tue May 5, 2009 11:21 AM EDT

Thank you, neenie1991. I think that the real problem is who the politicians are listening to and why.

4 votes

#13.3 - Tue May 5, 2009 12:51 PM EDT

http://adventurebooks.newsvine.com/_news/2009/05/03/2771255-teabaggers-cartoons-and-commentary-

Believe it not, here is another good post and solutions are being sought.

I love it!!!

3 votes

#14 - Mon May 4, 2009 11:26 PM EDT

I see absolutely no correlation between this article written with intelligence and the one you point to written with hatred? Perhaps I am missing something.

6 votes

#14.1 - Tue May 5, 2009 7:05 AM EDT

Own Up!!: I don't see the connection. Could you explain some, please?

3 votes

#14.2 - Tue May 5, 2009 10:06 AM EDT

Hey guys I happen to be walking that battle field Own Up has pointed you towards. Could use a few intelligent posters to bring it back into line. I see possibilities with a few that are following the thread to contribute some positive force to future discussions and actions. They just need a little education to remove the wool from their eyes.

3 votes

#14.3 - Tue May 5, 2009 11:38 AM EDT

Citizen Kane: I know that you are a sincere and intelligent individual. I would appreciate your point of view on the connection. The post seemed, to me, to be just more of the "Let's ridicule the powerless because we have the the whip now." It struck me as a childish diatribe that was a waste of my time.

I am not a fan of using yellow journalism, purple prose, sarcasm, ridicule, and propaganda techniques to make a serious point. If there was a serious point in the chaff I missed it entirely.

Could you give me synopsis of what I missed or didn't understand?

4 votes

#14.4 - Tue May 5, 2009 12:58 PM EDT

CK thanks.

The article itself is ridicule, but the comments are working towards a solution and education. This seed started with a solution and poeple are continuing to work towards that end.

Synopsis--People are starting to learn about an alternative tax method--FAIR TAX (Fairtax.org) and seriously look into the viability, problems, repercusions etc.

I viewed it as it started out to be a slam/bash/hate but CK and others have turned it into something positive. On this post your not focusing on a problem, but focusing on a solution--the other post was turned in this direction and it shows a glimmer of hope (just like our economy) for another of our nations problems.

3 votes

#14.5 - Tue May 5, 2009 1:16 PM EDT

And that is why we sounded the "All hands on deck" call...

3 votes

#14.6 - Tue May 5, 2009 1:34 PM EDT

Own Up!! and Citizen Kane: Thank you for your synopsis. I will take the time to re-visit the article and I will be better prepared this time thanks to you.

5 votes

#14.7 - Tue May 5, 2009 3:12 PM EDT

Mordecai--I can't speek for CK, but thank you for at least taking the time to look and see what is being presented.

3 votes

#14.8 - Tue May 5, 2009 6:53 PM EDT

I appreciate your participation. Sometimes I jump to conclusions about what I read more because of the style it is written in rather than the content. I am glad that you had the patience to provide the synopsis.

5 votes

#14.9 - Tue May 5, 2009 7:34 PM EDT

Mordecai ... I am guilty more than I would like to admit on this one.

"Sometimes I jump to conclusions about what I read more because of the style it is written in rather than the content."

I am wondering today, if I lost a friend because of my own angst and jumping to conclusions.

3 votes

#14.10 - Wed May 6, 2009 2:56 PM EDT

I am wondering today, if I lost a friend because of my own angst and jumping to conclusions.

We all feel froggy sometimes..:) Perrie told me to slow down. I do that...somtimes..

4 votes

#14.11 - Wed May 6, 2009 6:15 PM EDT

MJ--we all jump to conclusions and I am not the best writer, but I am passionate about the subject of fair taxes and about reducing the power or perceived power of our elected officials. We gave them whatever power they have, we can take it away.

4 votes

#14.12 - Wed May 6, 2009 8:53 PM EDT

I live and work in a world of some of the dirtiest and most underhanded politics and the most vicious, cold blooded, cut throat legal tactics. I am well paid for being a part of what makes that happen. I am always astounded at how quickly people will support ideas that will bring about their own ruin.

It is comforting to believe that the people can retract the powers extended to politicians but not very realistic. Unless all of the necesary steps are taken to restrict the powers bequeathed to the Federal government there is no means by which the power of the Federal government can be controlled short of unrestrained civil war. Civil war is not an option for anything other than the final destruction of the idea of democracy in America.

The people are long past the point of being able to simply say "We want to take back what we bequeathed to you as an absolute grant of right."

The only reasonable means to effect control is to implement structural changes in the the system to attempt to restore the rightful power and original authority of the people that they so easily gave away to the Federal government.

You can be assured that the Federal government is a benign tyrant that is jealous of its power.

8 votes

#14.13 - Wed May 6, 2009 11:25 PM EDT

Concerning the seed you offered owns up, I try very hard NOT to support that kind of story, that kind of author. I will not read it. Now CK and yourself, may have made some very excellent comments, and your hearts are in the right places. I suggest you instead write your own articles, or support only good articles, and make your points there. I am glad to see you here on this thread. You are both intelligent and have worthwhile thoughts to share. I will see them here or on other worthwhile threads, I prefer not to show support or go to a thread of hate to fight for sanity.

Granted this is my choice, I am attempting to influence you to make the same choice. A good friend once commented to me upon seeing me trying to fight the good fight with idiots -- "do not cast pearls among swine." Respectfully, I hope you give my thoughts some consideration.

6 votes

#14.14 - Wed May 6, 2009 11:51 PM EDT

jbdaad ... Thank you.

3 votes

#14.15 - Thu May 7, 2009 9:43 AM EDT

I do that...somtimes..

Sometimes...Thank you Arizona.

2 votes

#14.16 - Thu May 7, 2009 10:18 AM EDT

Thanks, Uni. I thought maybe I missed understanding the connection. I read part of the article in the link and gave it up because I needed to do something more significant like clean the wax out of my ear.

5 votes

#15 - Tue May 5, 2009 10:05 AM EDT

Hugz Mordecai, thanks for the laugh, I so needed it! :)

5 votes

#15.1 - Tue May 5, 2009 10:42 AM EDT

Uni--Valid and point well taken, hard to get through my thick skull though.

MJ--thanks for the great discussions. I hope you haven't sold your soul to the politics in which you work and for which you are well paid. There is more to life than money. I'll see you around and look forward to further discussions.

4 votes

#15.2 - Thu May 7, 2009 9:00 AM EDT

Own Up: Money isn't in first place, but it is way the hell ahead of what ever is.

I try to encourage people to really understand what is happening to them but like the prisoners at the death camps they just march toward the food line which is on the far side of the crematoriums.

I have worked on these three threads and tried to encourage a reasonable examination of the issues becasue they are key elemental issues. This has turned into a juvenile farce.

If I cannot get liberty, I might as well accept the money that is being offered. Better a rich frog than a poor subject.

7 votes

#15.3 - Thu May 7, 2009 9:08 AM EDT

Mordecai,

I assume it is because of this:

I live and work in a world of some of the dirtiest and most underhanded politics and the most vicious, cold blooded, cut throat legal tactics. I am well paid for being a part of what makes that happen.

that you are trying to educate people and do what you can to help bring change. Is that assumption correct?

I have worked on these three threads and tried to encourage a reasonable examination of the issues becasue they are key elemental issues. This has turned into a juvenile farce.

It can be very difficult to get people to think critically and to accept ideas that are alien to them. Working in the world that you do, you must know this. I would hope you wouldn't give up this easily. And, trying to do this in this online setting is even more challenging if you're looking for measurable results. Organization is key, and it's not easily accomplished in a virtual environment. People need to sit face to face, without distractions, and work through the issues, then put together a plan. Speaking of which...

I was under the impression that you had some kind of blueprint that would be revealed at the end of your sixth article. No? Are you going to continue here, or are you saying your farewell?

5 votes

#16 - Thu May 7, 2009 11:55 AM EDT

I intend to continue. I am installing new windows (insulated) in my house and putting a new roof on my carport/shop/carport. Right now I am so tired I can't think straight.

There is an "energy saving" home improvement tax credit on the 2009 schedule C. It is up 30% of the bill up to $1,500 total credit so I bought $ 5,000 worth of custom built windows and they will wind up costing me $3,500. And this when unemployment is still going up.

Does this make sense to anyone as a government policy?

5 votes

#17 - Thu May 7, 2009 3:53 PM EDT

Does this make sense to anyone as a government policy?

It does to me.

If you buy new windows, the window manufacturer and distributor make some money. If you hire an installer, the workers make money. If you get a tax credit, you pay less in taxes without infringing on the ability of the window manufacturer, distributor and installer to make money.

As an added benefit, if you install energy-saving windows, you'll be using less electricity, which means less coal being used at the power plant if you're not on a nuclear grid, which means less pollution.

What's not to love?

3 votes

#18 - Thu May 7, 2009 4:00 PM EDT

The fact that if there is slack in the tax base that can be given away it should be applied to create jobs for the people who are out of work now. When the economy is flourishing again, the government can indulge in the luxury of fashionable and entertaining projects.

I buy new windows direct form the manufacturer because times are tough and money talks. I offer cash for a deep discount and an invoice that shows the original resale price. The distributor gets cut out. Asd a result, the manufacturer get a little more than he would if the distributor had been included and I get my 30% discount.

I don't hire an installer, I go to the local missions and hire two paperless persons for $40 a day and the windows get installed for $80 plus my time so the local installer and his workers get to do without the work. $ 75 for a wind storm certificate and the Inspector didn't even have to come out in the 95 degree heat.

There is a long and very deep canyon between the idea of what it may be like and how things get done.

So $5,000 - $1,500 discount = $3,500 cost

$3,500 cost - $1,500 tax credit on the $5,000 invoice = $ $2,000 for windows.

No tax credit? I would have bought the windows and been happy with the $3,500 cost.

4 votes

#19 - Thu May 7, 2009 4:55 PM EDT

Mordecai ...

VisionCoast answered in the positive regarding your question. But, being who I am, I will not assume to know what you meant and ask the question (no offense meant VC). This I ask with some trepidation, as I have found that things I say quite innocently are not often taken as such. I am a novice in the arena of politics ... please take this into consideration.

I truly do try and look at all the angles for clarity. I really do want to understand and not assume. In doing this, I have found that I unintentinally offend as I some think I am on the attack which is never, never my attention when the thought is put to paper.

Okay here goes ... In the negative (if there is a negative to it) what would your statment imply in the context of your post #17...

"Does this make sense to anyone as a government policy?"

p.s. Congrats on the home improvements! :-)

1 vote

#20 - Thu May 7, 2009 5:06 PM EDT

Arizona:

Okay here goes ... In the negative (if there is a negative to it) what would your statment imply in the context of your post #17...

In the negative of #17?? If there is a negative ...??? Are you asking my to argue with myself?

Statement - which statement?

what would it imply?? I haven't got a clue. I suppose that it could imply just about anything that a person can conceive of if they are a mind to.

What would it imply? Compound verb? I don't know what it would imply. The perception of implication is at the will of the person who perceives some sort of implication.

I am unable to determine what you are asking? Is there a question there?

What are your trying to bring out?

3 votes

#21 - Thu May 7, 2009 5:59 PM EDT

LOL ... Mordecai you answered just as I expected in your comment #19. If your response to VC had posted before I sent mine, this would be a non-issue!

Can't help it! Cracks me up!! :-)

1 vote

#21.1 - Fri May 8, 2009 12:00 AM EDT

Does this make sense to anyone as a government policy?

Yes it does. There are a lot of homes that can be upgraded to help our energy system. Many minor repairs that can be initiated also. Such as indoor plumbing I need to get to. :( Every small leak requires a water pump to that uses electricty.

2 votes

#21.2 - Fri May 8, 2009 7:36 AM EDT

jbdadd ...

I completely agree. But, what I think Mordecai is saying is this is another incentive sugar-coated to make it look one way but when applied only works for those who can afford it. Another "break" that is represented that it is for everyone but in effect does not "trickle down" to those who need it.

The incentive as given actually takes more away from the economy. As Mordecai mentioned he would have been happy paying $3500 but instead because of the structure of this governmental policy he paid only $2,000.

This governmental policy is, in my most humble opininon, hurting the economy instead of helping it. It stimulates those who can afford to get a really good deal but it doesn't put his neighbor to work.

Anyway, that's my take on it!

2 votes

#21.3 - Fri May 8, 2009 10:16 AM EDT

Thanks, Arizona. My house is in not in need of any serious repairs. I am doing the repairs as are many of my freinds, bcause I am going to get $5,000 of windows at 60% off.

I would rather that house that can't meet a minimum standard get some direct purchase help to bring the house up to standard.

I think that a tax credit that is basically for those who can afford to participate is poor policy at best.

4 votes

#21.4 - Fri May 8, 2009 12:43 PM EDT

#21.3 and #21.4:

I'll argue with both of these positions.

Sure, not everybody can easily afford to upgrade their windows to a more energy-efficient product, but the tax credit is an incentive to make Americans at least think about reducing energy consumption—an inducement to help persuade those who can to do instead of spending money on something less beneficial.

Arizona, Mordecai began his project by negotiating directly with the manufacturer. That's how he got to the $2,000 figure. That part of it had nothing to do with the government's proffered tax credit.

2 votes

#21.5 - Fri May 8, 2009 12:55 PM EDT

I'll argue with both of these positions.

lol! You go boy!

#21.6 - Fri May 8, 2009 1:19 PM EDT

Hi VisionCoast ... so are you saying that you would not have gone to the manufacturer who was offering you a 15% deal vs paying Home Depot prices? As a person who works hard for his money are you saying that you would only take 15% instead of 60%? You have every right as anyone to buy factory direct.

1 vote

#21.7 - Fri May 8, 2009 2:57 PM EDT

Arizona,

In my home improvements, I've done a blend of employing a contractor and his subcontractors and getting a better deal on some things by sidetracking the contractor—specifically, windows! Now before you respond with an "Aha!" you should know that I've spent a whole lot more with the contractor than I did on windows.

Mordecai said that the manufacturer gave him a deal because "money talks." I never said it wasn't his right to make the deal.

My core argument is this: Mordecai's other seed, "The Case For a Federalism Amendment" proposes to get government out of our lives yet he (and I) will take the tax credit. The difference is, Mordecai is critical of the credit. If he disagrees with it, I'd suggest he shouldn't take the credit. But he will because it benefits him, same reason I will. The difference here is, I'm not critical of the credit. I think anything that entices Americans to consume less energy is a positive thing, in good times or bad.

Mordecai also said he used "paperless people" to do his installation. We know who these people are and why Mordecai used them, don't we? I would not knowingly do that. I'd prefer to employ legal American citizens who are struggling and in need of work and give them a fair wage, not those who are seeking the advantages America can offer without getting in the line behind all the others who came before them.

#21.8 - Fri May 8, 2009 3:15 PM EDT

VisionCoast ~ you say you would not knowingly employ an illegal. Well, we do have laws in business against doing just that. But, let's give another scenario ... I am a single parent, I need home repairs but don't have a lot of money. I am on cloud nine that between factory discount of 15% and the goverment tax policy of 15% I just saved 60% on my windows.

Now, am I to take this windfall and pour all into labor? I can't install my own windows, I don't have a husband or a the strong back of a son. But, I am brave enough to go down the street and see all the guys hanging about looking to find some work so they can feed their kids. I don't know if they are legal or illegal ... all I know is they are willing to do a days work for $40. They don't know if they will make $40 tomorrow. Now multiply that by needing help for a week or more.

I could end up paying more than what I made in the original discounted prices of the windows if I chose your route, do you agree? Granted its a noble thing to do it your way. But, you don't put food on my table now do you.

#21.9 - Fri May 8, 2009 3:35 PM EDT

Arizona,

I understand your point. However, I prefer to do what I can to uphold the laws of our country. I don't see how that can be criticized. I should knowingly break the law because it benefits me? That rationale won't get you off the hook in a court of law unless, of course, you have loads of money, which would negate your argument.

In today's economy, you'd be able to get a good price on almost any construction work if you know how to negotiate.

You're free to do what you want or need. Just be sure if you employ an illegal that you don't get caught.

#21.10 - Fri May 8, 2009 3:47 PM EDT

What law have I broken? The cops drive by these 20, 30 men every day, day after day. I see contractor trucks and sub-contracting trucks pull over and 2, 3 guys jump in the back of each and away they go.

#21.11 - Fri May 8, 2009 4:06 PM EDT

riskybusiness

To me the sad part is that the politicians use the tax codes as a means of control and manipulation. What about the people who installed energy efficient items two years ago and had to pay for it without a tax break? When the govt. uses items like the tax code for manipulation that is how bubbles get created in the economy. People may be buying a lot of windows now and then two years from now the people in the window factory lose a good job that they are depending on because the bubble burst. This is why the govt. should stop manipulating everything that has to do with business's. They pay farmers not to plant. They want to give money for trading in cars. They had much to do with the housing bubble. They give out grants to big companies while small companies who don't have the lawyers and knowledge for the paper work end up paying for the same items the govt. just give the big companies grants for.

The government needs to stop micromanaging and let the laws of supply and demand work for themselves.

4 votes

#21.12 - Fri May 8, 2009 10:07 PM EDT

I agree that the proper venue of government is in the areas that require the co-operation of two or more States.

5 votes

#21.13 - Fri May 8, 2009 10:42 PM EDT

The government needs to stop micromanaging and let the laws of supply and demand work for themselves.

So true Risky, but at the moment, capitalism is being blamed for all things bad. This is a totally unrealistic frame of mind, but that doesn't stop millions from believing it. The backlash of the capitalist witch hunt will be felt for years to come. The government is creating exactly the opposite environment than is needed to lift us out of this economic mess. Banks are trying to give back TARP money and are "told" they must keep it. Why? They say it is so that the weak are not exposed, causing further economic stress. Yet, just this week they publish a list of weakness in the top 19 banks. There is no logic in their actions.

The underlaying theme here is that we have corrupt politicians at all levels. We the people are not being represented. Yet all we can do is vote. Campaign monies, with the addition of the web as a fundraising element, has gotten not only corrupt, but untraceable as to where the funds are coming from.

Campaign Reform is often talked about, and never done. Do we really expect the criminal to police himself? No. So what are our options, how do we make this happen? What is it that we the people can do about the government we are supposed to own?

4 votes

#21.14 - Sat May 9, 2009 11:06 AM EDT

Mordecai wrote:

The fact that if there is slack in the tax base that can be given away it should be applied to create jobs for the people who are out of work now. When the economy is flourishing again, the government can indulge in the luxury of fashionable and entertaining projects.

Woo-hoo! Then let's withdraw the tax cuts given to the top 1 percent of Americans! Talk about indulgences... The Bush administration takes us to war, not one war but two (or three if you count international terrorism), and then cuts taxes with a disproportionate amount given to those who need it the least. Even Warren Buffet said publicly that his secretary pays a higher tax rate than he does and that the tax rates are a debacle. Sorry, Mordecai, I'm sure you'll eviscerate me on this one...but there's my opinion. Feel free to refute it.

Now that I vented one of my BIG pet peeves, it is, also in my opinion, a positive if people are given an incentive to use less energy. The only way this country will progress in the energy arena is if they are either 1) forced; or 2) enticed. The tax credit for energy-efficient home improvement is an enticement, and a good one at that.

I buy new windows direct form the manufacturer because times are tough and money talks. I offer cash for a deep discount and an invoice that shows the original resale price. The distributor gets cut out.

I don't hire an installer, I go to the local missions and hire two paperless persons for $40 a day and the windows get installed for $80 plus my time so the local installer and his workers get to do without the work.

So you just took money out of the distributor and the installer's bank accounts, reducing their ability to employ people and stay in business. What's good for you personally may not be good for the economy. I've had a contractor working different jobs around my house since July 2008. Yes, I may pay somewhat more (though I've gotten great prices—and even free work because of the contractor's appreciation—due to the construction bust), but I'm helping this company and their subcontractors stay in business and keeping the money moving.

3 votes

#22 - Thu May 7, 2009 7:30 PM EDT

So you just took money out of the distributor and the installer's bank accounts, reducing their ability to employ people and stay in business.

He took it did he? Maybe he should be arrested - steeling money from people that way ... why you would think the money was his or something. That he worked hard, earned it, saved it, bought his own windows with his own money. The nerve. o.0 Did you really mean to say that in that manner? I am truly curious.

4 votes

#22.1 - Fri May 8, 2009 8:39 AM EDT

VisionCoast ... Mordecai didn't do anything but make a good business decision. Can't fault him for that!

However, it might be a good idea to get on-board and take a hard look at what our government is doing under the guise of stimulating the economy and helping put America back to work!

Yes, we want manufacturing to increase ie: make the windows. But, we want the production to increase to put people back to work. This requires $$$ to stimulate the manufacturer to hire more, who then sells to home depot, who needs more people to sell the product, which requires more people to work on home improvements, which is not being done if the incentives cut too deep.

So who made out in the deal? Both the manufacturer and Mordecai not the neighbor who needs a job. Not the economy. Remember the $5,000 windows after a $1500 discount and a $1500 tax credit were bought for $2,000. This was better than a 1/2 price sale!

Like I said, can't blame Mordecai for making a good business decision. Because it came on what you perceive as the backs of the average American citizen so to speak is not his fault. Look towards our government incentives if you are looking to blame.

#22.2 - Fri May 8, 2009 10:44 AM EDT

I think he was only being facetious. o.0 .. I think. I hope.

2 votes

#22.3 - Fri May 8, 2009 12:04 PM EDT

Unicorn wrote:

He took it did he? Maybe he should be arrested - steeling money from people that way ... why you would think the money was his or something. That he worked hard, earned it, saved it, bought his own windows with his own money. The nerve. o.0 Did you really mean to say that in that manner? I am truly curious.

Unicorn, you're overreacting.

The whole premise of this discussion is that the government's tax credit is bad policy because it's a forfeiture of money at a time when unemployment is high, correct? At least that's how I understood this conversation. If I missed the point, please feel free to correct me.

My meaning is this: Cutting out the distributor and the retailer and the installer does not put money back into the economy, does it? I'm not saying Mordecai is not entitled to make whatever deals he can. Of course he is. That's how free enterprise works. I'm saying that in the interest of helping the economy, I think it's more beneficial as a whole to help keep businesses in business if one can afford to do so.

Only a fool wouldn't recognize the personal financial savvy of taking advantage of the economic downturn (which is what Mordecai described) to get the best deal you can, to drive the price down, to deny business opportunities because one can circumvent the established system when the economy is in the tank. Sure, that's financially good for the individual—but is it good for the economy as a whole? I don't think so.

So, getting back to the core conversation... If the government is at fault to encourage people to install energy-efficient windows by giving a tax credit when it is least affordable, is not the individual who works the system to benefit himself at the expense of business essentially doing the same thing?

I'm not blaming Mordecai. I'm looking at this from a different angle. Be the distributor. Be the retailer. Be the installer. Look at it from that point of view. Maybe you'll see what I see, or maybe not.

2 votes

#22.4 - Fri May 8, 2009 1:08 PM EDT

Arizona,

I believe you've contradicted yourself.

Yes, we want manufacturing to increase ie: make the windows. But, we want the production to increase to put people back to work. This requires $$$ to stimulate the manufacturer to hire more, who then sells to home depot, who needs more people to sell the product, which requires more people to work on home improvements, which is not being done if the incentives cut too deep.

Mordecai's deal didn't involve Home Depot, remember? He bought directly from the manufacturer. Yes, we need to create jobs. How does this do that? Why is this all the responsibility of the government? Don't we as individuals have the ability to have some impact on the economy as well?

So who made out in the deal? Both the manufacturer and Mordecai not the neighbor who needs a job. Not the economy. Remember the $5,000 windows after a $1500 discount and a $1500 tax credit were bought for $2,000. This was better than a 1/2 price sale!

You're right, "the neighbor who needs a job" will not benefit from these types of arrangements. That was my point: When you cut out the distributor, the retailer and the installer, you're benefitting only yourself. With the economy in the dumper, those who can afford to keep money moving through established businesses is helping the economy by putting some money into businesses, which then gets passed along to their employees.

There is another aspect to this that no one has mentioned. Manufacturers are loathe to sell to the public. They sell to distributors who then distribute to retailers because it gives the manufacturer a much larger market share and keeps the manufacturer out of the advertising and sales end of the business. This way the manufacturer can focus on what it does best: manufacture. It also opens business opportunities for distributors and retailers.

2 votes

#22.5 - Fri May 8, 2009 1:17 PM EDT

I will take that as a - you were not being facetious. I believe in capitalism, you believe in some sort of socialism. I feel it is only intelligent and right to make the best deal you can. I don't believe that a person has to pay the most he can so that some other person gets a break. You seem to believe that there is a moral imperative for someone to pay more to enable others to get a piece of your money. I don't get you, you don't get me. I am sorry about that. :) hugz Give it a few more years, you won't be touchy about the word socialism and I will be the one who is weird cuz I still believe in that old antiquated capitalism. Heck maybe we will even be fellow farm workers on the government plot to enable us to eat together that night on an old wire spool by the bridge. Might be nice, river front table and all. Nice bon fire.. wait no those are outlawed... nice.. well .. hopefully it is not cold there!! :)

4 votes

#22.6 - Fri May 8, 2009 1:23 PM EDT

VisionCoast ... so we are in agreement. Mordecai's original question was, "Does this make sense to anyone as a government policy?"

In my opinion, no it does not if the ultimate goal is to stimulate the economy and put people back to work. The 15% the manufacturer offered would have made Mordecai happy, but a 60% discount made him happier, as it should. However, this is not what he is getting at.

Think about it, where is the 15% tax discount coming from but from the American taxpayer! The money could be put to better use, don't you agree?

2 votes

#22.7 - Fri May 8, 2009 3:04 PM EDT

Unicorn wrote:

I will take that as a - you were not being facetious. I believe in capitalism, you believe in some sort of socialism. I feel it is only intelligent and right to make the best deal you can.

At the expense of what is good for your country as a whole? And why do you presumptuously conclude that I believe in socialism? Because I don't expect the government to single-handedly fix the economy, that I do my part in keeping the money moving? That's actually anti-socialist. Nobody made my choices for me.

The people I have employed have expressed genuine appreciation for the work, they have done an excellent job on every task they undertook, the contractor gave me hours and hours of free work as a show of his gratitude. How is that not intelligent?

I don't believe that a person has to pay the most he can so that some other person gets a break. You seem to believe that there is a moral imperative for someone to pay more to enable others to get a piece of your money.

I got great prices because construction has gone bust. I got three estimates before I chose a contractor. I negotiated hard and won. Trust me, I'm not stupid and I don't wish to be parted with my money needlessly. However, I do believe there is a moral imperative for those who can help to do so. I care about more than just myself and my own bank account. I care about this country, and if I can do something good for my country while getting a great deal for myself, why not?

Why do we expect the government to do it all? And then complain because we don't like what it does. You're empowered to take action. Use it. That's my viewpoint.

3 votes

#22.8 - Fri May 8, 2009 3:24 PM EDT

Arizona wrote:

Think about it, where is the 15% tax discount coming from but from the American taxpayer! The money could be put to better use, don't you agree?

There's a ton of money coming from taxpayers going in a million directions to help put this economy back on its feet. If so few people are able to afford energy-efficient windows (the argument made against this tax credit in comments above), the 15 percent tax credit won't amount to a peehole in the snow, will it? And, if you disagree with the credit, don't claim it. It's that simple. And, I guarantee you, those who will complain about the credit will claim it come tax time.

2 votes

#22.9 - Fri May 8, 2009 3:28 PM EDT

Unicorn,

I don't usually follow up a comment with a forgotten point, but this one is relevant.

You wrote;

I believe in capitalism...

Hiring a contractor is capitalism.

2 votes

#22.10 - Fri May 8, 2009 3:48 PM EDT

[grin] Yes it is, and I understand your point of view. You are very articulate. :) How on earth did we get so off topic. hehe Good thing Mordecai is busy or he would delete us all.

2 votes

#22.11 - Fri May 8, 2009 4:06 PM EDT

http://www.thirty-thousand.org/

In the negative of #17?? If there is a negative ...??? Are you asking my to argue with myself?

Oh, come on...that'd be fun, wouldn't it? Everybody's so serious these days...

3 votes

#23 - Thu May 7, 2009 7:31 PM EDT

EllieP

Here's an interesting idea for improving representation in the House. I'm linking to it in five articles. Forgive me if you see them all. I'm not spamming, not involved with the group. But, I do feel it applies to these threads:

4 votes

#24 - Fri May 8, 2009 9:34 AM EDT

Note that the last increase in representation occurred after the 1910 census when the total number of congressional districts was increased to 435. It has remained that size ever since (except for a four-year period when it was temporarily increased to 437 after the admission of Alaska and Hawaii).

Very good link Ellie. Well applies to a lot of non-sense in our current Governance.

3 votes

#24.1 - Fri May 8, 2009 9:44 AM EDT