E-Mail to Congress:
I partially watched Bulls & Bears on Fox News this Saturday morning.
One member of the group stated that the difficulty with the economy is that industry is not investing for creation of new jobs, because it does not have a clear picture of the business environment. This is absolutely incorrect.
"Industry" is made up of individuals who are members of company Boards of Directors, Administrations, and stockholders both large and small, and private business owners. These individuals already have a clear picture of the business environment. It is poor, as determined by government policy. This is not the time for investment by large companies and small business owners.
The Federal Administration has already created an anti-business environment. It has done this by planning to increase corporate and personal income taxes, increasing restrictive regulations through banking and healthcare, confiscating various industry segments such as automotive through bailout procedures and health insurance companies by pressing for a public option, and continuing to increase the size of government through employment.. In addition, there have been several pro-union developments which have been contrary to public interest.
Congress has also been cooperative in these endeavors by supplying funds to the gross disadvantage of extreme public debt.
Individuals with money tend to invest in a favorable economic climate, as they see a potential return for their investments. These are the same individuals referred to above. They don't see it in the present environment, and they are sitting tight. If government changes its policy of antibusiness by reducing taxes, reducing regulations, etc., we may see some positive business action leading to higher employment and general economic growth.
This is unlikely to happen, because the Administration and Congress are loaded with socialists with unrealistic expectations for their program, which history shows will take us down the road to economic ruin. It also may not happen because the Administration and Congress are making every effort to load the voting public with giveaway programs to existing citizens and the entrance of new Democratic (Socialist) voters through fraud and deceit involving illegal immigrants.
Saturday, July 31, 2010
Saturday, July 10, 2010
More Fleecing of American Taxpayers
E-Mail to Congress:
Dow Chemical & Townsend Kokum have formed a joint venture to manufacture large batteries for use by cars and trucks in electrical propulsion
The Federal Government has put in 160 million American taxpayer dollars. The Michigan state government has also put in 160 million Michigan taxpayer dollars, through tax incentives. Total taxpayer funds are $320 million.
The plant will employ 320 persons. If we consider this is a creation of new jobs, each job creation will cost the American public $1 million. We can amortize that cost over 20 years at $50,000 per year.
If we assume that all 320 employees will be well-paid at $50,000 per year, including benefits, and adding the amortization, each active employee will cost the company $100,000 per year, of which half will be paid by taxpayers.
A senior analyst at Lux Research says that unless there is a real spike in gasoline prices, there will be an insufficient market to use all the produced batteries. This shows again that governmental authorities always move free easy with American taxpayer money.
However, the likelihood is that the federal government can and will increase gasoline prices to force conversion to electrical vehicles. This is being done by restrictions on oil drilling and hopeful passage of the Boogie Man tax, which some call Cap & Trade (carbon dioxide emissions). The Boogie Man tax will add large amounts of tax revenue to government coffers. It will not be recognized that it is only another form of American taxpayer fleecing.
Adding insult to injury, batteries require electricity, which is now produced primarily by coal-burning power plants, emitting carbon dioxide. The net result is that the energy source will be taxed to promote a project for which there is no need. What difference does it make whether carbon dioxide comes from the tailpipes of automotive vehicles or from the chimneys of coal-burning electric plants?
Dow Chemical & Townsend Kokum have formed a joint venture to manufacture large batteries for use by cars and trucks in electrical propulsion
The Federal Government has put in 160 million American taxpayer dollars. The Michigan state government has also put in 160 million Michigan taxpayer dollars, through tax incentives. Total taxpayer funds are $320 million.
The plant will employ 320 persons. If we consider this is a creation of new jobs, each job creation will cost the American public $1 million. We can amortize that cost over 20 years at $50,000 per year.
If we assume that all 320 employees will be well-paid at $50,000 per year, including benefits, and adding the amortization, each active employee will cost the company $100,000 per year, of which half will be paid by taxpayers.
A senior analyst at Lux Research says that unless there is a real spike in gasoline prices, there will be an insufficient market to use all the produced batteries. This shows again that governmental authorities always move free easy with American taxpayer money.
However, the likelihood is that the federal government can and will increase gasoline prices to force conversion to electrical vehicles. This is being done by restrictions on oil drilling and hopeful passage of the Boogie Man tax, which some call Cap & Trade (carbon dioxide emissions). The Boogie Man tax will add large amounts of tax revenue to government coffers. It will not be recognized that it is only another form of American taxpayer fleecing.
Adding insult to injury, batteries require electricity, which is now produced primarily by coal-burning power plants, emitting carbon dioxide. The net result is that the energy source will be taxed to promote a project for which there is no need. What difference does it make whether carbon dioxide comes from the tailpipes of automotive vehicles or from the chimneys of coal-burning electric plants?
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Home Owners Should Not Now Sink More Capital into Their Homes
E-Mail to Congress:
EIN News says, "Regulators Push for Home Energy-Efficiency Program to Be Put on Hold. A program that encourages homeowners to take on debt to make their homes more energy efficient could damage the already fragile mortgage system and leave homeowners at risk, financial regulators said. (washingtonpost.com)"
Somebody in the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) has his head screwed on right. The key senior staff of the Agency consists of DeMarco, Cross, Dickerson, and Pollard. Kudos to all of them!
They saw that spending money on home energy improvements in a declining home price market, would be a bad investment for a home owner, and said so.
EIN News says, "Regulators Push for Home Energy-Efficiency Program to Be Put on Hold. A program that encourages homeowners to take on debt to make their homes more energy efficient could damage the already fragile mortgage system and leave homeowners at risk, financial regulators said. (washingtonpost.com)"
Somebody in the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) has his head screwed on right. The key senior staff of the Agency consists of DeMarco, Cross, Dickerson, and Pollard. Kudos to all of them!
They saw that spending money on home energy improvements in a declining home price market, would be a bad investment for a home owner, and said so.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
