Obama has made many residents of chicago furious when it was declared that he would be trying to get the Olympics to take place in Chicago, Illinois. Chicago is currently the city with the highest crime in the entire United States, and they are doing poorly in terms of money right now and our president wants chicago to spend 100 million dollars on the Olympics…because…it is his home town. A little selfish, right? Here is what the people of Chicago are saying:

I have a message to President Barack Obama: You have arguably more power than any other single man on this planet right now. So it may be a good time to stop thinking about how you can benefit the government, but rather the people.  Fortunately for the United States, Obama did not get his way and the Olympics will be hosted in Brazil. I wonder when it will occur to Obama that we cannot afford to keep spending like this…


Anyone who has ever watched a meeting in Washington on C-Span knows how it could easily be compared to that of a soap opera. Drama, drama, drama. They spend more time attacking each other than they do the actual ideas they are debating! Anyone who hasn’t watched C-Span and is interested in politics, I suggest you do so. It has the raw meetings, not bits and pieces played over and over in commentary clips from biased media. They are surprisingly interesting to watch, so before you pass that channel writing it off as ‘boring’, give it five minutes of your time.

In these meetings you will notice a lot of animosity. These state representitives do not just dislike each other, they hate each other. When Bush was president, many democrats were extremely immature just as many Republicans are immature about our current administration.

Hate has NEVER solved anything in a positive way. Republicans that make racist comments about Obama bring down the party. Someone who is racist is also shallow and ignorant. If you are racist, you are biased and your opinion is invalid.

Yelling out ‘you lie!’ during a meeting that is supposed to be civil and professional, is more than rude even if it is true. Yes, Mr. Republican Joe Wilson, I am speaking of you. Senator John McCain stated how disrespectful he thought the comment was, and I admire him for that because he was honest even though Joe wilson is a member of his own party. Do they need to be instructed to raise their hands as a child would in grade school?

If someone hates someone else for their opinion, they will never get anywhere. It is a difference of opinions that brings discussions to progression. To hear someones political opinion and disagree is one thing, but to attack their person for it is another. Try to think of someone you dislike, maybe you even hate them. When they express their opinion, do you listen as you would to someone you loved? Probably not, even if you don’t realize your subconcious is naturally going to back away from truly listening to that person with an open mind. And it is when people open their mind that things actually start to make sense.

Bottom Line: Don’t Hate.

Is the government really printing money to get us out of debt? The answer is yes. This is a question that is not much of a debate, because if you just look at other countries who have done this then you know what happens. This is a public post I found from someone named Carmela who is from Argentina:

“Well, I grew up in South America where our government in Argentina did this many times through my growing up years.  We had to live within our means no matter what but I thought that was just the way life was!  We stocked food, and always had cash and savings for a rainy day.  Our peso was pretty worthless.  I remember many times when the government came up with new currency so our bread wouldn’t cost a $1,000.”


Anyone who is aware of a situation where this has happened, or who has had history lessons knows the outcome of this ‘great idea’. It is very important to take a look at history before we make catastrophic decisions that affect others. I am by no means an economist, but I can quote one from the history news network:

Just how much money is the U.S. government printing to meet its debts? Steven Horwitz, professor at St. Lawrence University, and co-author of The Austrian Economists blog, explains that the amount of money printed in the past few months since the October economic crisis, has been absolutely unprecedented in U.S. history. “Since September, the ‘monetary base,’ which is the measure of currency plus bank reserves, has doubled from about $850 billion to $1.7 trillion, about $600 billion of which is in the form of bank reserves,” he says. When the Fed wants to raise money for the government it sells government bonds. The more bonds it sells the more money it raises. As long as there are buyers the government can raise as much money as it needs. If the buyers grow skittish the government can raise the yield on the bonds to make them more attractive. Most of the time the Treasury sells bonds either to private investors of governments like China. But it can also sell them to the Federal Reserve. When the Fed buys bonds it can pay for them simply by printing money.

If there is more of something, then it is worth less. Imagine you had thirty hungry people and thirty bowls of rice. You could sell each bowl of rice for whatever price you choose…lets say $2.00. But if you had fifteen bowls of rice and thirty hungry people, the rice would be worth $4.00…because there is less of it. So essentially by printing more money we are making it worth less.

I really don’t have much to say about that. The numbers and history books speak for themselves. So what DOES happen if someone tries to print more money to get out of debt? The answer is in one word: Inflation. We may quite possibly be about to see the highest inflation rate to ever hit the United States, and the money in your bank account may not be worth as much as it is now.


Sometimes in order to look at the bigger picture you need to step out of the picture entirely. It is very important to constantly consider the opposing point of view with an open mind. He who steps into the ocean with a blindfold may not be able to swim back to shore.

I have been reading the democratic point of view, and trying to understand why the administration thinks spending more money is going to get us out of a recession that was caused by irresponsibility and over spending. That is exactly what caused the recession in the first place. The housing market started to do poorly because people were given loans for homes that they couldn’t afford, and thus the credit card companies suffered. Democrats and Republicans alike agree that it was irresponsibility on both ends that pushed this recession over the edge.

I am seeing a lot of opinions blaming the lack of return to our thriving economy on Bush and his spending. That may very well be true, but in the first couple of months in office Obama had already spent more than Bush did in all of his eight years. So while to blame the recession on Bush’s spending may be an accurate accusation, why would you spend more on trying to fix it? Injecting a problem with the problem itself only works with vaccinations.

Bottom line: You can’t just spend more money to fix an issue caused by spending.

taxpayers2Americans, formerly classified into two main parties, are evolving away from tradition. Many recent polls have indicated that the independent party is now the nations largest party. If this trend continues, this means there could become three major parties.

Basically, the definition of a republican is someone who is fiscally conservative, and socially conservative.

The definition of a democrat is someone who is fiscally liberal, and socially liberal.

This is why democrats are classified as ‘liberals’ and republicans are classified as ‘conservatives’. Today’s generation has grown tired of these long-lived classifications and are choosing to become independent voters. Although the term means free from classifications, independent voters tend to possess certain qualities. The typical characteristics of an independent voter is a fiscal conservative, social liberal with libertarian tendencies. That basically means less taxes, and more freedom.

This is not just a movement, it is a revolution. The republican party began to dwindle during the presidency of Bush, just as the democratic party is shrinking under Obama’s administration. A new type of citizen is emerging, and freedom- something we had to fight for in the past- is once again an issue as history continues to repeat itself. People are beginning to understand that the government shouldn’t tell you how to live your life when it comes to social or fiscal issues. In fact, if you go back to the message our founding fathers were trying to get across, the only thing the American government is really supposed to do is ensure people are able to keep their freedoms.

When George Bush was in office, his controversial war in Iraq and lack of public speaking skills gave him a bad reputation. Many Republicans actually converted to democrat, although most that converted did so to the independent party. Now we are seeing the same pattern. The citizens of the United States don’t like where their tax dollars are going, and many democrats are switching to independent. The independent party is larger than ever, and it is the only party that allows you to make a decision based on a candidate and their ideals rather than the category they fit into. It has become a game of attacking the other party and nobody is getting anywhere, so people are branching off for freedom. And I’m joining them.

flagA good example of why we need to be stronger individuals in order to operate sufficiently as a community, would be a small child trying to put together a puzzle. The natural tendency for the parent is to intervene, and assist that child in putting together his puzzle. However, it is well known that it is better for the child if the parent allows him or her to put the puzzle together on their own. If the parent steps in, the child will never learn how to finish the puzzle independently.  This is a situation similar to that of the government and its people. We cannot operate optimally as a whole if we are not at our strongest as individuals.

I spend more time than I should debating politics both verbally and electronically, and I don’t spend a lot of time bothering to do anything about it. I have a feeling that I am not alone. I have a feeling that there are a lot of other people that feel compassionate about where their tax dollars are going, and people who have strong feelings and opinions on their country, that are also not doing anything about it. So I have decided to put my voice out there, hence this blog. If there isn’t anyone out there that agrees with me, at least my ideas will not become lost in thin air. At least I will have attempted to make a difference.

Before I get into our tax system, I would like to share some numbers. Most of us have read the ‘Bar stool Economics’ circulating through e-mails, but for those of you who haven’t: you can do so here, and I suggest you do. It puts the United States tax system into terms that even the most simple of people can understand. It IS our economy in a nutshell. Most of us have already established that taxes, well… suck. Some of us haven’t thought much about it but I want you to ask yourself this question: Are you satisfied with our internal revenue service, with the tax system of ‘America’? If your answer is yes, carry on. But if your answer is no, which I am guessing is the majority result here…then I have another question for you. What are YOU doing about it? Have you made any effort towards your beliefs? Because if you haven’t, myself and every other individual out there that isn’t happy with the IRS thinks you should at least try, for the sake of our country.

Right now our tax system is set up so that the percentage you are taxed increases as you make more money. Not just the number, but the percentage. Typically, the harder you work the more money you are going to make. In this situation while that may hold true, it also means the harder you work the more money they are going to take. What they take is spent on what they decide to spend it on. Whatever congress votes it should be spent on, even if you don’t agree. The funny part is, they spend your money before they even take it. What do you end up with in a situation like that? A recurring recession, consistently repeated throughout history.

Now take a step back and imagine this: a federal congress does not exist. That would save us some money right there, the money we spend to keep their pockets fat and their Hummers updated. How are the roads kept up? The schools improved? The streetlights kept on? When that bridge breaks, who will pass the bills through to fix it? Since a toll for everything is annoying among other things, that blows the ‘pay for only what you use’ idea out of the water. So I propose a new tax system. One made up of the people.

What if when you were filing your taxes, the IRS did not allocate the funds to where they are needed for the bills that were passed. What if you, as an American, had a right to choose where the money taken from you ended up? What if you had the freedom to choose where it was spent? I bet that is a bill congress would never pass.

What I propose is a simple check box list. Categories and sub categories. I would like to put $100 toward re-vamping the streetlights. The roads need work, so I will add $1000 for that. I want to put $2000 into redesigning the schools, since I have a child that goes to one. The rest of the money I can put toward the community reserve. Of course, this would never function well on a federal level, since different areas have different needs and opinions. So the governments would have to be stronger locally, and nearly eliminated federally. This would cater to each area, and there would not be constant battles from representatives in different areas with entirely different issues they need to work on. Not only would this give the citizen the freedom to choose where their money goes, they would also have the freedom to live in a state with a government that more suits their specific needs and goals. Anyone who has traveled the country understands just how different the states can be even though they all make up the same country.

Of course, those taxes would have an opt out option for the lazy or undecided. That would mean your taxes would be distributed where your state or local city decides they need it most. Those who opt out would get a tax discount, but they would not have the advantages of some of the perks that come with taxing. For example, they would not be eligible for state run public health care should they need it. But they would still have the right to choose. Also important, is that money would not be spent before it was taken. This would thus eliminate the cyclical recessions.

I can talk about the history and trends of the tax system all day, the benefits and the downfalls. All this really boils down to in the end, however, is freedom. Certain tax systems work for some and not for others. I am not proposing some outlandish idea to eliminate taxes completely. I am merely mentioning reducing them, and taking in effect the exact essence of our country…our freedom.