I have a theory I like to call the Turnip Truck Theory. It goes something like this; We're all riding on the back of a turnip truck. Some are riding on the left side and some are riding on the right side, but most are riding in the middle. Now the ones on the left who sit far out on the left side are dangling their feet off the truck. They can smell the fresh breeze as we travel along. Same for the ones on the far right. The problem is that there's an aroma in the air that's something of an aphrodisiac. When these good folks get a whiff of that aroma, they get to having strange thoughts. Like they think they are the only ones who have the right idea of how to run things. Of course, the left and the right are opposite, as you can imagine. Now, back to those of us in the middle. We're in the majority. We also seem to have the right idea of how to run things. But we're not smelling that outside aroma like the left and right. We're smelling the sweaty bodies of all the rest of the folks riding on the back of that turnip truck. We smell the hard work these folks do, the fears they have, the joys they know. In short, we see what's happening day by day and we can still relate. That's something the far left and far right can't do. They can't relate because all they can do is smell that aphrodisiac. Now, if you're a candidate for political office and you're from the far left or right, you're never going to be able to help your fellow Americans because you can't relate. If you're riding in the middle but think you need to appease the far right or left, you're in even worse trouble, because you can't appease all of them, ever. What you need to do, is ride in the middle of that truck to get a good nose-full of what life is really like. Then don't move from that spot, even after you're elected. Oh. By the way. Those folks on the far left and right I've been mentioning? When the truck hits a bump. And it will always hit a bump from time to time, well, they tend to fall off the truck, altogether.

Wall Street And Cash Cows.

Wall Street has cut way back on donations to Democratic campaigns. Well, not much surprise there. And they're giving more to Republican campaigns. Not much surprise there either. I mean, Wall Street is mad at Democrats for leading the charge to re-regulate Wall Street and add new regulation to the extremely profitable Derivatives markets, etc. Republicans are pushing back against the idea of too much regulation on Banks. That's OK to some extent, but there's danger in doing that. Sure, it helps bring in more campaign donations, but if they're too successful, the Democrats are likely to soften their stand on regulation so they can get in on the good side of this cash cow. The thing is, we need some strong regulation of Wall Street and the Banking industry. Why, you ask? Because they don't understand that they are mostly responsible for the Great Recession we're in. I say we, but I don't mean to include Wall Street or the banks. They're doing great. With profits way up, they aren't feeling any discomfort. They're not laid off and on unemployment. When they were called to testify before Congress, they felt no fault on their part for the Recession. To them it was just one of those "bumps in the road" that "happen from time to time". So, let's hope the Republicans don't get to liking Wall Street contributions too much and let's hope the Democrats don't get too jealous and start eyeing up all that money. Because it's you and me that will pay in the end. Just like always.

It's Called Jobs Creation.

Is it time to take back some of the jobs we've lost to the likes of China? I mean, here's a country that uses it's currency as a tool for increasing it's industrial base and it's economy at the expense of America and the rest of the world. At the same time, it seems to not care if it's industry uses inferior and, at times, toxic materials to manufacture goods they send to America and elsewhere. Some of these industries are ones we lost to china. Or just gave up on and let them go. We have American corporations who send these jobs and technology to China to save a buck, then get subsidies and tax breaks from our own government. Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not against subsidies and tax breaks for American companies. I think our government should be helping our industrial base, what little is left of it. But I am against rewarding companies for pulling jobs out of the country. That's just plain obscene. Instead, let's start rewarding companies for bringing jobs back as long as they keep them here. Now I know, I know, that might run afoul of international law or international good manners. The thing is, China doesn't worry too much about international good manners. It worries about how to get more jobs away from America. So either we need to get tough with China and I mean tough, not just whisper "please, thank you, may I" tough, I mean a good swift kick in the pocketbook, tough. Use the fact that they've sent us so many toxic and harmful products that we put a moratorium on all shipments from China while we do a study. Studies are great tools. They take way too much time and come to no real conclusions, so that another more in depth study is needed by a blue ribbon panel. Heck, we could draw it out for a decade if we wanted. Time enough to rebuild our industrial base. That way we'd be buying inferior products from ourselves. Well at least the jobs would come home.

Oil Companies Are Better Treated Then Non-Profits.

Did you know that the oil industry receives more tax breaks than any other industry in the country? Like a seventy percent write-off for the rent BP paid for the rent of the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig and all the other oil companies get the same tax benefit. Or the fact that many of the smaller companies have a larger income after taxes, then before taxes. Say what? It means that if they had a net income before taxes of ten million, they just might have eleven million dollars after taxes. Now with those kinds of deals, pretty much any company could make record profits. In fact, I'd be willing to come out of retirement and force myself to start a company, if the government would treat me that well. Wouldn't you? I mean if I could make ten bucks, but could count on a cool million, I'd go back to work, wouldn't you? The problem isn't that America is giving really good tax breaks to an industry to help our economy and create jobs and all that. The problem is that it picked the wrong industry to prop up. I mean, come on. Does anybody think the oil industry would flounder without some of those tax breaks? How come we're supporting an industry that provides a product we would like to phase out, but refuse to support, to any real degree, an industry to replace it? Does that make sense to you? Well, let me tell you, it makes sense to Congress. Our wise leaders think it's the right thing to do. That is to say, they think that giving great big tax breaks to the oil industry is a good thing and apparently think giving those kinds of deals to emerging alternative energy companies is a bad thing, I guess. Maybe because they get big bucks from the oil companies to help their reelection campaigns and don't get bug bucks from these new and emerging companies. Most non-profits would love to be treated as well as BP when tax time comes around. If you don't grease the pan, you don't get the bread to rise. Just remember, it takes lots of money to buy elections.

The Good People Of Youpickum.

Let me tell you a tale of a state called Youpickum. In our story, the good citizens of Youpickum are honest, hard working people who pay their bills, want good services from their government and don't like high taxes. They elect politicians who promise to give better than just good services and promise to keep taxes low. In fact the ones who get elected are the ones who guarantee not to raise taxes on anyone, except, maybe illegal aliens. So, how do you give more and better services without paying for them? Why, the American way. You borrow the money. So, true to their promises, these elected officials of Youpickum borrow money to pay for these more and better services and don't raise taxes. We won't mention the occasional hand in the til funny business. But by borrowing the money, they have to pay interest, which raises the costs, which means next time they'll have to borrow a little more, which means they'll have to pay a little more interest and so on and so on. Well, all goes well until there comes a big bad recession. Suddenly the elected officials have a lot less income from the meager taxes they charge because more people are out of work. Now, since they can't raise taxes, and they don't want to lay off people, although they will eventually be forced to do it, they just stop paying the state's bills. Which means more people loose their jobs, which means less income for the state of Youpickum to pay it's bills, which means it'll stop paying bills, which means it's ratings drop, which means it'll have to pay higher interest rates, which means less money to pay more of it's bills. So, what's the moral of the story about the state of Youpickum? Well, sometimes when times are hard, states have to increase taxes, unless they kept pace with rising costs, by raising taxes. See it's easier for the good folks of Youpickum to pay a little higher taxes during good times, then to loose everything in bad times. But then, the good people of Youpickum didn't know that. But you do.

"Nerve" in the Dictionary; Goldman Sacks.

Do ya know what the definition of NERVE is ? It's Goldman Sacks. Goldman Sacks was part of the Derivatives market that very nearly destroyed our economy and helped to plunge us into the deepest Recession on record. As you remember, things got so bad that the government had to step in and bail out a number of banks and investment firms to save the economy from completely failing. Goldman Sacks got a piece of that pie. Then they went after a piece of an even bigger pie. The bailout of A.I.G. That's the outfit that was insuring the bets of companies like Goldman Sacks. Bets like the one that the housing market would collapse, which it did. But the thing is, they were selling bundles of bad mortgages they called Derivatives. Mortgages that were almost certain to default, which would help to cause the bursting of the bubble. Well, Goldman demanded that A.I.G. ( think American Taxpayer) pay them from the bailout money it got. But those insurance policies were selling for about 48 cents on the dollar. That is, 48 cents for other people, but not for Goldman. They wanted and got full price. So, lets see if I can get this right. Goldman bundled toxic mortgages and sold them. They bet they would default by insuring them with A.I.G., they defaulted, they (Goldman) got bailed out, they got paid full price by A.I.G. with bailout money and now they don't understand why we don't love them for screwing us. Well, I for one don't blame them. After all, money from the government didn't come out of their pockets. They're a major corporation. They probably don't pay taxes, or if they do, they pay only a small amount. So, I guess if the money doesn't come out of your pocket, it's found money, right? Fair game, right? See. I told you that's nerve.

Here's A Way For Nobody To Win.

OK, here's an example of how government, at it's finest, works. The Obama administration is giving help to people who install energy saving devises like solar panels and so on. They get a loan that they pay back from their taxes by getting reduced property taxes. What's not to like about that? Well, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac the two quasi-governmental mortgage giants that handle nearly all mortgages in the country, have decided they may not accept mortgages that have used the energy saving program. See? One hand of the government giveth and the other hand taketh away. Blessed be the hands of the government. Now, you'd think that Fannie and Freddie would like people who show the good sense to try to find ways to reduce the costs of energy for their homes. You'd think that, but you'd be wrong. So, why do Fannie and Freddie dislike such thrifty people? Maybe they're afraid these people will figure out a way not to need Fannie and Freddie. Maybe, but not too likely. So what's the thinking at Fannieville and Freddietown? Well, see, the thing is, if these thrifty folks default and lose their homes to bankruptcy, the taxes will have to be paid first before Fannie and Freddie get anything. So people who are smart enough to think ahead and take advantage of an opportunity to save money, are considered more of a risk to Fannie and Freddie then people who just jump in and don't care about saving on heat or hot water or so on or so forth. Does any of this make sense to you? Me neither. That's government at it's best. Just imagine what government at it's worst must be like. I mean we could be fighting two wars we aren't paying for, find ourselves in a severe recession, have a devastating oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico that we can't stop, have a Supreme Court that has given the electoral process to Corporate America, a Congress that is frozen by partisan politics and a quarter of a world full of potential terrorists because we can't come up with a way to stop buying oil, and therefore can't get out of their countries. Do you suppose we're living with that worst government or are we just headed in that direction and this last year was just a short reprieve?