Wednesday, December 9, 2015
- See more at: http://www.moaa.org/Content/Publications-and-Media/Features-and-Columns/Tech-Tactics/How-to-Prolong-the-Battery-Power-of-Your-Smart-Devices.aspx#sthash.c2YqR4yU.dpuf
Tuesday, October 20, 2015
Sunday, June 21, 2015
Sunday, April 5, 2015
Dwight D Eisenhower was the first president who had to deal with illegal immigration. A study in Texas found that in areas where there were lots of illegals, the pay was half of what fruit and vegetable pickers received in the rest of the state. He knew that as long as they were willing to take less money farmers would continue to use them in greater numbers. Since he was the president of the United States and not Mexico, he took firm and immediate action.
The first thing he did was to seal the border. It is interesting to note he was able to do it with only 1,075 border patrol agents. That’s less than 10% of what we have today. I realize that technology has evolved, but it evolved for both sides. The operation is still well known for it’s efficiency throughout the Border Control agency.
Now, he had to face the 3 million illegals that were in the country. Never was amnesty a possibility. No one felt white guilt and no one accused Eisenhower of being a racist and even if they would have, Eisenhower wouldn’t care. He fought and defeated nazis once and he knew he could do it again. . Eisenhower saw only one solution. Send them back to Mexico and other countries. Eisenhower was also aware that farmers making huge profits by using illegal labor had the kind of money to buy politicians (Comcast, Microsoft and Google?) They were loathe to give up their profits. Eisenhower did not pander to the farmers for huge campaign contributions:
Top Obama Contributors in 2012
|US Dept of State||$417,629|
|Sidley Austin LLP||$400,883|
|Walt Disney Co||$369,598|
|University of Chicago||$357,185|
|University of Michigan||$339,806|
|US Dept of Justice||$334,659|
|US Dept of Health & Human Services||$309,956|
Ike appointed a former West Point classmate and soldier, Joseph “Jumping Joe” Swing to head the INS. Lyndon Johnson and Pat McCarran, democrat senators were for open borders and they had allies in strategic offices in the INS. Swing lived up to his name and jumped right out of the chute and he transferred all of Johnson’s cronies away from the border and into jobs where they couldn’t influence policy.
Then in June of 1954, the INS began project “Operation Wetback.” In the first two months of the project, they gathered up 50,000 illegal immigrants during raids on farms known to use illegals. And that was only in Arizona and California. And better yet, it is estimated that 488,000 illegals fearing arrest left the country. They then expanded the operation and by September 80,000 illegals were arrested in Texas and another 500,000 fled the country. Problem solved.
And Eisenhower didn’t drop them off at the border. He sent them 500 miles south of the US Mexican border. They were sent on ships that made the trip miserable and discouraged illegals returning to the United States.
Today, the liberal narrative is that it’s impossible to send all of the illegals home. They are wrong. In fact, it’s so simple I am surprised no one has suggested it before. If a landlord rents an apartment to illegal aliens or if employers hire illegals and are caught they are fined. DO AWAY WITH THE FINES. They don’t work and the consumer ends up paying the fines anyway.
Let’s do this. If a landlord rents an apartment or an employer hires an illegal alien, instead of fines let them serve one year in prison….per illegal. Also, you need to remove judicial discretion. The sentence must be mandatory.
How many would have to be sentenced before all employers decide it’s not worth it to do business with illegal aliens? My guess is very few. While you are working on that, make sure that illegals are not receiving welfare, Social Security, HEAP, HUD, Food stamps and Obamaphones. Without jobs, a place to live or government freebies, there would be no sense in staying.
There is just one step left. No appeals of deportation. If you are illegal, you leave. If you feel you deserve to be here, you can always go to the US embassy in your home country and apply like the law abiding do.
That is a real immigration fix and a permanent one too.
Thursday, January 22, 2015
Can a 5-question test predict how wealthy you will become?
Provided by Steven E Potts
In the future, will you become wealthier or poorer? Who knows, right? It seems like you would need a crystal ball to really answer that question given life’s up and downs. What if the answer is right in front of you? What if you can determine it from your present financial behaviors?
Two economists present a brief questionnaire – and an audacious claim. Last month, the Center for Household Financial Stability at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis published an article titled “Five Simple Questions That Reveal Your Financial Health and Wealth.” The authors, William Emmons and Bryan Noeth, argue that your answers to these questions can effectively predict your financial future.1,2
Q: Did you save any money last year?
Q: Did you miss any loan or mortgage payments in the past year?
Q: Did you have a balance on your credit card after the last payment was due?
Q: Do liquid assets make up at least 10% of the value of your total assets?
Q: Is your total debt service (i.e., the cash you devote each month to paying principal and interest) less than 40% of your income?1
The Federal Reserve has actually asked these questions of consumers for decades as part of its Survey of Consumer Finances. Studying the eight SCFs conducted from 1992-2013, Emmons and Noeth looked at the answers respondents provided to these questions and the level of personal wealth they reported. Their assertion: “In summary, good financial health – as measured by our simple five-question scorecard – is highly correlated with the accumulation of wealth.”2
As part of their research, Emmons and Noeth scored the answers. A financially positive answer to a question was assigned 1 point; a financially negative answer, 0 points.2
The average total score (across more than 38,000 households) was 3.01. The highest average score to a question was 0.91 (the one about debt load being less than 40% of income) and the lowest average score to a question was 0.27 (the one about the percentage of liquid assets among total assets).2
There was a surprising conclusion. The authors found that education was no reliable indicator of personal wealth. When it came to being rich or poor, well-educated individuals had no leg up on lesser-educated individuals.2
What’s your score? If you are able to successively answer the above questions with “yes,” “no,” “no,” “yes” and “yes”, your household is probably in pretty good financial shape – or better. In simple terms, those answers would get you a 5.0.
Here’s the bottom line. If you save money consistently and maintain a good cash position, if you make loan and mortgage payments on time and pay off 100% of your credit card debt each billing cycle, if you avoid debts that put a strain on your budget ... congratulations. You are doing the right things on behalf of your financial life and promoting your chances to build wealth.
If you’d like to see the precise methodology the researchers used and their definition of a “positive” and “negative” answer for each question, you can go online and download Issue 10 of the St. Louis Fed publication In the Balance (which contains the article and the scorecard) at stlouisfed.org/publications/itb/.
Steven E Potts may be reached at (714) 458.3221 or email@example.com.
This material was prepared by Marketing Pro, Inc., and does not necessarily represent the views of the presenting party, nor their affiliates. This information has been derived from sources believed to be accurate. Please note - investing involves risk, and past performance is no guarantee of future results. The publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting or other professional services. If assistance is needed, the reader is advised to engage the services of a competent professional. This information should not be construed as investment, tax or legal advice and may not be relied on for the purpose of avoiding any Federal tax penalty. This is neither a solicitation nor recommendation to purchase or sell any investment or insurance product or service, and should not be relied upon as such. All indices are unmanaged and are not illustrative of any particular investment.
1 - stlouisfed.org/newsroom/displayNews.cfm?article=2390 [12/15/14]
2 - stlouisfed.org/publications/pub_assets/pdf/2014/In_the_Balance_issue_10.pdf/ [12/14]