Vote Intro

 When it comes to the economy, there are 2 kinds of people:

    -  Producers of wealth

    -  Distributors of wealth

Producers of wealth are people who work, are creative, find solutions to problems, and add to the wealth of the country.  These people tend to be conservative in nature with a high belief in individual rights, limited government, and low taxes.  On the downside, they do not believe in the value of group rights, the value of the government to govern, and the value of taxes to support infrastructure, clean air and water, and the need to provide a level playing field for all companies both domestic and international.

Distributors of wealth are people who believe that the benefits and rewards of society should be divided equally by all.  These people tend to be liberal and may be individuals of great wealth who believe they should return some of their good fortune to the less fortunate.  These people are also the physically and/or mentally challenged and the economic unfortunates brought up though the welfare system.

 (*) The liberal leadership often fails to understand that without the producers of wealth, there would be less wealth to distribute.  The producers of wealth fail to understand that unless there is some distribution of wealth, America may end up like France during the rein of Maria Antoinette who ultimately faced the guillotine (social unrest) or an oligarchy like Russia is today.  The concern I have is that in order for America to succeed, there must be a balance between production and distribution.  Unfortunately, there seem to be few Americans who understand this principle, especially as each party becomes more politically charged. 

Side note: I have no clue what "Republicans" stand for, especially since the early 1980's.  They definitely aren't conservative and their values tend to based around their own self certitude; not really a principle.    

Trying to categorize one's self  in today's political environment is becoming increasingly difficult.  I don't think Democrats understand how the US economy works and the Republicans have done a good job of pillaging the economy.  I suspect most people no longer fit into the Democrat of Republican box. I have tried to re-categorize in the table below.

    -  Economic Conservative

    -  Social Liberal

    -  Consumer progressive

We all have an idea of what an economic conservative and social liberal stands for, but I would like to add a category called consumer progressive. This last category would also include protecting the average American from being exploited by business and bureaucratic government agencies.  For example, Congress recently passed a bankruptcy bill that makes it virtually impossible for an individual to shed over burdening credit card debt under any circumstance.  The surprise is that this bill was authored by a Democrat, Senator Biden.  Unbelievable.

Capitalism is one of the most misunderstood concepts in America today.  It is most commonly associated with what a large percentage of Americans believe to be "monopolistic" oriented corporations.  Unfortunately, large corporations have not helped their own cause.

Capitalism is also for people.  Capitalism also applies to any American who has an idea, service, or product and wants to enter the commercial marketplace. 

Where I have a problem with the capitalistic concept is that many Americans treat corporations as having more rights than Americans individuals. Since when did the rights of corporations supercede the rights of individuals?  For example, when you accept the terms and conditions of just about any credit card company you give up your right to sue by being forced into arbitration.  This is unacceptable.  No one should ever have to give up a right to a corporation.

 The purpose of the stock market is capital formation to finance the capital markets. When hedge funds short equities, this is not capital formation but capital destruction which can have a devastating affect on companies and individual's retirement savings plans.

During mid 2008, one investment house with 12 million shares of stock experienced shot positions of over 15 million shares.  This is ridiculous.

Typical bank leverage is 12:1 five investment firms received permission from the SEC to leverage 40 times.  During mid month, they leveraged 60 times just as long as they were at 40 times at the end of the month when they needed to report.

The Republican party took a beating in the 2008 elections.  But why?  While it may appear to be their leaning towards the evangelical right, the real reason (IMOP) is PERFORMANCE.  First with Terri Schiavo, then Katrina, and ultimately by a botched up war in Iraq, decisions made by members of the Republican have shown a high degree of incompetence.. 

While small government is an admirable conservative goal, Americans have the right to expect a certain minimum level of performance from their elected representatives. 

How can some politicians be so wrong for so long and still maintain their same old opinion?

Substance:  the ability to understand there is a problem, identify the problem, develop a solution for the problem, and implement the solution. 

As I listen to political debates and comments by politicians, I try to categorize their comments in 3 sections:

        1.  Facts - What are the real facts in/supporting  the comment.

                  (Facts are repeatable and verifiable, just as in the scientific method.)

                  (Often times, it's the interpretation of the facts that is subject to argument.)

                         Resource:  FactCheck.org

        2.  Opinions - Most of what I hear are opinions. 

                  (Opinions should be based on facts, and not just "cherry picked" facts.)

        3.  Principles - This is the base foundations of a politicians beliefs. 

                  (Principles can be developed from experience or from written dogma.)  

Facts should be the basis for a person's opinions and ultimately their principles.  Unfortunately, many persons start with principles first and then work backwards to opinions and ultimately a "rearrangement" of the facts.  At this point, the facts are so distorted, they are no long facts.

It's critical to separate the opinions from the facts because the facts can be substantiated and the options are often based up by incorrect logic and ignorance.  Principles are most often confused with facts especially the more extreme the political view.