VOLuntarilyConservative

It was apparent to this observer from watching the debate earlier this week that the folks running against Herman Cain for the GOP nomination are relying on folks not being informed as to Cain's 9-9-9 tax plan. Their hope is that American voters remain confused as to the differences in state and federal taxes. Like Cain said in the debate, this is apples and oranges. Cain is trying to reform the federal tax program. Despite Mitt Romney's protestations, it wouldn't be legal for any sitting president to alter the way a state taxes its residents.

Cain explained a little more about his plan in Detroit earlier today. In the nearly 20 minute speech, Cain talks about incentives for capital gains by corporations and entrepreneurs, the deductions that businesses would have to work in "opportunity zones," how this activity would be an incentive for cities to work to help themselves, and other facets of the plan.



I am with Ann Coulter, who, as she stated last night on "Hannity," likes the plan more and more as Cain's political rivals keep attacking it.

Labels: 2012 Presidential Campaign, Economy, Herman Cain

It cost less for a barrel of oil yesterday than at any time in the past year. In fact, oil prices have dropped over 30% from its high earlier this year.

So why haven't the price of goods also seen a likewise decline? We have seen prices rise at retailers over the past couple of years under the guise of energy costs haven risen. Since energy prices are dropping, shouldn't the savings be passed along to the consumers?

Labels: Economy, Energy, Oil

Thanks to the Instapundit for tipping me off to a column by Professor Richard Epstein of the Hoover Institution that thoroughly explains how the debit card mess came about and why it is really the government's fault (specifically, Illinois Senator Dick Durbin and President Obama) that Americans and eventually the larger banks are being squeezed for no reason.

The column concludes:

The greater tragedy, however, lies in the overheated political scene that
allows demagogues like Senator Durbin to get his way. The current economy has
enough trouble without the Durbin Amendment. One of the economy’s bright spots
was the debit card, which in hard times became the life-line of millions of
people. Its use, measured both by card swipes and dollar levels, far exceeded
that of the credit-card. What possible reason is there for Congress and the
president to meddle in one of the few systems that work, even if the courts will
roll over to whatever they do? There is no one thing that can fix the American
economic system or its horrific political climate. But the prompt repeal of the
odious Durbin Amendment would be a fine place to start making amends.

Labels: Dick Durbin, Economy, President Obama

In a surprise to some of the liberal economists who - for the first time in recent memory - predicted actual job gains for the past month, it was announced this morning that the economy actual hemorrhaged another 85,000 jobs in December.

Given that we are now some time away from the misnamed "economic stimulus," how anyone can see it as anything but a colossal failure is beyond me. It was sold as being a job creation bill. It did nothing of the sort.

Labels: Economy, Stimulus

A.C. Kleinheider has a very interesting column in today's Nashville City Paper. In the column, A.C. posits that noted anti-tax advocate, award-winning blogger, and conservative activist Ben Cunningham should consider running for the recently vacated Sixth District seat in the U.S. House of Representatives.

A.C. notes that he has talked to Ben and that he has not warmed to the idea of himself as a political candidate.

I'm of two minds on Cunningham for Congress. For the people of the Sixth District, and the American electorate as a whole, Ben going to D.C. would be fantastic. Ben is one of the best economic minds I know, and given that our political leaders are about to vote us into economic armageddon (if they haven't already done so by the time you read this), we're going to need people of Ben's intellect, experience, and character on Capitol Hill.

That being said, I know Ben and have to openly wonder if this would be a good thing for him. I always have to consider what public office - seeking it, working in it, keeping it - does to people. I saw the toll the grind of the Senate took on Senator Fred Thompson. I saw how tough it was for Congressman Ed Bryant to deal with the campaign grind. And both of my former bosses were experienced politicians at the time.

If Ben does decide to enter the fray, I am sure that he would find friends aplenty for his campaign. Ben has helped people throughout Tennessee to keep taxes low and to fight government waste. He has helped organize more conservative issue discussions than anyone could possibly know. While a potential Mae Beavers entry into the field might partially disrupt its formation, a Cunningham candidacy could very well formulate a grassroots network - both within the Sixth District and outside of it - that could be the difference in a divided primary where all of the other candidates look fairly similar.

I keep hearing the libertarians, tea partiers, and conservative grassroots talk about getting back to basics and keeping the politicians out of office. If that's really what you believe and you aren't so filled with apathy that you're willing to do something about it, you might want to contact ol' Ben Cunningham. He could be exactly the guy you want representing Tennessee in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Labels: 2010 Congressional Races, Economy, Taxes

In a move forecasted last week, Citadel Broadcasting filed for bankruptcy Sunday.

This is of interest for Knoxville residents because Citadel owns most of the radio stations in the area, including country giant WIVK, talk radio's WNOX, and the woefully disappointing sports talk network WNML.

Ad revenues are declining (and expected to stay that way), and it isn't hard for me to see why in terms of WNML's performance. I have personally spoken to businesses that contract with that station for advertising and told them that I wouldn't be frequenting their establishments as long as they continued to support certain shows on WNML ("The Sports Animal"), particularly the morning show with station program director Mickey Dearstone, Title IX-hire Heather Harrington, and former Vol Jeff Jacoby.

For me, my objection is aimed at the poor quality of their show and my view that Knoxville deserves a better brand of sports talk radio. Jacoby sometimes offers some decent analysis (as does Monday morning guest Pat Ryan), but Harrington often has no idea which teams are in which athletic conference, and Dearstone would never have survived in this market if he wasn't his own boss. How bad is the morning show? I know dozens of hardcore sports fans who have paid for Sirius/XM hardware and subscriptions just so they aren't exposed to this show; it's that bad.

I am in no way suggesting that the failure of WNML is the cause of Citadel's demise. However, it is a snapshot of how one failed network - carried out over several other markets - can bring down a huge corporation. I'm sure that WIVK is a financial success; the biggest country station in East Tennessee has driven competitor after competitor out of the market for decades. However, it's not realistic to expect for their gains to offset the losses of other failed ventures.

Will Citadel's filing have any lasting effects on Knoxville radio? Only time will tell, but we could see a few changes - hopefully for the good.

Labels: Bankruptcy, Economy, Radio

We're one day from a big game for UT football, so a large part of me does not want to dwell on the negative today. However, I've been quiet too long on our national trend towards self-destruction.

Labels: Diversity, Economy, Health care, Secession

Apparently, Popeyes Chicken is looking at opening another location in Knoxville. Unfortunately for me, it looks like they are still concentrating on the market around Farragut. Hey, Popeyes, how about some love for us on the eastern side of Knox County?

I remember a time when Popeyes was a weekly staple of my diet. After an afternoon at Wrigley Field watching the Cubbies, there wasn't much better than riding the Red Line down to Division Street and picking up some of that famous fried chicken.

It's great to hear about a company looking to expand in this horrific Obamafied economy. It seems like all that we hear is one bad report after another. It's a breath of fresh air to hear some good news for a change.

Labels: Economy, Farragut, Food

From the USA Today:

"Lesbian couples are more likely to be poor than married heterosexuals,
and children of same-sex parents are twice as likely to live in poverty as those
of traditional married couples, a new report shows."

Interesting results, for sure. Why would sexual orientation lead to a life of poverty?

I admit that I have no way to explain these results. Perhaps Robert Rector of The Heritage Foundation was right when he called the study, a product of UCLA, "garbage." It certainly wouldn't be the first time an academic study related to homosexuality belonged in the landfill.

Labels: Economy, Homosexuality

The New York Times calls the Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act the "largest expansion of government-sponsored service programs since President John F. Kennedy first called for the creation of a national community service corps in 1963." And when the NYT says that, you know we're talking a level of wasted taxpayer dollars that boggles the mind.

This piece of Democratic legislation brilliantly creates "paid volunteers" - a mythical beast once restricted to Democratic political campaigns - to allow for Americans to serve in their communities. Because, you know, that's something that we would never be able to do without the government's help...

The Tennessee delegation broke down pretty much the way you would expect - with one exception. In the House, the Republicans (Roe, Duncan, Wamp, Blackburn) voted against the bill, while the Democrats (Davis, Gordon, Tanner, Cohen, and Cooper) all voted for it. (So much for Lincoln Davis and John Tanner being "fiscally conservative.") In the Senate, the Tennessee delegation was split. Thanks to Senator Corker for being one of only 19 Senators - all Republicans - to vote against this unnecessary expansion of the federal government.

Labels: 2008 Congressional Races, Bob Corker, Economy, Government Spending, Lamar

There have been several major events related to the local economy here in Knoxville - Goody's and IPIX going belly-up being at the top of the charts. Blount County has also been hit hard, with Alcoa experiencing lay-offs, the boat manufacturing plants and Denso cutting back hours, and a recent report (along with confirmation to me from anonymous sources familiar with the situation) that Clayton Homes may be in serious trouble.

And while massive lay-offs at The University of Tennessee may create more problems, Knox and Blount Counties are fortunate to have multiple large employers in their municipal boundaries. Other places close to home are not so lucky.

The Tri-Cities are a prime example. Each has its own major economic driver. Johnson City has East Tennessee State University. Bristol has Bristol Motor Speedway. Kingsport has Eastman Chemical. Over a decade ago, I wrote a piece speaking to the vulnerability of each of the Tri-Cities due to this phenomenon. At the time, King Pharmaceuticals and several other mid-sized employers were operating in the area, but the problem has become more acute due to cut-backs or bankruptcy of those mid-sized employers over the past 15 years.

I have always felt that each of the Tri-Cities was intimately connected to the fortunes of its major economic driver. If the business institution failed, then the city risked collapse.

In today's news comes another sign that my theory is about to be put to the test.

"Kingsport most likely to bear brunt of more Eastman layoffs; 5 percent pay cuts on the way"

Eastman, known around Kingsport for lavishing huge bonuses on its executives and spending insane amounts of money on executive facility upgrades and remodeling, is once again cutting employees and salary. This caught several people by surprise, given that the word as of last month was about the size of annual bonuses, which are usually only issued during times of company strength.

East Tennessee has done a good job of attracting businesses. However, the economy is going to test the versatility of the economy here.

MORE: Warren Buffet says that things are going to get worse on the unemployment and inflation front before they get better. Buffet, while a flaming liberal, is the best financial mind of his time. When he is worried (and isn't sure what is to happen with Clayton Homes), one has to worry.

Labels: East Tennessee, Economy

Ken over at the Blue Collar Muse posed that question to House Majority Leader Jason Mumpower today, and it apparently is garnering quite a bit of attention.

Ken's correct on principle. For those of us who stand to gain from having borrowed money - that is, money borrowed from our sons and daughters and their sons and daughters - given to us to deny such money because it is wrong and illegitimate is what must happen in order for the conservative movement to mean anything besides a brand name that is bandied about every couple of years around election time.

As Ken points out, South Carolina and Mississippi are looking at saying "Thanks, but no thanks" to Washington, too. Is a secessionist movement afoot? I doubt it, but it would be revolutionary for politicians to tell the federal government that its borrowed money won't spend in the South anymore.

Labels: Economy, General Assembly, The South

OK, so we all agree that our economy is in a recession, if not entering a depression.

How does that jive with Paul Blart: Mall Cop making $64,923,380 in only 2 weeks at the box office?

After Leo was born, we cut back on movie expenditures to only seeing blockbuster movies (Harry Potter movies, Watchmen, Star Trek, Public Enemies). Apparently, not everyone is hoarding money, though, and instead have no problem dropping the $17.00 (or more) per couple to see what looks like an average comedy.

As a former film critic, I remember the days when $100,000,000 in U.S. box office receipts was rarefied air.

Labels: Economy, Movies

This report doesn't mention it, but why wasn't the Postmaster General questioned about reducing the hourly wages of postal workers? I'm not really aware of any college degrees or vocational training for mail carriers, but it appears that postal work is paid at an hourly wage of $18.02 to $23.59, plus federal benefits (including health insurance, life insurance, retirement, savings plans, annual leave, and sick leave). The popularly cited statistic is that labor costs comprise almost 72% of the U.S. Postal Service's budget.

I'd be interested to see which Member of Congress thinks his constituents want to pay more for less service from the USPS.

Labels: Congress, Economy, Governement Services

I came across this story in the Boston Globe that contradicts the traditional logic that finances are the root of most divorces in the United States.

I found the couples in the story to be quite interesting, mostly because Angela and I come from diverse financial philosophies. I can't say diverse financial backgrounds, because both of our families have known hardship. I remember living in a trailer early in my life, while Angela's family was technically homeless for a period. However, our parents have different attitudes toward money. And if my parents would be called "tight" with money, then I would be called "supertight." Laugh if you must, but I will literally study every can of green beans at Food City, comparing the price per ounce, ingredients, etc., for minutes until I finally make a decision. When you add in the amount of time that it takes me to clip and categorize coupons every Sunday (which I usually do with football or golf on in the background), it is apparent that I spend quite a bit of time on being thrifty.

How Angela and I get along so well is that we communicate over every decision - and I mean every decision - that involves money. We've lightened up over the years on things like lunches (especially since we are both on the road nearly every day in different counties), but we still discuss just about every other purchase that we make. This seems to cut down on disagreements that lead to fights.

So what's my point? I completely agree with the piece in the Globe. Money is a scapegoat, camouflage for other problems in a marriage like failure to communicate, failure to synchronize goals, or being unequally yoked. Marriages end because of many reasons - from jealousy to selfishness to psychological problems - but I don't think that money in itself is one of those reasons.

Labels: Economy, Marriage

I took advantage of court and meetings being cancelled due to the weather to tend to the sidebar on this blog. A few dormant blogs were put on hiatus or erased entirely, and a few blogs were added (and those additions were long overdue).

The rest of the day has been spent playing with Leo and watching DVDs. (He's sleeping right now, so The Dark Knight is playing, a welcome break from Elmo and Backyardigans.)

Everyone is ga-ga over the Inauguration, which is their right. I just choose not to be. I've been to my share of Inaugurations, and its much ado about nothing. It's a series of rhetorical speeches, parties at taxpayer expense, and fantastic fundraising opportunities for the party in power. Those things don't excite me when my guy wins. (I probably would have gone if I knew the candidate, but that would have been out of respect for him or her; I consider that to be part of loyalty to friends and candidates, not personal enjoyment.) Why would I be uppity about the opposition party's candidate being sworn in? Besides, it appears that all of the networks - including the treacherous FoxNews - are plenty excited, enough to make up for my apathy.

As a taxpayer, I am a bit concerned about the Inauguration. I keep hearing price tag estimates around $150 million. That would be three times the most expensive Inauguration in United States history. During a time when people are losing their jobs, bedrock American corporations are liquidating their assets and seeking protection from their creditors under bankruptcy laws, and consumer spending is sinking to a level not seen in my lifetime, I would have thought a little financial restraint - maybe as a sign of actual modesty - would have been called for. Apparently not.

Labels: Blogging, Economy, Inauguration, President Obama

Obviously, the best thing that the U.S. government can do is to let GM, Ford, and Chrysler continue down the path they have chosen to take, which most likely results in bankruptcy. That is the only way for the "Big 3" to emerge stronger and more slimmed down in their fight to remain even remotely competitive with foreign automakers.

The reason for the demise of American car companies is the unionization of their workforce. Plain and simple.

So it is ironic in some ways that a deal was reached to federally bail out the "Big 3" - much to my chagrin - but that the deal was scuttled last night because the unions stepped in. Apparently, the unions are more interested in going down with the ship than negotiating for a better position in a post-bail-out world.

But all is not lost, for the Bush Administration - keeping with form as one of the worst presidencies in American history - is coming to the rescue. Apparently, the strings that Congress thought it had attached to the bail-out of the financial industry weren't actually there, because Bush is going to use that money for the automakers.

We have entered bizarro world as it relates to the federal government. It is amazing to look throughout the world and see admitted socialized governments with less evidence of actual socialization than our own federal government here in a declared "democracy" with free-market principles.

It's come to the point where I hate blogging about the federal government, because it is just so daggone depressing.

Labels: Economy, President Bush, Socialism

Labels: Cartoons, Economy

First, read this column by Pat Buchanan that paints a bleak picture of where America stands in terms of debt, finances, and global commitments.

Then, try to imagine what caliber of leader that it would take to meet these challenges head-on. Quite frankly, I can think of only a few of our best presidents that could handle this mess (Reagan, Washington, perhaps Lincoln).

Now look at our options for the White House. Do you honestly think that any of them are capable of this task? The third party options aren't the jokes they normally are (OK, so Cynthia McKinney is), but they aren't even close to being ready for the reigns of leadership. Obama? Please. This is so far over his abilities and experience that we will never be able to address what is before us as a nation under an Obama Administration. McCain? Perhaps, but his behavior on the campaign trail has been a neutered version of the man I knew (and feared) in the Senate. If he were to govern as he has legislated in the past, he might be able to deal with some of these problems. Probably not all of them, though.

Buchanan paints a grim view. He normally does. I just want someone to start talking solutions, minimize the rhetoric, and start answering the questions that we can no longer afford to ignore.

Labels: 2008 General Election, Economy, Military

Labels: Cartoons, Congress, Economy