|
|
|
Ponzi Schemes Explained |
|
Dan's Blog
|
By Dan McGrath on
12/26/2008
|
|
|
|
The term "Ponzi Scheme" has come up in the news a lot lately, primarily in describing $50 billion in investment securities fraud Bernard Madoff is accused of perpetrating. Not often explained is what a Ponzi Scheme is, and how it works.
Named for Charles Ponzi, an Italian immigrant and con man around the turn of the 20th Century, the con is sometimes also referred to as a "pyramid scheme" wherein early investors are paid from the deposits of a widening base of new investors. As long as new people continue to buy into a growing ponzi scheme, money continues to flow upward to the pyramid of investors. These schemes inevitably collapse when the pool of new investors pumping new money in can’t grow fast enough to support the payments to earlier investors, because actual investment earnings, if any, are not sufficient to cover promised returns.
Even though Ponzi schemes always collapse, getting in early ("on the ground floor") can yield tremendous returns. It’s the people who come in towards the end of the scheme that lose big, since their money hasn’t actually been invested, but merely passed up to the personal accounts of the creator of the scheme and earlier investors.
One year after Charles Ponzi was released from prison for fleecing unsuspecting investors out of $7 million, President Franklin D. Roosevelt concluded that the federal government could get away with such a scheme. Social Security was signed into law as part of the "New Deal" in 1935.
Social Security is now the largest government enterprise in the entire world and combined with Medicare/Medicaid accounts for over 40% of all U. S. federal government spending.
Social Security is a mandatory retirement investment, deducted each pay period from every employee’s wages, with the promise that these investments will be repaid with interest by the federal government upon retirement, but like most Ponzi Schemes, the money isn’t actually invested in any conventional sense. In fact, current social security deposits are not only used to cover current transfers to retirees, but also part of the federal deficit. The government can get away with this for the time being because Social Security deposits are currently in excess of payments, but the number of retirees is now growing faster than the workforce. Unless changes are made in the way Social Security functions, it will collapse like all Ponzi Schemes do, when the pool of new investors isn’t contributing enough money to support payments promised to beneficiaries further up the pyramid. Eventually, a whole generation of investors into this scheme is going to get burned. Since the largest generation, the "baby boomers" are beginning to retire, with a smaller generation coming up to support them, that day of reckoning is likely coming sooner rather than later.
|
 |
|
Comments (1)
|
|
|
|
|
Over Objections, President Bush Hands Our Wealth to Sinking Automakers |
|
Dan's Blog
|
By Dan McGrath on
12/19/2008
|
|
|
|
Over objections of the Senate and the majority of American citizens, President Bush facilitated a $17.4 billion loan of taxpayer’s money to Detroit’s troubled automakers today. Since Congress did not approve new funding for the automakers’ bailout, the president tapped the TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program) fund for $13.4 billion of the loan. The remaining $4 billion will still require legislative approval. Ford says it doesn’t need the loan, so GM and Chrysler will apparently split the take. To put the amount in perspective, the state of Minnesota collects about $17 billion per year from all tax and fee revenue sources. Enough tax money to run the entire state of Minnesota for a year is being doled out to two private companies that are unable to stand on their own feet. With these companies teeting on the edge of the abyss, it's entirely possible that these loans will never be repaid.
TARP was established to bailout Wall Street. A $700 billion fund of non-existent money was established to prop up failing financial corporations. Initially the president signaled that he opposed using this fund to bailout the car manufacturers. Following the defeat of the bailout bill in the Senate, the president has changed his tune, saying, "The only way to avoid a collapse of the American auto industry is for the executive branch to step in. My economic advisers believe that such a collapse would deal an unacceptable blow to hardworking Americans far beyond the auto industry."
The bailout "loan" comes with strings attached. Primarily, that the loan will be recalled if the automakers aren’t "viable" by March 31st. In essence, the president has said that the car manufacturers can not be allowed to fail, for dire consequences will ensue – unless they are still foundering this spring, in which case, it’s evidently OK to allow the collapse and ensuing economic Armageddon. Makes perfect sense.
The auto bailout is just the latest in a seemingly endless parade of corporate handouts, taking money from the pockets of hard working men and women, their children and their children’s children to cover the bad decisions of millionaires and billionaires. Current federal bailout commitments total $8.7 trillion. The entire federal budget is $3 trillion and the bailouts now represent nearly 2/3 of the nations entire GDP of $13.1 trillion.
According to the Congressional Research Service, the total value of the bailouts undertaken by the federal government exceeds inflation-adjusted spending for all American wars. The American Revolution, the War of 1812, the Civil War, the Spanish American War, World War I, World War II, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan combined cost $7.2 trillion in today’s dollars. Even much maligned spending on the current Iraq war has to date totaled only $648 billion, a figure that pales next to the extraordinary deficit spending for corporate welfare. Throw in all spending for the Louisiana Purchase, the New Deal, the Marshall Plan and NASA, and you still haven’t topped the bailout spending spree of 2008.
America’s present debt equals about $37,000 per person. Representative Price of Georgia said, "By bailing out automakers without real reform or long-term solutions, we are only protracting uncertainty and putting billions of tax dollars at grave risk. It is now clear that the creation of TARP was a rueful mistake which has failed to provide urgent market stability, yet has put our country perilously in debt for the foreseeable future."
|
 |
|
Comments (1)
|
|
|
|
Announcing the Death of Paul M. Weyrich |
|
Dan's Blog
|
By Dan McGrath on
12/18/2008
|
|
|
|
Congressman Ralph M. Hall, Chairman of the Free Congress Foundation Board of Directors, and President Marion Edwyn Harrison, sadly announce the death of the Founder and National Chairman, Paul M. Weyrich.
Paul Weyrich, 66, died this morning while briefly hospitalized near his home in Northern Virginia. A contributory cause of death was methicillin-resistant staph aureus, commonly termed MRSA. For some years Paul Weyrich had been in a wheelchair, due to a combination of illnesses and a fall many years ago on black ice.
While hospitalized a number of times, and often in pain, Paul continued his admirable and extensive work as a leader of the cultural, political and social conservative movement.
Paul founded not only the Free Congress Foundation but also the Heritage Foundation and was the first Heritage President. While still a student in his native Wisconsin he became a radio and MILWAUKEE SENTINEL newspaper reporter and then a CBS political reporter and newscaster in Milwaukee. In 1966 he came to Washington, initially handling press relations and other assignments for Senators Gordon L. Allot, of Colorado, and Carl T. Curtis, of Nebraska.
In 1973 Paul Weyrich created the Heritage Foundation and in 1974 he created the predecessor to Free Congress Foundation. For several years he also operated a television cable channel. He held the highest honorary position in the Council for National Policy. During the past 35 years he extensively advised, spoke and wrote on cultural and other aspects of conservatism. In and after 1989 Paul visited the formerly Communist Soviet Union, organizing training courses for the promotion of democracy and individual rights. Paul also was an expert on rail and light-rail transit, having served as an AMTRAK Director and a National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commissioner.
In 1990 Paul was ordained a deacon in the Melkite Greek Eparchy, a conservative Catholic Church.
Paul Weyrich is survived by his wife of 45 years, the former Joyce Ann Smigun, their five children and 15 grandchildren.
Steadfast and courageous in causes and faith, and admirably stoic in continuing his extensive work during many years of illness, Paul Michael Weyrich will be missed by the many people with whom he worked and by his family and numerous friends.
Funeral arrangements are not yet concluded. More information will become available through a call to the Free Congress Foundation, 703 837-0030, and on the website, www.freecongress.org.
|
 |
|
Comments (1)
|
|
|
|
No More Bailouts |
|
Jeff's Blog
|
By Jeff Davis on
12/14/2008
|
|
|
|
The ill-conceived auto industry bailout bill passed in the US House last week, but was rightly rejected by the US Senate. Special interests aren’t giving up, however. Now they are looking for huge handouts from the Treasury Secretary and the White House. While this situation is being portrayed as a bailout of the auto industry, it is, in fact, a ploy designed to delay the inevitable implosion of the unsustainable United Auto Workers (UAW) union contract demands.
This bailout will only temporarily prop up UAW’s dysfunctional relationship with the auto companies. Union contracts with the manufacturers that require paying 700,000 people nearly full wages for not working plus the extraordinary legacy costs of health care and pensions have crippled US automakers’ finances. Reports indicate that GM currently looses $326 for each car that rolls-off the end of its assembly line while Toyota makes a profit of $1266 per vehicle it sells.
UAW contracts have effectively killed the “golden goose”, so now they are demanding “golden eggs” from American taxpayers. The proposed bailout would only delay the inevitable and at significant cost. Today’s US automaker business model is simply not sustainable. The only chance to rescue the US auto industry is to allow companies to enter bankruptcy, restructure and emerge leaner, stronger and more competitive.
The money demanded for the bailout doesn’t even exist. What’s being proposed is massive deficit spending. When the government creates money from thin air, everyone’s dollars are devalued. Government bailouts are stealing wealth from American families.
TAKE ACTION: Click here to send a message to President Bush and Treasury Secretary Paulson demanding that they not use money from the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) to be used to bailout the auto industry.
|
 |
|
Comments (1)
|
|
|
|
14% of State Budget in the Red |
|
Dan's Blog
|
By Dan McGrath on
12/4/2008
|
|
|
 Minnesota’s next biennium budget deficit is now projected at $4.8 billion, with a new revelation today that we’ve run out of money for the current biennium. That immediate shortfall is nearly $500 million. There’s only about $153 million in the budget reserve fund, so we have a big problem – now.
All told, Minnesota is $5.2 billion into the red ink, which represents 14% of the entire budget. Drastic measures will be required to patch this record-setting budget hole. Either huge tax-hikes, deep budget cuts or both are in the very near future. With the exception of possible federal deficit spending for state bail-outs, there are no other options. Governor Pawlenty has already come out against federal deficit spending to close state deficits.
The 2004-2005 biennial budget was $28 billion. In the course of 4 years, the legislature has increased spending at a head-spinning pace. The next biennial budget is $36 billion. That’s a spending increase of $8 billion, or 29% since just 2004. It’s no real wonder that we’re facing a record-setting deficit now. That kind of spending growth isn’t sustainable.
The historical pattern in government is to grow spending during boom years and raise taxes to cover the unsustainable new spending during bust years. This is a deadly cycle that inevitably catches up to the taxpayers. Growth in Minnesota’s government spending has drastically outpaced inflation for years. The time to take a stand against the reckless spend-and-tax cycle is now. Covering a deficit this large with tax increases will accelerate the spend-and-tax cycle out of the stratosphere.
Take Action: Click here to contact your representatives and remind them not to make matters worse with tax hikes when we can least afford them.
|
 |
|
Comments (1)
|
|
|
|
Huge Budget Deficit Looming |
|
Dan's Blog
|
By Dan McGrath on
12/1/2008
|
|
|
 Minnesota’s legislature reconvenes in January. One of the first problems lawmakers are likely to face is a huge deficit, moving forward into the next budget biennium. The official economic forecast is due to be released on Thursday, but early indications are it will paint a less than rosy picture.
The state government will likely face a deficit of over $4 billion dollars. In 2008, legislators withdrew $500 million from the reserve fund to help close a $1 billion deficit, leaving only $153 million in reserve account. Borrowing covered the rest of the budget gap, but the bonding bill wasn’t limited to covering essentials. Another $500 million was also borrowed for additional capital project expenditures.
Speaker Kelliher has given a preview of her ideas to close the deficit, saying if it’s too large, it’s difficult to do it just by cuts. The unspoken phrase is tax increases.
The economic problems that have, in part, led to the budget shortfall are the same situations that are sensitive to tax hikes. Unemployment has reached 6% in Minnesota, and is likely to rise further in the near future. Corporate profits are declining, incomes aren’t growing, sales are down and investments are failing. Higher taxes can exacerbate all of these economic conditions.
The state’s Constitution requires a balanced budget each biennium. Faced with such a huge deficit, many legislators are likely to turn to tax increases as a way to cover the government’s budget shortfall. Bonding isn’t practical in our current economic situation. Speaker Kelliher continues to talk about additional “investing” in education and state infrastructure improvements, implying yet more proposals for new spending in the face of a whopping $4 billion deficit.
When many families face increased economic hardship, reduced income, investment losses, loss of home equity and cost of living inflation, state government looks likely to attempt increasing the taxpayer’s burden.
In the run-up to this year’s election, Governor Pawlenty, aware of a looming deficit (expected at the time to weigh in at around $2 billion), made several statements about the need for the state to live within its means, which may indicate a willingness to veto the tax increases that are likely to come across his desk in 2009.
Several candidates for the state’s House of Representatives also promised to put spending cuts ahead of tax increases by signing the Live Within Our Means Commitment. This commitment will soon be put to the test and there are many legislators who have not made this commitment to the taxpayer at all. It will be of supreme importance that Minnesota’s lawmakers hear from their constituents on the upcoming budget issues. Minnesota’s economy can’t afford higher taxes right now. It’s time to take a hard look at reversing the trend of bloated government spending.
|
 |
|
Comments (3)
|
|
|
|
Election Integrity Should be a Priotity |
|
Dan's Blog
|
By Dan McGrath on
11/17/2008
|
|
|
|
A review of Minnesota’s voter registration rolls prior to this year’s election revealed a number of irregularities. Minnesota Majority requested the Secretary of State and officials in 30 different counties to conduct investigations into these irregularities. Authorities have thus far been largely unresponsive or dismissive, prompting Minnesota Majority to continue its independent investigation and to file a formal complaint with the US Attorney’s office. The complaint cites a number of provisions under the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) that require the Secretary of State to perform certain voter registration verifications on a regular basis. It appears that Secretary Ritchie has failed to perform these verifications.
Minnesota Majority’s investigation into irregularities in the voter registration list maintained by the Secretary of State’s office revealed situations strikingly similar to recent discoveries in Wisconsin. An investigation by a joint taskforce comprised of the US Attorney, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Milwaukee County Attorney and the Milwaukee Police Department revealed election system issues that could very well be occurring in Minnesota. Their discoveries included widespread recordkeeping failures, suspected double voting, fraudulent voter registrations, felons voting or registering to vote, vote counts in excess of the number of registered voters in the county and other problems. Wisconsin law enforcement agencies have turned-up the same sort of evidence in their investigations as Minnesota Majority has raised questions about in Minnesota’s voter rolls. Minnesota election officials and law enforcement seem to be turning a blind eye to these issues, however.
Minnesota Majority is seeking additional information about the voter files and practices of election officials from the Secretary of State and several county auditors under Minnesota’s Data Practices Act. Examples of the information being requested include voter verification postcards returned by the postal service as being “undeliverable”, voters registered by “vouching” and voters flagged by the Secretary of State to be “challenged” at the polls prior to casting their ballot. Cross-referencing this information with other data Minnesota Majority has compiled will enable a deeper understanding of the irregularities, and the data handling practices of the Secretary of State and other election officials.
A citizen’s petition has been created to call public attention to the problem and allow voters to weigh-in on the issue with their elected officials. The petition, which can be signed online at ElectionIntegrityPetition.com, calls upon elected officials to enact changes in Minnesota’s laws to require voters to present government-issued photo ID before receiving a ballot; require the Secretary of State to employ specific prescribed data verification techniques that ensure the integrity of Minnesota’s voter rolls; flag voter registrations that fail to meet specific standards for accuracy and completeness; establish an annual independent audit of the voter registration lists; and require voters to register at least 30 days prior to an election so that all voters can be certified as legally qualified to vote before casting a ballot. Concerned citizens Lt. Col. Joe Repya, Rene Ramirez and Yoman Brunson spoke in support of the petition effort at a press conference today. About a dozen other citizens turned out to protest the Secretary of State’s apparent inaction on election integrity issues.
TAKE ACTION: Sign the Election Integrity Petition and instantly send a message to your elected officials.
TAKE ACTION: Write a Letter to the Editor in Support of Voter ID and other election reforms.
|
 |
|
Comments (17)
|
|
|
|
What's Worth More? Your Bike or Your Vote? |
|
Dan's Blog
|
By Dan McGrath on
11/11/2008
|
|
|
 It doesn’t require any empirical evidence for a reasoning person to conclude that if you leave your bicycle out, unlocked, it will probably be stolen. The fact that theft is a punishable crime does not in itself inspire much confidence in the typical bicycle owner. We use chains.
How much more is political power worth than a Schwinn? Senators, governors, representatives and presidents oversee vast amounts of taxpayer’s treasure. VAST. They have the power to pick winners and losers, dole out government contracts to friends, and stymie foes. Millions of dollars in campaign contributions roll into some races. Minnesota spends over $15 billion a year. The federal government spends trillions. Passage of a single law can make one businesses wildly successful, or crush another. Scores of special interest groups receive billions of dollars from the government. What then is the value of a vote?
Minnesota’s elections are so laxly secured that it can be easily compared to the honor system. The word of one person is enough to secure a ballot. Our ballots control nearly unfathomable amounts of political power and money. Our money. To go through life confident that none would be tempted to steal something so immensely valuable as a vote while dutifully chaining and locking your 12-speed must require an invincible state of delusion.
I challenge my fellow Minnesotans who have no concern about having their vote stolen by fraud and who oppose simple election protections, like requiring photo ID to vote: Leave your bicycle outside, unchained overnight. There is no evidence that proves that it will be stolen and it's far less valuable than the vote you aren't concerned about securing.
|
 |
|
Comments (4)
|
|
|
|
Results of Minnesota's Judicial Races |
|
Dan's Blog
|
By Dan McGrath on
11/6/2008
|
|
|
 There were only 12 contested judicial races around the state. 118 races went uncontested. Like the rest of the races in Minnesota, it was a good year to be an incumbent. No incumbent judges were unseated by challengers. Of 130 total judicial elections around the state this year, every judge who wanted it kept his or her seat.
Two incumbents on Minnesota’s Supreme Court were up for reelection this year. Both prevailed. Associate Justice Paul Anderson defeated challenger Tim Tinglestad 60 – 39% and Associate Justice Lorie Skjervern Gildea, a mid-term Pawlenty appointee, defeated Deborah Hedlund 55 – 44%.
In the only contested Minnesota Court of appeals race, incumbent Judge Terri Stoneburner defeated second-time challenger Dan Griffith 58 – 42%. Griffith ran a fairly high profile, but limited budget race and brought statewide attention to proposals to appoint rather than elect Minnesota’s judges, a notion he strongly opposes.
Incumbent Judge Joseph Carter defeated Nathaniel Reitz in a First District Court race. Carter was the judge who had awarded a man, who was on probation for raping a 13-year-old girl, custody of his girlfriend’s 9-year-old daughter. The known sex offender went on to sexually assault the girl and has since been sentenced to 27 years in prison. This decision was the central issue of Reitz’s campaign. Evidently, it wasn’t enough to sway voters.
In an open Second District Court race, Gail Bohr bested challenger Howard Orenstein. Bohr, 64 will not be able to complete the 6-year term she’s been elected to, however, because Minnesota law requires judges to retire by age 70. Bohr is destined to be replaced by a gubernatorial appointment who will not have to seek approval from voters until 6 years after that.
In the Third Judicial District, 32-year incumbent Judge Lawrence Agerter prevailed over challenger Anthony Moosbrugger, who was just one year old when Judge Agerter was first elected to the seat.
In the Fourth Judicial District, incumbent Judge Philip Bush defeated Eugene Link for the Court 9 seat, Jane Ranum beat David Piper for the open Court 53 seat and Judge James Swenson fended off a challenge from Thomas Haeg for the Court 58 seat.
Randall Sleiter prevailed over Glen Jacobson in an Eighth Judicial District race.
Nancy Logering defeated Luke Stellpflug and Robert Varco prevailed against John Dehen in the Tenth Judicial District.
|
 |
|
Comments (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|