But I love my Starbucks.

Now, there are things we all enjoy in life.  Those little luxuries and indulgences that put some joy and excitement into what can often be routine and mundane.  Like a cup of Starbucks.

But let’s say, oops  the tranny blows out on the family car.  $2500 on a credit card and NUTS, now my budget is a lot tighter.  Darn it, darn car.  But what are you going to do?

Well, being a financial whiz, I figure out that I spend $3.95  5 days a week for my half-caffe, double, mocha latte espresso hot damn delicious cup o’ joe at the Starbucks en route to my job.  Well, hell, that’s  $80.00 a month for a really fine cup of coffee.  But, it is only coffee.

So, manly man that I am, I decide, I can go without that delight for maybe a year or so, until I get a raise or pull in some cash and get this financial strain behind me.  I used to make coffee  at home.  I think I remember how.  If not, I can look it up on the internet.   If  I put some sugar in it and whipped cream on top,  it’ll be cheap, DELICIOUS and fiscal equilibrium can be restored.  And, really I could still have a Starbucks  once in a while.  I’m not going under financially or anything.  Just tight.

See, when it’s your OWN money and you can’t take it from someone else or print it and you really do have to answer to someone if you can’t make your obligations, well, you can give up a cup of Starbucks.

Well, apparently Obama cannot even do that.

Federal spending is sooooo out of control.  We are, in fact, going under as a nation.  Did you watch that video?  Here’s another one with Obama’s Secretary of the Treasury.

How is THIS responsible government?

I hear many knowledgeable people saying that we’re printing lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots of money to keep up with the outflow.  Some say that could cause MASSIVE inflation.  Last I checked, that could make my Starbucks cost maybe $5.00 or $6.00.  Worse, a gallon of gas could cost that much, (hmm, Starbucks or gas, choices, choices)  That’s not gooooood.  THAT’S NOT GOOD AT ALL!

Now Fed Chairman, Bernanke, figures that this inflation will offset equally devastating deflation.  It’s kind of like if you lose your right arm, you should cut off your left leg so you’re, you know, balanced.  Yeah, it’s like that.

Instead of playing financial Russian roulette with our foreseeable future, can’t we rein in the spending, even as much as an analogical, metaphorical trip to Starbucks?

Can it be that all that spending is all absolutely vital and must be done or we’ll  just shrivel up and die or whatever?  Will the Republic cease if ANY federal spending ceases.  I really find that hard to accept.  I think anybody that has to manage a household or run a business would find it hard to accept as well.

As a matter of fact, we often find just the opposite.  When we get our own spending under control, we feel less stress.  There is less domestic discord. We can usually focus on what’s truly important to us.  In time with discipline we have some extra money for a little fun or ease.  It really comes down to priorities.

When the money is not yours and you don’t earn it.  When you have the power by force of law to take it (or print it).  When you can jail someone if they refuse to give you or try to get out of giving you their money, well then, I guess you don’t have to decide on priorities.   At least, that is how this administration is acting.   Although Obama’s administration is potentially the worst in this regard, when I checked not one administration since Roosevelt reduced the debt.

So, who’s up for some Starbucks?

Ahhhh, I like the whipped cream on top.

Moran

To comment, click on the post title and scroll down to the comment section.

My email address is mindofmoran@aol.com

My Facebook page is http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Mind-of-Moran/143474912371803

Thank you for your support!

Apparently, my mother was wrong. Money does grow on trees! Whoo HOO!

Congress has allocated $25 billion so we can each plant one of these!

The recent compromise on extending the Bush era tax rates and the extension of unemployment benefits illustrates the overriding problem in America.  Most people would like to keep more of what they earn.  However, there is a NEW american mentality that relies on government to smooth out the ups and downs of living.  Further, those looking for the aid  consider that they are entitled to it, ESPECIALLY, if it’s supposed to be funded by the so-called rich.

The federal government is NOT Robin Hood.

Moran

Like me on Facebook at  http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Mind-of-Moran/143474912371803

Email me at mindofmoran@aol.com

Get a free copy of the U.S. Constitution at  http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Mind-of-Moran/143474912371803?sk=app_4949752878

What’s that definition of insanity again?

Time and again, the ruling class deems it necessary to” save us” by engaging in economic policies which are PROVEN failures.  Sadly, these elitists have a cheering section amongst the populace which further empowers these idiots.

Does 2 + 2  EVER equal anything other than 4?   NO.

Here are two videos which succinctly and engagingly demonstrate the failure in theory and practice of  Keynesian style economics.

Please watch and share!

Here’s another gem.

A man without reason.

I remember not too long ago having to endure a European visitor to our country expound to me why it was soooo necessary for our government to load up crushing debt and spend it on our behalf.  I wish I had seen and was very familiar with the principles and events put forth in these videos.  He would have learned (maybe) to keep his feckless, cradle to grave euro-nanny-state nonsense to himself.

About Keynes:

Keynes spent his ENTIRE life in government service and academia.  He never ran a business other than some private tutoring.  Despite this lack of any USEFUL experience he is revered as an economic genius, probably because he writes well.  If Einstein were the same caliber of genius as Keynes, “Fat Man” would have been little more than a big firecracker.   If you don’t know, “Fat Man” was the code name for the atom bomb we dropped on Hiroshima.

Moran

Brilliant Investor, Economic Nutjob!

Often, we defer to individual’s opinions because of their level of success and/or celebrity and Warren Buffet certainly falls into this category. If he called me with a sincere stock tip, I’d hock just about anything and everything to get in on that recommendation! I mean after all, he’s Warren Buffet!

But that doesn’t necessarily make him wise in all things great and small. This link shows an excerpt of an interview wherein he suggests taxing the ultra rich: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/buffett-slams-trickle-down-calls-for-higher-taxes-on-the-wealthy/ .

What disturbs me is his rationale. He states that Government spending is 20%-25% of GDP while tax revenue is a round 15%. He states merely that those two numbers need to come closer together and someone’s taxes need to go up. Manfully, he volunteered himself and fellow ultra wealthy peers to partially fill that gap.

Check out these facts as quoted by Beforeitsnews.com directly from the director of Congresional Budget Office (CBO) during Bush’s terms.

“In a letter written by Peter R. Orszag, May 18, 2007, ( Orszag was Director of CBO “Congressional Budget Office” at the time),  he stated, “receipts as a share of GDP rose from 16.5 percent to 18.4 percent”. The period was from 2003- 2006.  ( I explain later that only 16.3% of Bush cuts on rich implemented before 2003, the other 83.7% started 2003.) Orszag later became Director of the Office of Management and Budget for Barak Obama. I assume, he is not a Tea Partier? ( BTW, he just quit, recommending to keep ALL the Bush tax cuts, even for the rich, for the next 2 years.)  Orszog also stated in the same letter, “Total Federal revenues grew by about $625 billion, or 35%, between fiscal year 2003 and fiscal year 2006″ and then continued, “Had revenues grown at the same rate as the overall economy  between 2003 and 2006, Federal receipts would have increased by only $373 billion. The other $252 billion of the actual increase in revenues represents growth in excess of GDP growth.”. When Bush got the other 83.7% of the cut, REVENUE OUTRAN GDP! “

In the short clip with Buffett he disparages “trickle down,” as though trickle down explains how we came to the current economic debacle. He completely IGNORES the GROWTH of government spending. See the graph from the Heritage Foundation. In 2000 to 2010 there has been a 40% increase in spending per household in INFLATION adjusted dollars.

This Government spending has outrun the growth of the real GDP, and tax revenues. So if Mr. B wants to ante up and put a few billions in the kitty, more power to him, but the real

Up is good, right!

problem IS an out of control government money mill!

Moran

Well, let’s just wait and see.

I remember feeling pretty excited when Newt Gingrich masterfully engineered a kind of revolution.  For the first time in decades, Republicans had the power in Congress.  Republicans took over the House and Senate and pushed back against the very liberal policies of President Clinton.   A balance of power was brought about.  It seemed to work pretty well.  The economy expanded,  and we were fine on the world stage.

Tired of the Clinton’s and those associated with them, a scandal weary electorate elected George Bush president.  A Republican House and Senate were already in place.  To their shame, these nimrods expanded government and entitlements with no less abandon than their Democratic counterparts had for decades.

Midway during “W’s” second term, a war weary electorate threw out the Republican bums and installed a Democratic Congress.  Then they (we) gave the reins of executive power to Mr. Obama who along with his Democratic cohorts have run up more debt than all previous administrations COMBINED!

My point comes to this.  It seems that when any one party has the Presidency and the two Houses, it’s BAD.  VERY, VERY BAD. They can’t seem to help themselves.  There is too much momentum, too much agreement in the direction of throwing federal money at virtually everything.  Hardly anybody knows how or when to say “no.”  The few that do, are too few to make a difference.  And I can only imagine the pressure that can be brought to bear against a junior congressperson seeking to change the “way things are done.”

At least when neither party has “it all,”  there is enough disagreement on HOW to spend us into OBLIVION, that the momentum is somewhat slowed.  Sometimes the animus is enough to bring about gridlock, which is really pretty awesome.

If we go back to the Clinton and Reagan years.  We find that the President’s opposite party mostly controlled the Congress.  This seemed to work the best.  We will have the same situation with Obama for the next two years.  Maybe, it’ll get better.  Let’s just wait and see.  And if we get a Republican President in 2012, a small, very real part of me hopes the Democrats retain control of the Senate.  I can’t believe I said that.

Moran