“We the people” is non-partisan. It may be boring to the news media, but non-partisanship is the peaceful, common sense method of moving this nation forward through elimination of waste in centralized government. The news media and majority of elected officials today talk about “reaching across the aisle” and getting things done in a bi-partisan manner. Since when did we ever have a two (bi) party system? If that were the case, then how did Jesse Ventura become Governor of Minnesota? Al Franken would almost certainly never have become Senator from Minnesota without Dean Barkley’s participation in that race. Nor would Joe Lieberman still be in the Senate. Together, we ARE the People, and WE need to be non-partisan in our approach to fixing our centralized government.
I believe that party affiliation should be removed from election ballots so that voters will only vote for someone if they know what they stand for. Fewer votes would be cast, but they would be informed votes – ones that stand for a belief instead of a red or blue color on a map and ones that were cast independently of anyone dictating the vote of another citizen. What is wrong with a candidate describing him or her self as financially conservative, militarily moderate, educationally progressive and moderate on healthcare? That description is not reflective of any party I know of, but would make for an interesting candidate. Would it not be better than a party affiliation label? It would enable legislation representing the will of the people instead of strong-arm political pressure on elected officials to vote a certain way due to a party affiliation.
Let’s face it – a party affiliation is nothing more than an endorsement by a political union. In exchange for the support of a large body of voters, a politician accepts endorsement by a political union to be THEIR representative in Washington (or wherever), not the representative of the constituents of the district, state or whatever. Why do I believe this? Simply because each legislative body has majority and minority party bosses. These bosses, as the title implies, boss around their party endorsees to comply with the will of their party – not their constituents. Candidates do not have other union endorsements under their names on the election ballots, so why are they labeled with political unions?
Each and every one of you reading this has, or knows of someone who has, voted straight party on a ballot. How incredibly improper and unfair to America, not to mention future generations. Look at the mess that has been created in every legislative body in the country as a result. This is a national embarrassment. Who among us has the will to change it? Is it you?
Friday, July 3, 2009
Celebrating Our Freedom
Happy Independence Day!
My mind drifts a bit every year about this time. I try to relate the current state of the nation to what the founding fathers were thinking so long ago. I try to read the mind of Thomas M. Foster, my ancestor that arrived from Ipswich, England in 1742 to start the then soon to be American branch of our family tree. And now that I am over 40 years of age (ahem), I think my mind should be allowed to drift occasionally.
I took note the other day of H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act, which narrowly passed in the House recently. It will no doubt be highly modified before becoming a law, but even so, we should all take note of some of the language written into this original version by our elected congressional representatives. As a real estate practitioner, I was drawn to sections of the bill that relate to housing. I confess, I have not read the entire bill (yet), but neither did any of the representatives that voted for it in Congress by their own confession. I’d like to share some excerpts from the bill as passed by the House of Representatives. I must warn you that some of these excerpts may be disconcerting to those of you considered to be Americans, so read at your own risk.
Well-intentioned Objective:
- Effective on the date of enactment of the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, 30 percent reduction in energy use relative to a comparable building constructed in compliance with the baseline code; effective January 1, 2014, for residential buildings, and January 1, 2015, for commercial buildings, 50 percent reduction in energy use relative to the baseline code; and effective January 1, 2017, for residential buildings, and January 1, 2018, for commercial buildings, and every 3 years thereafter, respectively, through January 1, 2029, and January 1, 2030, 5 percent additional reduction in energy use relative to the baseline code.
Implementation
- There shall be established national energy efficiency building codes under this subsection, for residential and commercial buildings, sufficient to meet each of the national building code energy efficiency targets established under subsection (a), not later than the date that is 1 year after the deadline for establishment of each such target, except that the national energy efficiency building code established to meet the target described in subsection (a)(1)(A) shall be established by not later than 15 months after the effective date of that target.
- Each State, or where applicable under State law each local government, shall implement and enforce applicable State or local codes with respect to which a certification was accepted by the Secretary under subsection (c)(2)(B) or paragraph (5) of this subsection, or the national energy efficiency building codes, as provided in this subsection.
Enforcement
- The Secretary shall propose and, not later than 3 years after the date of enactment of the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, shall define by rule violations of the energy efficiency building codes to be enforced by the Secretary pursuant to this section, and the penalties that shall apply to violators, in any jurisdiction in which the national energy efficiency building code has been made applicable under subsection (d)(1). To the extent that the Secretary determines that the authority to adopt and impose such violations and penalties by rule requires further statutory authority, the Secretary shall report such determination to Congress as soon as such determination is made, but not later than 1 year after the enactment of the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009.
- Where a State fails and local governments in that State also fail to enforce the applicable State or national energy efficiency building codes, the Secretary shall enforce such codes.
Punishment
- The Secretary shall assess a civil penalty for violations of this section, pursuant to subsection (d)(3), in accordance with the procedures described in section 333(d) of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6303). The United States district courts shall also have jurisdiction to restrain any violation of this section or rules adopted thereunder, in accordance with the procedures described in section 334 of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6304).
- Each day of unlawful occupancy shall be considered a separate violation.
- In the event a building constructed out of compliance with the applicable code has been conveyed by a knowing builder or knowing seller to an unknowing purchaser, the builder or seller shall be the violator.
Summary
The Federal government will set lofty goals for energy reduction at the household level and dictate that state and local governments verify that the objectives are met and subsequently punish any citizen not in compliance. Punishment will range from daily fines to being prevented from selling their real property to forcing remodel projects to be completed by sellers, regardless of their ability to afford doing so. The increased costs for hiring inspectors and enforcement personnel, their management chain and administrative support staff, office space, vehicles, tools, increased caseloads in the courts and the appointed defense attorneys for those defendants unable to afford a defense will be borne by the taxpayers through a combination of income and property taxes, plus applicable fines.
Okay, so rewinding to the beginning, WWTFFD (what would the founding fathers do)? Well, I think they would keep it simple. They were interested in keeping centralized government to a minimum – keeping government localized. They felt so strongly about this, in fact, that they had a tea party and started a revolution. They would say that the central government was intended to provide for national defense, a monetary system and the general health and welfare for its citizens, and everything else should be handled by the States. Beyond those fundamental provisions, we are blessed today with organizations such as the United Nations that provide a forum for representatives of all people from around the world to deal with global issues that are not the focus, nor fault of any one nation. Yep – I think old Thomas M. Foster would agree. Just keep it simple.
The True American Spirit
Let me inject a few more observations. I do not believe the hybrid vehicle concept was driven by any government decree. I do not believe Native Americans built mud huts to keep cool because the government told them they had to. I do not believe multi-layer glass windows were introduced as a result of government programs. I do believe that these were all independent thinking solutions by enterprising individuals and companies who had good ideas and the wherewithal to develop their products and bring them to market. Pure and simple – American entrepreneurial spirit and capitalism at its finest.
Let us all join together and help Congress get back to basics – providing for a strong national defense, a monetary system and the general health and welfare for its citizens. 2010 is just around the corner. Vote responsibly!
Happy Independence Day!
My mind drifts a bit every year about this time. I try to relate the current state of the nation to what the founding fathers were thinking so long ago. I try to read the mind of Thomas M. Foster, my ancestor that arrived from Ipswich, England in 1742 to start the then soon to be American branch of our family tree. And now that I am over 40 years of age (ahem), I think my mind should be allowed to drift occasionally.
I took note the other day of H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act, which narrowly passed in the House recently. It will no doubt be highly modified before becoming a law, but even so, we should all take note of some of the language written into this original version by our elected congressional representatives. As a real estate practitioner, I was drawn to sections of the bill that relate to housing. I confess, I have not read the entire bill (yet), but neither did any of the representatives that voted for it in Congress by their own confession. I’d like to share some excerpts from the bill as passed by the House of Representatives. I must warn you that some of these excerpts may be disconcerting to those of you considered to be Americans, so read at your own risk.
Well-intentioned Objective:
- Effective on the date of enactment of the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, 30 percent reduction in energy use relative to a comparable building constructed in compliance with the baseline code; effective January 1, 2014, for residential buildings, and January 1, 2015, for commercial buildings, 50 percent reduction in energy use relative to the baseline code; and effective January 1, 2017, for residential buildings, and January 1, 2018, for commercial buildings, and every 3 years thereafter, respectively, through January 1, 2029, and January 1, 2030, 5 percent additional reduction in energy use relative to the baseline code.
Implementation
- There shall be established national energy efficiency building codes under this subsection, for residential and commercial buildings, sufficient to meet each of the national building code energy efficiency targets established under subsection (a), not later than the date that is 1 year after the deadline for establishment of each such target, except that the national energy efficiency building code established to meet the target described in subsection (a)(1)(A) shall be established by not later than 15 months after the effective date of that target.
- Each State, or where applicable under State law each local government, shall implement and enforce applicable State or local codes with respect to which a certification was accepted by the Secretary under subsection (c)(2)(B) or paragraph (5) of this subsection, or the national energy efficiency building codes, as provided in this subsection.
Enforcement
- The Secretary shall propose and, not later than 3 years after the date of enactment of the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, shall define by rule violations of the energy efficiency building codes to be enforced by the Secretary pursuant to this section, and the penalties that shall apply to violators, in any jurisdiction in which the national energy efficiency building code has been made applicable under subsection (d)(1). To the extent that the Secretary determines that the authority to adopt and impose such violations and penalties by rule requires further statutory authority, the Secretary shall report such determination to Congress as soon as such determination is made, but not later than 1 year after the enactment of the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009.
- Where a State fails and local governments in that State also fail to enforce the applicable State or national energy efficiency building codes, the Secretary shall enforce such codes.
Punishment
- The Secretary shall assess a civil penalty for violations of this section, pursuant to subsection (d)(3), in accordance with the procedures described in section 333(d) of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6303). The United States district courts shall also have jurisdiction to restrain any violation of this section or rules adopted thereunder, in accordance with the procedures described in section 334 of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6304).
- Each day of unlawful occupancy shall be considered a separate violation.
- In the event a building constructed out of compliance with the applicable code has been conveyed by a knowing builder or knowing seller to an unknowing purchaser, the builder or seller shall be the violator.
Summary
The Federal government will set lofty goals for energy reduction at the household level and dictate that state and local governments verify that the objectives are met and subsequently punish any citizen not in compliance. Punishment will range from daily fines to being prevented from selling their real property to forcing remodel projects to be completed by sellers, regardless of their ability to afford doing so. The increased costs for hiring inspectors and enforcement personnel, their management chain and administrative support staff, office space, vehicles, tools, increased caseloads in the courts and the appointed defense attorneys for those defendants unable to afford a defense will be borne by the taxpayers through a combination of income and property taxes, plus applicable fines.
Okay, so rewinding to the beginning, WWTFFD (what would the founding fathers do)? Well, I think they would keep it simple. They were interested in keeping centralized government to a minimum – keeping government localized. They felt so strongly about this, in fact, that they had a tea party and started a revolution. They would say that the central government was intended to provide for national defense, a monetary system and the general health and welfare for its citizens, and everything else should be handled by the States. Beyond those fundamental provisions, we are blessed today with organizations such as the United Nations that provide a forum for representatives of all people from around the world to deal with global issues that are not the focus, nor fault of any one nation. Yep – I think old Thomas M. Foster would agree. Just keep it simple.
The True American Spirit
Let me inject a few more observations. I do not believe the hybrid vehicle concept was driven by any government decree. I do not believe Native Americans built mud huts to keep cool because the government told them they had to. I do not believe multi-layer glass windows were introduced as a result of government programs. I do believe that these were all independent thinking solutions by enterprising individuals and companies who had good ideas and the wherewithal to develop their products and bring them to market. Pure and simple – American entrepreneurial spirit and capitalism at its finest.
Let us all join together and help Congress get back to basics – providing for a strong national defense, a monetary system and the general health and welfare for its citizens. 2010 is just around the corner. Vote responsibly!
Happy Independence Day!
Thursday, June 11, 2009
HDTV Mis-Direction?
Well, tomorrow is the delayed cutover to HDTV. I don't particularly know what that is all about, but according to the news briefs I heard yesterday, the delay was due to approximately 6.4 million households not having a converter box at the time the original cutover was scheduled to occur. This may sound a bit cynical, but the government was apparently quite concerned that their message was not going to reach 6.4 million households. In response, they spent $2 billion (that would be $2,000,000,000) in taxpayer money to delay the cutover and equip an additional 3.6 million of those households for HDTV . . . there seem to be 2.8 million still not capable of receiving the new signal. The government apparently believes their message to be of such importance that it was well worth the $2,000,000,000 in taxpayer money. My understanding was that the government was to take care of the health and well-being of its citizens, provide a financial system and a strong defense. I am trying to understand how HDTV fits into that . . . . . I suppose it could just be an overwhelming lobby effort by the television industry - talk about special interest influence in Washington - sheesh.
As I stood in line at my local grocery store the other day, I thought of an alternative to investing $2,000,000,000 in tax dollars for TV. Next to me was a pre-prepared bag of food for the local food shelf marked at $5. It contained enough food and ingredients to feed a family for a day. I couldn't do the math in my head, since $2,000,000,000 of tax dollars just had too many zeroes for me to comprehend. Since then, I have divided the $2,000,000,000 by $5 and learned that hour hundred million families could have enjoyed a good meal - that is 400,000,000 families. Think about that - isn't it mind-boggling?
So just for the record, if I had a legitimate choice of how my tax dollars were to be spent, I would have fed the people instead of making certain they had TV in their living room. It would have been a pretty good message for the government to deliver and even the lobbyists for the television industry could have taken some credit - I don't really care about that. 400 million families might have cared, however.
As I stood in line at my local grocery store the other day, I thought of an alternative to investing $2,000,000,000 in tax dollars for TV. Next to me was a pre-prepared bag of food for the local food shelf marked at $5. It contained enough food and ingredients to feed a family for a day. I couldn't do the math in my head, since $2,000,000,000 of tax dollars just had too many zeroes for me to comprehend. Since then, I have divided the $2,000,000,000 by $5 and learned that hour hundred million families could have enjoyed a good meal - that is 400,000,000 families. Think about that - isn't it mind-boggling?
So just for the record, if I had a legitimate choice of how my tax dollars were to be spent, I would have fed the people instead of making certain they had TV in their living room. It would have been a pretty good message for the government to deliver and even the lobbyists for the television industry could have taken some credit - I don't really care about that. 400 million families might have cared, however.
Friday, May 22, 2009
Twin Cities Real Estate Update
It seems like ages ago when I last provided an update for the local Twin Cities real estate market, due in part to the changes that have been underway. Whether you are a Buyer or a Seller, the general trend is good - here are some reasons why:
So . . . what could anyone be waiting for?
- Conforming home loan rates remain at historic 40-year lows;
- First-time home buyers are eligible for a $8,000 tax credit if they purchase before December 1, 2009;
- The number of homes available for sale in the Twin Cities is over 20% lower today than a year ago;
- The housing affordability index is a record 219 right now, meaning the median household income in the Twin Cities is 219% over that required to purchase the median priced home.
So . . . what could anyone be waiting for?
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Big 3 Automakers Double-Dipping?
When is enough enough? Each of the Big 3 automakers has received immense local and state tax breaks to locate their manufacturing and research facilities in this state and the next. Politicians have clamored around them for years because they see manufacturing as job creation. To some extent, this is true. The state and local governments make tax concessions on the front-end to the automakers in exchange for building a manufacturing plant or research facility. The local and state taxpayers must make up the difference, because heaven forbid that tax concessions be covered by a reduced government budget. The new facilities commence operation and the local politicians pat themselves on the back and get re-elected a couple of times. Let's not overlook the fact that the Big 3 auto industry has not been expanding in many years, so those "new jobs" were actually replacement jobs. For every "new job", there was a worker displaced somewhere else - but then, that is some other politician’s problem . . . .
Then reality sets in. The auto industry is highly competitive with a broad range of interchangeable vehicles to choose from, i.e. - they all get the passengers from point A to point B, so differentiation is difficult. As time goes on for any specific product line, costs must drop because new competition will be driving down the actual net sales price. Ah - now the reality part. The manufacturing facilities are loaded up with union laborers who, by contract, are getting regular salary increases. The automakers used the government tax incentives to get by in the early going of their operations, but as time passes, the contract labor rates eat that up and more. They are then left with a top-heavy salary burden that cannot be resolved, even with all the off-shore parts manufacturing they can farm out.
So . . . . as we contemplate giving the Big 3 another round (the double-dip) of taxpayer money - the $25 billion discussion of the day - shouldn't we step back a bit and ask why? Saving jobs is a typical response, but for how long? Management fundamentals seem to be missing in action. I particularly enjoyed these reports from today’s hearings in Washington, and applaud these Congressmen:
-- Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Calif., asked the three auto chiefs seated at the witness table before him to raise their hands if they had come to Washington on commercial airliners. No hands went up. Then he asked if any planned to sell their corporate jets. Again, no hands went up.
-- Sherman and Rep. Gary Ackerman, D-N.Y., told the auto executives they were having a hard time justifying to their constituents bailing out companies whose chiefs fly around in expensive private jets.
-- Ackerman said there was "a delicious irony in seeing private jets flying into Washington D.C. and people coming off them with tin cups in their hands."
Given this reaction from the other wing of Congress within his own party, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid promptly asked President Bush to standby in case he needed help in getting a Big 3 bailout pushed through. Excuse me? Good leaders listen – get a clue, Harry!
Oh, and by the way, the double-dip is actually a triple-dip. Remember the manufacturing plants that were built in exchange for local and state tax concessions? Well, at the Federal tax level, the manufacturers are rewarded for modernizing their manufacturing facilities - yet another tax benefit for big business. Why manage? Uncle Sam will always come to the rescue! What class did all these folks take in grad school, anyway?
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Congratulations, America! Don't Let Up!!
A couple of days ago I noted the gasoline price at my most frequented filling station at $1.89 per gallon. I was amused and reflected back to late spring when many candidates in the Presidential primaries from both parties were supporting the idea of suspending the Federal gas tax for the summer months. Only one candidate stood up for addressing the problem versus buying primary votes at roughly $60 apiece (the average saving per household with the gas tax scheme for the entire summer). Only one candidate spoke openly that the problem was the demand for gasoline and if demand was reduced, that the price would follow - his opponents scoffed at him as being an elitist and not being in touch with the average American. Gosh - imagine that - someone trying to understand and solve the problem instead of giving a few token dollars for votes. At the time, there were 17 candidates still duking it out in the Democrat & Republican camps. Statistically speaking, 94% of them were clueless about the problem and thought $60 per household would make Americans forget about it. Amazingly enough, they are almost all still holding their elected offices today in spite of this shallow thinking. Wake up, voters - you really need to pay attention!
At our house, we sold our gas-guzzling SUV and picked up a small (American made) economy car which immediately started saving us $75/month in gasoline expenditures. Many other Americans did the same thing. We were delighted to participate in this exercise, proving that free markets can and do correct themselves - without government intervention.
So now we are seeing sub-$2/gallon gasoline after just 5 months of reducing our collective demand - down from $4/gallon. My message today is very simple. GASOLINE IS NOT ON SALE, folks. Do not go out and start guzzling gasoline because it feels like it is "on sale". A 50% price drop at the pumps was due to reduced consumption. Increasing consumption will have the opposite effect. It will require immense discipline on the part of all American consumers to keep the price down and frankly, to cause it to drop even further. Gasoline cost roughly $0.24 per gallon when I first learned to drive. Wouldn't you like to see that on the sign outside your local filling station?
And just to expand this thinking a bit, as we have reduced our consumption of gasoline, would you be open to the notion that in so doing, we have also reduced our harmful emissions into the atmosphere and helped the environment? Wow - an amazingly simple thing like driving less and converting to more fuel-efficient automobiles providing more net income to your household AND helping improve the environment at the same time. The next time someone comes to my doorstep and wants my signature on a petition and a donation to fund a political action committee / lobbyist to buy influence in Washington regarding an environmental cause to cleanse my conscience, I can now engage in a meaningful conversation about how I have already made a difference and suggest that they are the new endangered species. We may be on to something here, America. Keep up the good work!
At our house, we sold our gas-guzzling SUV and picked up a small (American made) economy car which immediately started saving us $75/month in gasoline expenditures. Many other Americans did the same thing. We were delighted to participate in this exercise, proving that free markets can and do correct themselves - without government intervention.
So now we are seeing sub-$2/gallon gasoline after just 5 months of reducing our collective demand - down from $4/gallon. My message today is very simple. GASOLINE IS NOT ON SALE, folks. Do not go out and start guzzling gasoline because it feels like it is "on sale". A 50% price drop at the pumps was due to reduced consumption. Increasing consumption will have the opposite effect. It will require immense discipline on the part of all American consumers to keep the price down and frankly, to cause it to drop even further. Gasoline cost roughly $0.24 per gallon when I first learned to drive. Wouldn't you like to see that on the sign outside your local filling station?
And just to expand this thinking a bit, as we have reduced our consumption of gasoline, would you be open to the notion that in so doing, we have also reduced our harmful emissions into the atmosphere and helped the environment? Wow - an amazingly simple thing like driving less and converting to more fuel-efficient automobiles providing more net income to your household AND helping improve the environment at the same time. The next time someone comes to my doorstep and wants my signature on a petition and a donation to fund a political action committee / lobbyist to buy influence in Washington regarding an environmental cause to cleanse my conscience, I can now engage in a meaningful conversation about how I have already made a difference and suggest that they are the new endangered species. We may be on to something here, America. Keep up the good work!
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Get Ready - Get Set - Rebound!
It has been awhile since I provided a market update for Twin Cities real estate. I have been observing the data with renewed interest of late. We have now identified a trend in two areas:
1) The number of new listings coming on the market for the past 5 consecutive weeks is lower than it was for the same period a year ago; and
2) The number of new sales (pendings) has been higher for the past 6 conscutive weeks than for the same period a year ago.
What does this mean? My interpretation is that we are in the early stages (not widely recognized) of a market rebound. Several states in the nation have already noted the same trends and have declared a turnaround. Minnesota is about to join those ranks. Homebuyers should get ready . . . get set . . . and GO! Savvy investors already have - now it is time for the owner-occupied sales to kick in. Don't be late for the party!
1) The number of new listings coming on the market for the past 5 consecutive weeks is lower than it was for the same period a year ago; and
2) The number of new sales (pendings) has been higher for the past 6 conscutive weeks than for the same period a year ago.
What does this mean? My interpretation is that we are in the early stages (not widely recognized) of a market rebound. Several states in the nation have already noted the same trends and have declared a turnaround. Minnesota is about to join those ranks. Homebuyers should get ready . . . get set . . . and GO! Savvy investors already have - now it is time for the owner-occupied sales to kick in. Don't be late for the party!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
