How To Choose A President

With all the adds on TV by each Presidential candidate, it has to be confusing to most.  How do you know which one to pick?  Before you make your decision, you first need a "plan".  That is what this blog is about.

I look at the problem in "three" sections.
(1)  Does the candidate understand the problem?
(2)  Does the candidate have a solution?
(3)  Can the candidate execute the solution?

Look at Obama as an example.  If he thinks global warming is the most serious and pressing problem that we face, he has failed on point (1).  If he can't get past point (1), there is no need to go on any farther.  Try another one.  Obama, at least, feels that ISIS is a serious problem and thus he passes on point (1).  The fact that he does not have a solution means that he fails on point (2) and again, there is no need to consider Obama any farther.  Starting too see how this works?  A good candidate has to get a "yes" vote on all three points.

Now, let's look at some candidates.  First Rubio.  Have you seen his adds or listened to his speeches?  If you have, you will have noticed that he always gets point (1) right but never gets any farther. Since most of us know what the problem is, all Rubio does is to lecture us on what we already know.  If Rubio knows what the solution is, you have to ask why he is not telling us?  If you assume that he knows the solution (2), then what are the chances that he could be able to execute the solution (3)?  Here, you have to look at his track record of executing complex plans and he does not have a positive track record.  Rubio has never been in a positon to make hard decision.  Most of his experience has been spending someone else's money and we know that when it came to spending his own, he has not done too well.

You could keep this up all the way down the list of candidates and at the end, it would be clear which were good candidates and which one would be best.  Take Trump next.  For my money, he has clearly shown that ISIS, immigration and the economy are the most serious problems, not global warming.  Trump gets and "A" on (1).  Does he have a plan?  Yes!  Some may not like his plan for illegal immigrants, but it is a plan and the other candidates do not have a plan that is really a plan.  Trump gets at least a grade of "B" on (2).  Finally, what has been Trump's batting average on executing complex decisions and plans?  In a very competitive world on both a national and international basis he has executed his plans successfully. I would say that he has a very good batting average and thus an "A" on point (3).

For those candidates who claim as their experience winning an election for a public office, how does that rate compared to someone who has been spending their own money?  Look at it this way.  Here is a state government system or structure that has been operating for about 100 years.  99% of the players are in place and experienced when the newly elected person shows up.  The fact that at least 25 or 30 people have held this same job before would tend to tell one that it is not a very difficult job.  It would be like taking over the controls of a train going from San Francisco to New York for a few miles.  Dose that take the sharpest knife in the drawer?  I don't think so.  How about a giant super tanker?  Even the captain does not take the boat in and out of port.  He gets an experienced "pilot".  The captain only handles the ship on the high seas and often he is in bed sound asleep as happened in Alaska a few years back with the big oil spill.  My objective here is to put into perspective real world experience with elective government experience and I think you can see the difference.

Your job is to compare the candidates on the three points above and vote for the best one!!

PS--Have you noticed that in most of Obama's speeches, all he does is lecture us on facts that we all already know.  He never defines the real problem, the solution or how he is going to execute a successful plan.  Obama is like the guy at the end of the bar who keeps telling people about problems in the world, but never has a solution for any of them.

PS--Here is another thing that any President or good executive needs.  The ability to anticipate problems well enough into the future so that action can be taken to prevent them.  It is a lot easier to prevent kids from playing with matches than it is to put out a home fire!!!  Obama fails on this one too.  More education does not solve this one.  You either have it or you don't!  I think Trump has it.

School Tax And Immigration Policy

I just paid my property tax, how about you?  The biggest item on the bill was the school tax.  It was about 50% of the bill.  Nationally, the school tax ranges between 40% and 55% of the property tax bill.  The reason that it is so high is that the average cost per year per student is $15,000.  This will be my starting point for this blog.

This blog will not focus on the unionization of our school teachers or the fact that most can not be fired for any logical reason.  That is the meat for another blog.  First, I want to look  at the breeding habits and earning habits of different groups within our population. 

The first group is the illegals that are here and who are breeding and sending their kids to our public schools. As a group, their  earnings are well below the median and their number of kids is well above the median.  Try these numbers.  They have twice as many kids at 4 and earn half as much at $25,000.  They consume $60,000 in your school tax while they pay less than $1,000.  We have over 25 million of these illegals here in the USA doing the above.  If they were all sent back to where they came from, it is clear that we would all be better off.  Think about all the billions in school tax money that we would save.  Most of you don't realize how these illegals are screwing you.  If you did, you would be wanting your government to fix the problem!

The next group is the Muslims who we let in because of our "good heart".  The breeding habits of the Muslims is actually higher than the illegal Latin Americans.  For my analysis, I am going to use 6 kids as the average per family.  If you don't agree with my numbers, check the  figures for Minneapolis. Many of these Muslim immigrants have been on welfare from day one and will stay there for most of their lives.  This means that their average family income based on work is actually lower than that of illegals.  I am going to use $20,000 here.  At $15,000 per kid for school, that means the average Muslim family with 6 kids is going to be consuming $90,000 of your school tax money.  Do you really think that they are ever going to pay their own way?  How much richer do you think a city like Minneapolis would be if their citizens did not have to pick up the tab for Muslims?  I remind those of you who don't see a problem with letting in more Muslims that your actions end up by stealing from you neighbors.  I don't think you can be honest and be in favor of more Muslim immigrants for any reason.

The nest group are Blacks.  They rank right in the middle of the above groups, but have most of their kids out of wedlock where many of their kids end up as criminals and school drop outs.  This group not only eat up much more of your school tax money than they pay in, but also welfare cost and law enforcement cost.  The problem is similar to the above, but the solution is not.  I don't know how, but the Black community is going to have to clean up their act and be socially responsible.  It is clear to me that they are not victims, but are leaching on the socially responsible tax payers. The first step in the solution is to admit to the problem and the Black community has not yet admitted they "they" are the problem and have to look within themselves for the solution.  It will not be easy nor fast, but it has to change.

When we compare our quality of life with other countries, we also need to think about how our population is different from them.  I am talking about places like Canada, New Zealand, Finland and Australia.  They don't have a significant portion of their population similar to the above three groups.  The bottom line is, "can you admit that we have a problem in where and how our school tax money is spent"?

PS--Why do we have a tax law that allows a tax discount for each kid?  As it turns out, the people who pay the least taxes also have the most kids.  We don't need more kids or immigrants.  The world is over populated now and the quality of life in the USA goes down with every new birth.  We need to stop paying people to have kids.  If they can't afford kids, they should be responsible enough to not have them in the first place.

Immigrants Built America Myth

Do you really think that immigrants built America?  If you do, I think you must be smoking something.  This blog is going to try to set the record straight.

When the first Europeans came to Jamestown in 1608, 90% of the Native Americans had already died from small pox.  It had been introduced by sailing ships that were trading with the Native Americans for the prior 100 years.  Remember that Columbus discovered this place in 1492.  My family did not come to Jamestown for another 116 years!  It was not until 1790 that the United States was formed and it only included the 13 most Eastern states.  There were near zero Europeans in the other 37 states.

Immigrants did come to the USA, but it was to exploit the natural resources that were here, like fish, fur, timber, coal, farm land and oil.  The other point, what was the type of skill set needed?  To farm, you had to be able to walk behind a mule.  To mine coal, you needed a strong back.  For none of these jobs did they need to be able to read or write and most could not.  I have driven over much of the USA and I did not see any signs for "free land" or "farmers wanted".  I guess that it is because we do not need anymore farmers, miners or loggers.

If immigrants built and made us so rich, why didn't immigrants go to the Sahara Desert and make that place rich?  How about Hatti?  The place has plenty of people and it is not rich?  Look at India, it also has plenty of people and it is clear that they are not rich.  You have to start thinking that it was not the fact that immigrants came to the USA that made us rich, the wealth was already here in the form of our natural resources.  Would more immigrants to Hatti and India make those two countries more wealthy?  I think that you can clearly see that it would not and in fact, it would make both much poorer.  If immigrants would make those two places poorer, why would you think that immigrants coming here would make the USA richer?  I could have thrown in Mexico and the answer would be the same.

Now, look at the other side of the coin.  Would Mexico be richer if a bunch of their low skilled people immigrated "out" of Mexico and into the USA?  I think that you know the answer to that one.  The same would be true of Hatti and India where many of their immigrants who come here send money back home.  Do you think that makes the USA richer?

In a prior blog, I talked about the "objective".  Exactly what is the objective for us citizens of the USA?  I propose that a good one might be "median quality of life".  Remember that there are a lot of people in Mexico, Hatti and India who have a very good quality of life, but for the "median" families, it is very low.  I had a maid and a gardener when I lived in Argentina, but back here in the USA, I can not afford either.  That is why I picked "median".  If you figure income equals quality of life, then the objective could be "median family income".  As it turns out (4th grade math), when you add in a bunch of  immigrants who earn less than the current median income, it lowers the median income for the USA.  Got that?  This points up another way that a country can improve the "median quality of  life".  What do you think that is?  Get rid of those people who do not have the skills or ability to earn more!  Sounds cruel doesn't it?  Well, this is exactly what countries like Switzerland and Japan have done.  They don't have a lot of criminal dead beats at the bottom pulling down the median quality of life like the USA does.

What do you think would happen if the USA had fewer people committing crimes?  I am talking about all the drug dealing and murders that we see in some of our larger cities.  This is not about getting rid of guns.  I know people who have several hundred guns, yet I do not know one person who has ever shot someone.  What if we eliminated the people who claim disability, but  who are clearly able to work from milking us tax payers?  It would raise the median family income and quality of life.

Every time you listen to a politician or a new government program or policy, ask yourself if it raises or lowers the median income.  If it lowers the median income, you have to speak out against it.  If it doesn't change or changes only slightly the median income, you also have to be against it.  Our government has more important things to do than busy work that does not lead any place.  Realize also that our government always errors on the side of being too optimistic.  Their programs always cost more and provide less.  You have to take that into account.  Look a Obamacare for a recent example.  It would have been better to have done "nothing".

This is getting a little long, but it is all related to what our immigration policy should be.  We need to think more about our own children and less about people around the world who had kids they could not afford to take care of.  We could all do with a little more tough love!

Rubio Vs Clinton

Did you hear that it appears that Rubio would beat Clinton in a head to head contest?  I have been watching this too and have some different ideas.  Rather than focus on Rubio for the answer, I look at the liberal voters for the answer.  What is it about the liberal voters who would vote for Clinton that is significant?  That is this blog.

I look at all the candidates on the Republican ticket and feel that Rubio is totally unqualified to be President of the USA.  Rather than listen to what Rubio has to say, I would prefer to look at his record of prior conduct and actions.  Remember that actions count more than "words".  Based on Rubio's prior actions, I feel that he is one of the least qualified to be President.  Since he has never held a job where he had a competent boss or worked for competent people, there is no way to know that he is competent himself.  Rubio is a light weight among light weights, but he is cute and has a strong voice.

Look at Obama, he was totally incompetent to be President, but liberal voters don't look at competence.  They look for cute, a good smile and a strong voice and Rubio has that.  Do you really think that some one like Trump would impress a liberal voter with his competence and history of dealing with complex situations?  No way!  That is why some light  weight like Rubio would attract liberal voters from Clinton and Trump would not.

If you have noticed, rather than looking at the end of the flow of votes, I look at where they came from.  In this case, most people look at Rubio's attraction and I look at the mental attitude of liberals for the cause of the flow.  Liberal voters are mental light weights and respond appropriately as you can now see.  The number one problem facing our nation is not Global Warming, it is the light weight liberal brains of too many of our citizens and voters.  I think that the "Teacher's Union" is the biggest threat facing our nation, not Global Warming!  Our young voters are one of the most dangerous groups in our country because they have not recovered from the brain washing done by the teacher's union.  Think about it?  Who was the first to endorse Clinton?  Don't know?  It was the "Teacher's Union".  100% of the money from the teacher's union started out as tax money from you and me, so our tax money is financing Clinton.

PS--Did you every think about exactly who the people are who would vote for someone like Clinton?  Well here is who I think they predominately are. 90% of the Blacks, 80% of the Mexicans, 80% of the Jews, 75% of our school teachers, 70% of union members, 75% of high school drop outs and 85% of people on welfare.  Now, do you realize why America is going down the toilet.  Our problems is that the USA is being taken over by free loaders who don't understand that the government does not have any money.  The government gets their money from you and me in the form of taxes and if that is not enough, they borrow from China and send the bill to our children.  Isn't Democracy great???

PS---For the record, it was White males who built the USA and now they are being screwed by those who they helped.  Interesting isn't it how Democracy works in the end?

Terrorism And The Poison Pill

This blog is not a repeat, it is a reminder.  If you did not read my prior blog about the "Poison Pill", you should go back and read it.  Here is a summary.  The human race has had, over time, many different religions that competed for the minds of us humans.  When serious organized religions got started without the aid of a "written language" that produced books that could be passed around, there was little competition between religions.  As the different religions got bigger and bigger the competition for new believers got more intense.  The religions responded by adopting the "poison pill" which taught that their religion was the only true religion and all others were false.  With this new idea, once a mind had been converted, it was unlikely to lose it to any other religion.  Great,  except what happens in the end?

Rather than finding new minds to convert, the focus of religions shifted to keeping the minds that they had converted.  The end was a "war" between all the human religions.  Since the Muslim religion came along "after" the Christian religion, they were first to adapt the "poison pill".  It is  the dogma of the Muslim religion to allow Muslims to kill non believers which includes Christians.  Isn't that what this "poison pill" business has degenerated into?

Like many concepts when taken "too the limit" have very unwanted outcomes.  I could site all kinds of things that look good to simple minded liberals that turn out "in the limit". to be very bad.

PS--The thing about the "poison pill" concept as all religions accept it, is that only one religion can have it right about the "here after" and all others are wrong.  Since they all can not be right a much more probable situation is that "all" are wrong.  The human race needs to get beyond religion and all it destructive aspects.  Religion is like weeds in your garden.  As the weeds start taking over the garden , at some point you have to get out the "Roundup" and kill them off or you will starve. When is the human race had enough of religion?  It will not be soon enough or we are all going to be dead.
Remember Eastern Island and listen before it is too late.

Democrats Are Selling Out America

It is going on right under your nose.  The Democrats are selling out America and this blog will tell you how they are doing it.  In the end, Democrats are not concerned about America, they are only concerned about themselves.  They don't care how America ends up as long as they are running the show.  Remember that, "the ends justifies the means"?  When ever one buys into that concept, it will not be long before the party is over.

Here is how they are doing it.  Immigration.  How can more immigrants be the problem or the means?  Most think that it was immigrants who built America and if it was good back then, it is still a good idea today.  Nothing could be farther from the truth.   Back  n 1790, we did need immigrants to exploit the natural resources of this new America and to man an army big enough to protect the new nation.  After those two things were satisfied, there was no longer any need for more immigrants, but they still came.  On average, those extra immigrants have made us poorer and lowered the median quality of life here.  Those are the facts.

Look at the more recent immigrants.  Most have come from places and from cultures that have either been slow to assimilate or have not assimilated at all.  This has left a once united country broke into factions.  You have to agree with this point. The more serious problem with these new immigrants compared to those of the past is that these new immigrants tend to end up in our larger cities and urban areas.  They have no connection to the land as did those of the past.  Further, they mostly have come from countries that have had failed non-democratic governments.  Most of those governments were dictators or authoritarian and did not provide well for any but those on the top.  When people with that kind of background come here, to a working democracy. they still think in terms of some kind of central control.  Most immigrants have come from countries with a smaller population than America and thus see little problem with a strong centralized government.  This is where the problem starts.

Liberals do not believe in the founding principles of the constitution where the individual is protected from abuse by a strong central government.  The founding fathers envisioned a country where the individual was in control as much as possible and that any central government got its authority at the consent of the individual, not the other way around.  Most of our newer immigrants were just not ready for this revolutionary type of government that we have here in America.  They see the conservative Republican party as advocating "no" strong central government and in their eyes, this means no control or chaos.  For that reason, they naturally favor a strong central government with the "hope" that it will provide them with a good quality of life.  Since, in the beginning, they have not yet given up any of their freedom, they do not see a strong central government as a threat.

The net results is that new immigrants will vote for the liberal Democratic agenda. They see no real problem taxing the rich and giving the money to them since back where  they came from most of the rich became rich by their connections to a central government rather than merit and hard work. With this kind of mind set, new immigrants are sitting ducks for the liberal's pitch. 

Look back at the last 75 or 100 years and see where the new immigrants have come from and you will see that I am right.  The Democrats have a long range plan so it does not matter if the immigrants got here legally or not since their children will be citizens with the right to vote and keep them in power.  It will be like religion where most kids will follow the religion of their parents, only in this case it will be the voting patterns of their parents!!!!


PS---Here is another angle.  Most immigrants fall into either of two groups.  Poor people who will feed at the public trough of American tax payers and lower the median net family income and lower the quality of life.  The better educated people who will earn a lot of money off the American economy and send remittances to family back where they came from. In the end, they will "not" help the American economy.  While all this is happening, these first immigrants will be bringing in their older parents and relatives who will qualify for aid from us tax payers.  We are sitting ducks for this scam and don't even realized that we are helping to sell out our children and grandchildren.