Search Insurance

Showing posts with label Whats. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Whats. Show all posts

Friday, May 11, 2012

Talk Radio Host Asks Presidential Candidate Joe L. Buckett... If I Vote For You, What's In It For Me


Al: This is Al Robinson with my special guest today, Presidential candidate Joe L. Buckett. Welcome to the show Joe. Some of our listeners have heard about your candidacy, and others have not. But since we only have twenty short minutes here, let me get right to the point and ask you the question that our listeners would most like to ask. I want to know, if I vote for you, Joe L. Bucket, what's in it for my family and me?

Joe: Great place to start Al, and I'd answer by telling you that, in accordance with section 13 of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, we plan to extend to every American citizen, an annual credit for at least $3,000 designated solely for the purpose of purchasing stock or productive capital of some kind, in qualified business ventures. It'll be called a Capital Homesteading Account and will function similarly to the way an IRA or a 401K function today.

Over the years, every citizen will develop an ownership stake in the American economic pie, that's sufficient enough to produce an income in addition to their current wage or salary, which is designed to compliment that salary or wage, and to provide a solid retirement nest egg on which every American citizen can retire with dignity, and actively avoid ever becoming dependent on the U.S. government, i.e. social security...which we all know is mathematically destined to crash and burn under the weight of retiring baby boomers within the next three decades anyway.

Financial dependence, whether it's on a government or a corporate entity, is economic slavery to be avoided if at all possible. If we really want to let freedom ring, that can happen...but not if we elect either one of these mainstream party candidates, both of whom are hopelessly lost in 19th and 20th century economic paradigms. In order to come up with 21st century solutions to 21st century problems, you must have both feet planted firmly in the 21st century.

By the way Al, before we go any further, I need to confess that this entire 21st century recipe for success was purloined directly out of Dr. Norm Kurland's ingenious new book entitled Capital Homesteading for Every Citizen. To get a copy listeners can visit his web site at http://www.cesj.org.

Al: Sounds good to me Joe, but I have one minor problem with what you've said so far. That sounds like a $3,000 dollar loan to me and I want to know how my friend Johnny Paycheck to Paycheck is going to pay for this loan when he can't even keep up with all his credit card bills? That looks like one gigantic problem to me.

Joe: Yes Al, despite the fact that we're talking about a zero interest loan, from inside the 20th century paradigm that is an insurmountable problem. But let's step outside the box for a moment so I can tell you that the credit I'm talking about is going to bypass Wall Street and travel directly to Main Street from the Federal Reserve, through local banks, to Johnny Paycheck. And these local banks have a vested interest in the health and welfare of the local community, and they will help guide the investor toward qualified companies who, among other things, have proven themselves to be solid, predictable growth companies.

Now one of the ways a company must be qualified will be according to its willingness to pay dividends out to their stockholders, which we'll encourage by making all paid out dividends, tax deductible to the company. Johnny Paycheck's loan will then be repaid, in approximately seven years using those paid out dividends, not his salary or wages. When the loan is paid off, the dividends will keep on coming and will go directly to Johnny in order to supplement his wage or salary, and to help him to earn a solid retirement nest egg and avoid government dependence. This is effectively a leveraged buyout for individual citizens instead of multinational corporations.

Al: OK Joe let's back up one more step here and ask...where's all this money going to come from in the first place? Are you planning to jack up taxes on the wealthy and redistribute back to the less fortunate? If so, are you a communist, or a socialist?

Joe: OK Al. Now you're getting down to the real nitty gritty. You've just asked the $64,000 question when it comes to our $3000 plan. And the answer is, like all money, these funds will originate in the Federal Reserve, go directly to local banks, then into Johnny's Capital Homesteading account so that he can buy his annual piece of the rock. So that's where it comes from.

But that's not really what you're asking is it? What you, and most people want to know is, will the American taxpayer be stuck paying the bill? Who's going to pay it back? How will it be paid back? And how long will that payoff take? These are what I call banker's questions, which makes them very legitimate in my view.

So, the answer to the first question is that it won't cost the American taxpayer a dime. In fact in the near future this plan will shrink the size of government and offer American taxpayers the only legitimate reason to ever reduce taxes...a smaller government. The loan will be paid off with the tax-deductible dividends generated by the stock purchased by the CHA participant, and it will take a predictable average of seven years to pay it off. At the end of that seven year period, the tax deductible dividends being generated will begin to go directly to the CHA participant to compliment his or her wage or salary.

Because they're so worried about their taxes going up, the one question that most people fail to ask about the plan is "what's the net result of this program?" But it's an incredibly important question that needs to be answered, so let me do so right now.

The net result will be millions of people from coast to coast, many of who have never had the chance to participate in the American economy as a property owner before, who will become property owners. That is to say, they will become capitalists in a free market economy, and as the result of their ownership portfolio they will enjoy capital generated incomes designed to augment their wage or salary, which, in the long run, will eliminate the need for things like minimum wage laws and welfare because it eliminates poverty!

In the long run it will also eliminate the nearly bankrupt social security system and replace it with financially independent citizens from sea to shining sea who are no longer dependent on government for their livelihood. In short in will replace financial dependence with independence...WAGE SLAVERY WITH FREEDOM!

Al: That sounds great so far Joe, but won't all this new found purchasing power, all this new DEMAND in the market drive inflation up, reduce the value of the dollar, and eventually undermine all good that you're trying to accomplish here?

Joe: Your questions continue to be right on the mark Al, but the answer to this one is no, it won't drive inflation up. You see the classic definition of inflation is too much money chasing to little product. In other words it's too much demand chasing too little supply, so inflation is actually the result of an imbalanced economy.

In our $3000 plan, supply and demand are related in such a way that when production goes up, the income generated automatically goes up. And when production goes down, the income generated automatically goes down. So this system features it's own built in antidote to the imbalances in our free market economy.

As such it eliminates not only inflation, but also the infamous bust boom cycles that wreak havoc on the people of this nation every decade or so, as well as the problem of concentrated wealth/power which is the cancerous root cause of social unrest, or as we like to call it today, CRIME and TERRORISM. Yes Al, in this new, 21st century, free market system, a rising tide really does lift all boats...not just the few privileged ones.

Al: OK Joe, I'm following so far, but I'm still going to play devil's advocate and ask, what happens when that company who receives some of this capital credit investment, is poorly managed, and it goes belly up like say Enron or Worldcom? What happens to the second income and the nest egg? And who pays the loan off? Is it the American taxpayer by any chance?

Joe: Of course in our current system that's exactly what happens. Tax payers are always bailing out poorly managed big businesses from Chrysler back in the 70's, to Silverado Savings and Loan back in the late 80's, to major banks, United, and Delta Airlines in the wake of 911...just to mention a few.

In our case however, there will be an insurance mechanism, much like when you or anyone else buys a house with an FHA mortgage where for a small premium the FHA underwrites the purchase, insures the individual, and the bank against the risk of default, so that neither is ever held directly liable if the loan can't be repaid. By the way, one of the individual's investment choices will be to purchase the stock in this insurance company, so that won't require raising taxes either.

The other answer to this question though is that since the capital credit will be traveling through local banks that will have a vested interest in the health and welfare of the local community, investors will avoid Wall Street altogether, and lots of these funds will end up in the hands of local business enterprises that people in the community know personally, and often work for, who are up front and transparent about their books and the future of their business, who local bankers know well, and will have a unique ability to predict future success. In short, the capital credit investor will get guidance from knowledgeable locals, who have a vested interest in the advice they hand out.

Al: Joe, please allow me throw one more wrench into your system here. This all sounds like so much theory to me because it's never been tried, tested, and proven, right? What empirical evidence is there that this wild ass theory of yours has any real world viability?

Joe: Al you keep coming up with these wonderful questions and I really appreciate the opportunity you're giving me to answer them. And on this last question, you're half right and half wrong. While it is true that it has not been tested in the municipal, state, or federal sector, it has been tested in the business community all over the nation.

I'm here to tell you that this 21st century ownership model to our 21st century economic problems has been tested in well over 10,000 business enterprises around the country who've implemented Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPS).

Several years ago a group called the Center for Employee Ownership conducted a study of the nation's 2000 best ESOPS businesses, and among other things they discovered that companies who are organized around employee ownership, GROW 10% FASTER EVERY YEAR than conventional, autocratically organized companies grow. Try slapping an annual 10% growth increase into a staggering economy and see what it does for a nation!

And for my money that's sufficient empirical evidence to at least roll out a test at the municipal level. And if that works, let's roll it out at the county level. And if that works, let's roll it out at the state level. And if that works let's roll it out at the national level, after all the bugs have been worked out. And there will be bugs.

Al: We're almost out of time here Joe, so would you kind of wrap this thing up in a summary for our listeners out there in WAVG AM/FM talk radio land?

Joe: Sure Al, I'll be happy to do that. I'd say that the key thing to recognize is how this strategy disrupts our nation's current systematic tendency towards concentrating wealth and power (it used to be referred to as monopoly) in a few hands. Instead it actively spreads the ownership of wealth producing capital out among individual citizens so that power is defused. This in turn underwrites (instead of undermines) justice, freedom, democracy, and a dramatically smaller government...of the people, by the people and for the people.

Now can you imagine a family of four in which each member has been investing minimally $3,000 annually over a substantial number of years, without using wages or salaries to do it? Can you fathom what kind of demand that scenario would generate in our economy? By the same token can you believe that all this can be accomplished while reducing the role and size of government, lowering and simplifying taxes (actually we'll endorse a simple flat tax), and eliminating inflation because supply and demand are finally both working in harmony, on the same wave, moving in the same direction?

That is to say, when production (supply), including sales, increases, then income (demand in the form of paid out dividends) automatically follows in its wake, which will automatically soak up the production/supply, and eliminate the "excess demand chasing too little supply" recipe for inflation. And when you keep supply and demand in balance, on the same wave, you also eliminate the troublesome bust and boom cycles that conventional economists accept as "just part of the free enterprise system." Done right, we contend that bust boom cycles aren't an inevitable part of a free market system at all.

Finally, understand that this plan is designed to gradually phase social security out, while rescuing it from pending bankruptcy. It's also designed to gradually phase out welfare as we know it, to reform health care and education, and to enthrone individual citizens over corporate autocrats and government bureaucrats so that they (autocrats and bureaucrats) are once again subservient to financially independent (i.e. FREE) citizens. In other words we're showing citizens how to actively avoid becoming financially dependent on, and thus subservient to the government bureaucrats or corporate autocrats.

Al: We have officially run out of time here, but I must confess that you've won my interest, and you've probably won the interest of many people out there in the listening audience. By the same token there are still many details that we've left uncovered in this twenty-minute session. So my last question is, can you give our listeners a book or a web site, or both where interested parties can learn more about this fascinating, outside the box, 21st century vision for the future of America's free enterprise system?

Joe: Sure Al. There are several places for your listeners to go. The first and probably the simplest is my own web site which is http://www.joelunchbuckett.com . The second is http://www.americanrevolutionaryparty.us . And the third and most important is http://www.cesj.org which is a virtual cornucopia of information when it comes to the concept of binary economics, which is the official name for the concept that we're talking about today.

And once you're on the http://www.cesj.org, click on the book entitled Capital Homesteading For Every Citizen written by Dr. Norman G. Kurland, his extremely capable colleagues Dawn K. Browhawn, and Michael D. Greaney. Norm is the single most knowledgeable human on planet earth today when it comes to the subject of binary economics. His book is a wonderfully written, and user-friendly commentary, which provides all the details that you'll need in order to understand this incredibly innovative concept. If you really want to see what free enterprise economics is going to taste like in the future, this book is absolutely a MUST READ!

Al: Thanks Joe, and to all you listeners out there in WAVG land, check out Joe's web site at http://www.joelunchbuckett.com where you will find references to all the other references that Joe just mentioned. Until next week this is Al Robinson for WAVG AM/FM talk radio saying adios for now.

The Top 12 Benefits Of The $3,000 Plan...

1. It will rescue the Social Security System and other government entitlement programs from pending financial doom at the hands of the aging baby boomer generation.

2. It will provide new investment capital for businesses whose expansions are held back due to lack of funding

3. It will provide an opportunity for employees to become partners in the businesses they work for

4. It will eliminate the us VS them mentality and create an all for one, one for all, team mentality which will in turn make the business more efficient and more profitable

5. It will provide a second income to heads of families who are under financial stress from raising kids

6. It will minimize the need to have two parents working

7. It eventually rescues individual citizens at all levels from becoming wage slaves or industrial sharecroppers

8. It will generate unprecedented demand in the economy

9. The unprecedented demand will create many new jobs

10. Many new jobs means that employers will have to compete for employees which in turn will increase wages

11. In the not too distant future, it will eliminate poverty

12. It will attack social unrest, crime, and terrorism at their roots by democratizing the free market economy and eliminating concentrated wealth and power in the hands of a few, at the expense of the many, all while legitimately reducing taxes by reducing the size, and thus the cost of government!




Joe Lunch Buckett is a Chicago based, freelance writer who in 2004, was our nation?s first virtual candidate for the Presidency of the United States. If you're interested in learning more about Joe Lunch Buckett?s common sense solutions to 21st century problems, ranging from the war in Iraq, to Social Security, and Immigration, check out his book entitled "The Big Idea," which you can order on either Barnes and Noble or Amazon.




Thursday, December 22, 2011

What's the Future of Organic Certification?


Some organic produce enthusiasts are cheering about its increasingly widespread availability. They say it's about time that huge retailers like Safeway, Costco, and even Wal-Mart have begun to add organic products to their shelves. With the market beginning to boom, some of the world's largest food manufacturers are beginning to jump on the bandwagon, as well, such as Kellogg's, Kraft, and General Foods. Isn't that good news for advocates of healthier food?The answer is a qualified maybe. It's a simple case of the time-proven law of supply-and-demand. The organic market has been growing steadily for decades, and once the numbers were there, it was inevitable that the big companies would step in to grab a share of the market. Some less enthusiastic organic foods advocates have expressed concern that having the giant retailers move into the market will ultimately weaken certification standards and hurt small farmers who have been able to capitalize on serving the organic niche market in order to survive.The market share for organic produce is still miniscule, accounting for less than 3 percent of U.S. retail food sales in 2005, but the numbers are still impressive: $14 billion in sales and increases of 16 percent for organic produce, 24 percent for organic milk, and a whopping 55 percent rise in organic beef sales over the past year. Certified organic products typically sell at a 20-30 percent premium over similar non-organic ones. Given numbers like those, it's not surprising that the nation's mega-retailers are beginning to get excited by the possibilities for future growth. However, there is growing concern that as factory-style farms move into the organic area to fill the demand from giant retail chains, the certification process may be lessened to allow those huge farms to meet the specifications. Those fears were given some credence when a recent report by the Cornucopia Institute discovered that two of the largest organic dairies in the nation keep their cows primarily in huge feedlots with little or no chance to graze on pasture. At the moment, the demand for organic milk outstrips supply, but if the trend continues (and there's no reason to believe it won't), it could cause genuine problems for small farmers, who have been all but squeezed out of nearly every other phase of agriculture, but managed to find a market niche that allowed them to stay in business. One of the biggest effects on the market will be retail giant Wal-Mart's demand for considerably lower prices. That means smaller profit margins for suppliers, but it could also mean a further loosening of certification standards in order to meet the demand and the low prices Wal-Mart would expect.

Where will it all lead? It's too early to tell, but if the current trend continues, it would appear that the consumer cost of organic produce and meat is going to become more affordable. However, it's yet to be determined how much loosening of the certification guidelines will take place in order for that to take place. Copyright © 2006 Jeanette J. Fisher




Jeanette Fisher teaches environmental interior design. For more information about Environmental Psychology and 5 ways you can change your home environment, visit http://environmentpsychology.com.




GDP -- What's in it for ME?


Robert Reich, former Secretary of Labor under President Clinton. did a little exercise where he took the GDP, divided it by the population and came up with a figure of $35,000 for every man, woman and child in this country IF GDP were to be divided equally.

GDP -- is the sum of all goods and services produced in an economy in one year. Since that was several years ago, we're going to update our 'divided equally' figure to $42,008 for 2005, based on GDP of $12,455.8 (in billions of dollars) and a 2005 population of 296,507,061.

We all know that dividing equally is not how we divide things up in this country. There are the rich, the poor, and those of us who are sandwiched in between. The rich get theirs off the top, the poor scrape theirs off the bottom, and those left in the middle continue to get smaller and smaller.

But let's take a typical family of five - mother, father, and three children. GDP, divided equally, would mean a household income of $42,008 x 5 or $210,040.00. How many families do you know of with three children that have a household income of $210,040.00?

The chances are very good that your answer is -- none. The median household income is now not much above $48,000. Median, you will remember, means the mid-point -- half of the households are above the median, and half are below.

Why is GDP so unequally distributed? Not that it should be equally divided up, but why is so skewed to the top? Why do we continue to accept the "trickle down" theory when we've had years without seeing any trickle? Why to avert a recession is money in the form of tax-cuts poured in at the top instead of directing more in the middle and the bottom?

What is the point of all this? A very simple one -- it makes no difference to you how much productivity is up or how much GDP is up, or how much business profits are up, if you are not getting any of the benefits.

The next time you read or hear those glowing numbers about the economy, just ask yourself these questions --

How is this benefiting my family?

What am I getting out of this?

What are these increases in GDP doing for me?

Even if you are not receiving any benefit from the increases in GDP everyone should know what the term Gross domestic product (GDP) means as well as the calculations, but few of us do. Do you?

There are various definitions out there for Gross Domestic Product, GDP, but the only one that should be given credence is the definition from the BEA - Bureau of Economic Analysis.

"Gross domestic product (GDP). The market value of goods and services produced by labor and property in the United States, regardless of nationality; GDP replaced gross national product (GNP) as the primary measure of U.S. production in 1991."

GDP replaced GNP back in 1991 - what's the difference? GDP is the market value of goods and services produced by labor and property in the US over a period of time, while GNP is the market value of goods and service produced by an economies productive resource over a period of time.

The GDP reports prepared by BEA for a quarter actually consist of three separate reports released approximately one month apart, the 'advance estimate', the 'preliminary estimate' and the 'final estimate'.

GDP is described by the BEA Customer Guide as "the sum of final-expenditure components", consisting of the following:

Personal consumption expenditures, (consumer spending).

Gross private domestic investment (business investment in structures, equipment and software, and inventories.

Net Exports (exports of goods and services less imports of goods and services).

Government consumption expenditures and gross investment (government spending).

There are a total of 299 NIPA tables consolidated into a seven summary account, double-entry system representing receipts and expenditures for the U.S. economy.

GDP is summarized on the right side of the first summary account, "Domestic Income and Product Account" while GDP income is summarized on the left hand side. In a double-entry system both sides must equal, which they do. A sample summary account may be viewed on the BEA website.

National accounts involve large sums and when rounding the various components for transfer to a summary account, there may be a discrepancy which is recorded on the income side of GDP. This statistical discrepancy is defined as "the net sum of offsetting, unknown, measurement errors" by BEA.

The seven summary accounts are as follows:

Account 1. Domestic Income and Product Account

Account 2. Private Enterprise Income Account

Account 3. Personal Income and Outlay Account

Account 4. Government Receipts and Expenditures Account

Account 5. Foreign Transactions Current Account

Account 6. Domestic Capital Account

Account 7. Foreign Transactions Capital Account

When GDP estimates are released by the BEA, they are issued indicating two dollar values, 'current' or 'nominal' dollar estimate, and 'chained' or 'real' dollar estimate. Calculating GDP in 'chained' dollars (using the year 2000) eliminates the effects of inflation and provides more meaningful comparisons from one period to another.

GDP measurement is not as accurate as it could be due to the fact that every country has an informal economy - sometimes called a 'black economy' that consists of incomes and expenses from illegal activities that are not reported to the government, i.e., sales from illegal drugs, gambling, black-market software, CD's, DVDs, etc.

© 2007 Richard E Walrath and Patricia L Johnson




Richard E Walrath is a writer and co-owner of the Articles and Answers News and Information sites. He is a former budget analyst and resides in the Ohio area with his wife, Joan. Visit Richard online at http://www.articlesandanswers.com/WordPress/




Thursday, December 1, 2011

What's Going on With the National Curriculum Statement in South Africa


The new system aims to put right defects in the unpopular Outcome Based Education (OBE) system and improve learner achievements.

The Committee that reviewed the process acknowledged that teachers were over burdened with curriculum and administrative duties and the department has started the process of relieving some of the pressure on them, thereby allowing them to do what they are there for- to teach our learners. The Review Committee has set in motion measures to reduce the number of projects learners need to do and portfolio files of learner assessments have been axed. Also, as of January 2010 CTAS for Grade 9 learners were stopped.

When you look at some of the statistics that are being published, these changes couldn't have come sooner. A survey found that under OBE, a million children gave up schooling every year, with in excess of five million learners having left school incapable of reading or writing effectively.

The Minister explained the aims of the new National Curriculum Statement (NCS), summarised as follows:

• The repackaging of the existing curriculum into the general aims of the South African curriculum, the specific aims of each subject, clearly delineated topics to be covered per term and the required number and type of assessments, also per term.

• Outcomes to be absorbed into more accessible aims and content and assessment requirements will be spelt out more clearly. Topics and assessments to be covered per term are being aligned to available time allocations per subject.

• The reduction of the number of learning areas in the Intermediate Phase from eight to six. That means that in grades 4 to 6 technology will be combined with science, arts and culture will be combined with life orientation and economic and management sciences will be taught only from grade 7. One of the priorities in the Basic Education budget speech in March was the development and distribution of adequate learning and teaching material. Motshekga went on to explain "A crucial pillar in the Department's determination to improve learner performance is the provision of learner workbooks. This project is a result of the injunction by the Presidency to provide resources to teachers and learners to improve learner performance in literacy and numeracy.

To this end, the Department of Basic Education has developed a plan for the development of the Work Books for Grades 1 - 6 in order to ensure the development, piloting, printing and distribution of learner workbooks early in 2011. We will pilot the workbooks in schools in 2010 and they will be available for use in all schools in 2011. The project will provide resource support to 6.5 million learners and approx 180 000 teachers in nearly 20 000 schools. This will place workbooks in the hands of each and every learner in the system.

A team of curriculum experts/materials developers/translators is developing the workbooks. These individuals have proven experience in the development of learner workbooks, are conversant with resource based methods and are able to produce high quality output according to project deadlines."

Additional recommendations that Minister Motshekga made are:

"Firstly, the Council approved the recommendation that from 2011, the language chosen by the learner as a Language of Learning and Teaching shall be taught as a subject, or as a First Additional Language, from Grade One (1) and not from Grade 2, as is currently the case. What this means, for instance, is that the teaching of English will occur alongside mother tongue instruction for those learners who choose English as a language of learning and teaching. English will not replace the mother tongue or home language in the early grades, as some commentators have interpreted the recommendation.

Secondly, Council agreed to regular, externally-set assessments at grades 3, 6 and 9 in literacy (in home language and first additional language) and numeracy/mathematics. It agreed on a weighting of continuous assessment and end of year examinations.

Council thirdly agreed that the symbols or rating scales used to rate learner performance in Grades 10-12 will, from 2011, be extended to Grades R-9, so that there is consistency across the curriculum."

The fact that the OBE problems are being addressed is indeed progress but what of the 5 million kids that have left school with limited literacy and numeracy skills - are they to be written off as lost?




David Meredith is CEO of Virtual-IT a database development company based in South Africa. The company wa established in 2001 with a management teamthat has a combined experience of over forty years, specialising in the Education Industries of South Africa and the United Kingdom. The team at Virtual-IT has the background that you can trust with your Staff Skills Development Programs, be it Facilitation Feedback, Assessment or Learner Management Reporting Systems, we understand the challenges and opportunities this unique industry offers and our Network of Industry experts allows us to add value to most areas of Training and Reportability.

For more details please go our web site http://virtual-it.co.za/ or [http://lmssoftware.org/]