You are here: Home / Archives for palm harbor

Today’s Slave Mentality

December 20, 2012 by 5 Comments

 

slaves Todays Slave MentalitySlavery in the United States was abolished with Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation, which took effect in 1863; but I’m not sure it has completely gone away. Slavery flourished in North America throughout the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries where it was an important part of the country’s economic system. Under the legendary Sugar-Rum-Slave triad, sugar was shipped from the Caribbean to Europe where it was distilled into rum. Profits from this was then used to ship merchandise to West Africa where it was traded for slaves, which were sent to the Caribbean where they were sold as field hands for the sugar plantations. Others were used as indoor servants.

The tortuous life of the slaves involved such things as picking cotton, heavy labor, and just about every menial task imaginable. Some would try to escape; others would resist slavery and rebel like in the famous Nat Turner rebellion in 1831. Runaways would be recaptured and returned to their master where they were brutally punished, primarily using the whip. Rebels were executed quickly and publicly. Aside from this, most of the slaves were resigned to their fate and adhered to the rules and regulations of their master, thereby becoming dependent on him for food, clothing, and shelter. Consequently, they learned to live modestly, avoid responsibility, and be happy allowing someone else to take care of them. So much so, they would defend the master in perilous times knowing their livelihood depended on him.

Slave codes were introduced to prohibit slaves from learning to read and write, carry firearms, attend religious gatherings, and many other activities, all aimed at controlling their behavior. This was all done to dissuade slaves from running away or rebelling and frankly proved to be very effective for this purpose.

When the slaves were freed, some thrived under their new-found freedom; but many others were lost and became wards of the state. They may have been freed from their masters but were lost without someone telling them what to do.

The slave mentality is still very much among us. A class of people have emerged in this country who put forth minimal effort knowing the master (the government) will take care of them. As more and more people become addicted to entitlements, they become more apathetic and less likely to work. As an example, let’s consider the American Indian, on whom we have been spending in excess of $2.6 billion annually (1) over the last few years for such things as health care, education, public safety, housing, and rural development. Despite this huge cash infusion over an extended period of time, only 25% are employed, and they suffer from the highest poverty rate and lowest life expectancy in the country. The point is that when you become a ward of the state and such amenities are guaranteed to you, there is a natural inclination for apathy to run rampant.

Those imbued with the slave mentality do not simply want something for nothing; they expect it. Whereas they are content to perform simple labor, they expect their master, the federal government, to provide for their housing, welfare, health care, and other amenities. This explains why entitlements have grown at an alarming rate in recent years and why such people have no problem with a massive government. They are mindful of the rules and regulations of the master but have no true understanding of the concept of freedom, which is nothing more than a catch-phrase of the government.

In contrast, those opposed to big government who actively work to sustain themselves relish freedom and truly understand the price of it in blood and sweat. They realize that freedom encourages personal initiative to invent, innovate, discover, write, and create. They may either be successful or a failure, but they relish the opportunity to at least try. They are allowed to believe what they want, say what they want, and go where they want; but most importantly, they are allowed to be an entrepreneur with all of the risks and responsibilities involved. The slave mentality class doesn’t grasp this and shirks risk and responsibility, preferring the safety of the master instead.

The slave codes of today are implemented by the media that cleverly manipulates the people’s sense of right and wrong, thereby defining how they should think and act. As George Orwell correctly observed, “The people will believe what the media tells them they believe.” Political correctness is an obvious example of how the media influences the perceptions of people. In reality, the media is controlled by the government, which orchestrates the messages to the masses. From this, the slaves steadfastly protect their master by savagely attacking his detractors, either physically or verbally. Such slaves are simple people who can be easily manipulated by the media.

For the slave mentality to flourish, government needs to grow and become more invasive in the lives of the people. Entitlements are the hallmark of the slaves, something they believe they deserve as opposed to earning, something the master will provide. To grasp the size of the people possessing the slave mentality, consider how the country’s Welfare has escalated since 1960:

welfare Todays Slave Mentality

So what exactly is the slave mentality? A person who is willing to become subserviant to the government in exchange for basic creature comforts as opposed to earning it themselves. The slave unknowingly remains a prisoner and is not truly free. In reality, he/she does not understand freedom, nor do they want it; for freedom requires hard work, risk, and responsibility, elements that they have been conditioned to avoid. Knowing this, the government master controls the people through simple bribery and uses the media to manipulate the perceptions of the masses.

The initial reaction to this theory is to dismiss it out of hand, that wards of the state can hardly be considered slaves. However, if they think like slaves and behave like slaves, then in all likelihood they are slaves. It is important to recognize that this mentality is certainly not unique to the United States; it has also become prevalent in the United Kingdom as well as other European countries. One thing we cannot overlook is that if the master’s source of money evaporates, he will be unable to take care of his slaves, and then they will have to settle for less. They may resist austerity measures initially, but they will inevitably have to fall in line. Just remember: if the slaves get out of line, the master still has the whip that  he is unafraid of using.

Keep the Faith!

1 – U.S. Department of the Interior Budget Justifications and Performance Information, FY 2013

Keep the Faith!

Note: All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies.

mbatim Todays Slave MentalityTim Bryce is a writer and the Managing Director of M&JB Investment Company (M&JB) of Palm Harbor, Florida and has over 30 years of experience in the management consulting field. He can be reached at timb001@phmainstreet.com

For Tim’s columns, see:
timbryce.com

Like the article? TELL A FRIEND.

Copyright © 2012 by Tim Bryce. All rights reserved.

Filed Under: Commentary, Floyd Reports Tagged With: , , , ,

Political Postmortem, 2012

December 6, 2012 by 1 Comment

Republican Democrat SC Political Postmortem, 2012

It’s been about a month since the election, and the dust has finally settled. I believe we are all glad the negative television commercials are gone as well as the obnoxious lawn signs; but there are a lot of people who miss the action and are beginning to exhibit withdrawal symptoms. Whereas young people were mostly apathetic during this electoral cycle, older people and party loyalists were transfixed on any news pertaining to the campaigns, including presidential, congressional, and local. This resulted in a windfall for the media. Over $1 billion was spent on television advertising alone for the presidential race, not to mention radio, newspaper, billboards, telephone calls, and Internet advertising. In all, we set another record in terms of campaign spending; but was it really worth it?

According to OpenSecrets.org, a research group tracking money in U.S. politics, the University of California was President Obama’s top campaign contributor at $927,568. I don’t quite understand how a university system like California’s, which is supposed to be floundering financially and raising student tuition to new heights, can afford such generosity. Then again, maybe I just answered my own question. The fifth largest contributor to the president’s re-election campaign was the U.S. Government at $528,603. I wonder if the American taxpayers knew about this and agreed to it. I know I was never consulted. (Editor’s note: We sure weren’t either!)

I am still concerned about the apathy of young people and their apparent indifference for our electoral process. I have never seen a generation so uninformed, regardless of the information technology currently available; nor do they seem concerned about the future of the country. This frightens me.

We also learned that the country is as polarized as ever, maybe more so. This has been building since the 2000 election with the hanging chads but has gotten progressively worse. For the first time though, anger has been expressed through social media, such as the physical threats made to assassinate Gov. Romney or calls for uprisings. Such open expressions of hostility are not new, but their propagation through technology is. I pity the Secret Service, which has to investigate such threats and taunts.

The media encourages such behavior, as exemplified by MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell who challenged Tagg Romney to a fight on camera (see VIDEO). O’Donnell was neither reprimanded or fired by the network. This can only be construed as MSNBC approving of his antics, and by inference promotes and endorses open hostilities.

Then there is the matter of lying, cheating, and deceit in the campaign itself, either by official representatives of the campaigns or the public, which is why Voter Identification became such a major issue this past year. The closer we got to the election, the more dirty political tricks we saw, such as the letters sent to Republicans in the closing days of the campaign that informed them it wasn’t necessary for them to vote.

The biggest lesson I learned from this electoral cycle, though, was that the country hates our current form of elections. It is sinfully wasteful in terms of finances, consumes too much time (thereby promoting polarity), and distracts politicians from tending to the duties taxpayers pay them to do. We probably spent more on the election than what President Obama proposed to tax the rich. Our form of elections are neither efficient or effective. For a country that prides itself on the efficiency of our technology, we certainly do a lousy job of conducting an election. It’s barbaric, but we only have ourselves to blame. As Pogo said, “We have met the enemy, and he is us.”

One last note: in a recent poll of registered voters, a paltry 22% believed in the polls during the campaign, a whopping 75% didn’t find the media credible in their political reporting, and the rest were unsure what day it was.

Keep the Faith!

Note: All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies.

mbatim Political Postmortem, 2012Tim Bryce is a writer and the Managing Director of M&JB Investment Company (M&JB) of Palm Harbor, Florida and has over 30 years of experience in the management consulting field. He can be reached at timb001@phmainstreet.com

For Tim’s columns, see:
timbryce.com

Like the article? TELL A FRIEND.

Copyright © 2012 by Tim Bryce. All rights reserved.

Photo credit: DonkeyHotey (Creative Commons)

Filed Under: Commentary, Floyd Reports Tagged With: , , , , , ,

The Disparity Between Capitalism And Socialism

November 27, 2012 by 1 Comment

Obama Reigning In Capitalism SC The Disparity Between Capitalism and Socialism

I was recently invited to give a talk at a business conference designed to help high school seniors in our county who have an interest in pursuing a business career. Specifically, I was assigned two sessions to describe what the young person should expect as they make the transition into adult life, which was based in large part on my book “MORPHING INTO THE REAL WORLD – A Handbook for Entering the Work Force.”

I wore a suit and tie for the occasion to express my credibility and out of respect for my audience, even though none were older than eighteen years of age. This was going to be an unusual talk for me as I normally address adults, not youth. Because of this, I wanted to know a little about my audience. So, using a show of hands, I inquired where the students were from, such as their high schools, but I also flippantly asked how many were capitalists and, conversely, if there were any socialists present. I received a lot of blank stares on both accounts. This caused me to deviate from my planned program and deliver a mini-dissertation describing the differences. I contended that in order to be successful in business, the students would be wise to know what each meant.

Interestingly, some were brainwashed into believing capitalism was evil and simply represented another form of greed. I contend greed is a human emotion and can be equally applied under either system. Therefore, capitalism is not greed; it is a celebration of the individual’s right to try and succeed. Whereas capitalism focuses on the rights of the individual, socialism concentrates on the rights of the group overall.

I explained that under capitalism, the individual has the right to try his/her hand at anything they are so inclined, thereby representing freedom. They simply have the right to try, nothing more, nothing less. If they are lucky, they may succeed; but they also run the risk of failure. Failure is an inherent and important part of the system. There are no guarantees for success. This is why risk is important, to force the individual to work harder and smarter to avoid defeat. As such, capitalism encourages entrepreneurship (innovation and invention). If the person is successful, they are entitled to enjoy the fruits of their labor. If they are not, they must suffer defeat. This should force the person to redouble his/her efforts and try again, which of course is evolution in action.

To encourage entrepreneurship, our founding fathers took steps to safeguard the intellectual property of the individual. This specifically includes Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution, wherein the powers of Congress are defined. It states, in part: “The Congress shall have Power … To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;”. This led to such institutions as the Patent and Copyright offices, which were specifically designed to safeguard an individual’s intellectual property. As early as 1790, the first patent and copyright were approved. At the time, safeguarding intellectual property in this manner was rare to the rest of the world. By promoting the entrepreneurial rights of the individual, our forefathers were embracing capitalism.

As mentioned, the focus in Socialism in on the group, not the individual. Here, the rights of the many take precedence over the individual. Because of this, personal initiative is discouraged, the individual cannot endeavor to do better than the next person, and failure is prohibited; the group will always bail you out. There is no notion of assuming risk and being held personally accountable for your actions. All compensation is equitable among workers with no rewards for outstanding achievement or penalties for inferior workmanship. Intellectual property belongs to the group, not the individual. Consequently, this approach discourages entrepreneurship and tends to promote apathy.

The Achilles’ heel of Socialism is the belief that everyone is equal and, as such, should be treated and compensated on an equitable basis. On the surface, this sounds like a fair and noble notion. The assumption though is that everyone works at the same level of effort and expertise which, of course, is simply not so. Restraining the individual from achieving higher levels of workmanship or striving for higher goals is unnatural and discourages the worker.

To summarize:

CAPITALISM SOCIALISM
FOCUS The rights of the individual; the right to “try”; requires freedom. The rights of the group; collective decision making; regulations restrain the individual.
ENTREPRENEURSHIP Yes, encourages risk; enjoys fruits of labor; individual assumes personal responsibility; promotes evolution. No, discourages risk; individual cannot fail; encourages apathy, discourages change; unnatural.
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY Yes, belongs to the individual. No, property belongs to the group.

Before closing, I encouraged the students to become familiar with the works of author Ayn Rand, particularly “The Fountainhead” (1943) and “Atlas Shrugged” (1957). Rand’s work touted the need for individual achievement and capitalism and saw them as two intertwined concepts.

In business, we have to be mindful of encouraging individual achievement and teamwork equally. We realize our team is as good as its weakest player, hence the need to encourage workers to strive harder for perfection. However, there will always be those people who will rise above others, and it certainly wouldn’t make sense to impede their growth.

“But you say that money is made by the strong at the expense of the weak? What strength do you mean? It is not the strength of guns or muscles. Wealth is the product of man’s capacity to think. Then is money made by the man who invents a motor at the expense of those who did not invent it? Is money made by the intelligent at the expense of the fools? By the able at the expense of the incompetent? By the ambitious at the expense of the lazy? Money is made–before it can be looted or mooched–made by the effort of every honest man, each to the extent of his ability. An honest man is one who knows that he can’t consume more than he has produced.” – Ayn Rand

Photo credit: terrellaftermath

Filed Under: Commentary, Floyd Reports Tagged With: , , , ,

The Vilification Of The Tea Party

November 18, 2012 by 9 Comments

Tea Party SC The Vilification of the Tea Party

Whenever I write a political column that is conservative in nature, I am often accused by my liberal readers of being a “filthy Teabagger.” I have found this expression to be rather amusing. They might also compare me to Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, FOX News, etc., all of which are designed to suggest we are fanatically evil and bent on distorting the truth. I have my own views on these entities which I have shared in my columns over the years, some things I like, some things I do not. However, I cannot dismiss them out of hand when I compare them to the liberal media who spins their own doctrine.

Although I am not a member of the Tea Party, I have met many of them over the last few years. Frankly, I have found them to be articulate in their concerns, and nothing more than conscientious citizens. Not once have I heard one of them utter a racial expletive or call for the assassination of anyone or any other gruesome activity. They are simply unhappy with the course the country is taking. Their beliefs can be condensed into three simple points:

* That the government should abide by the U.S. Constitution, thereby guaranteeing our freedoms and liberty.

* That big government and over regulation inhibits business and, as such, should be reduced.

* That the government has a fiduciary responsibility to operate within its means, meaning to operate within a balanced budget.

There may be other minor considerations, but these three points represent their principal concerns. They also want their government representatives to subscribe to these rules and have been very instrumental in getting people elected who share their views. Furthermore, they see government officials as servants of the people, not the other way around. Frankly, I have a difficult time refuting their arguments, which is why I am occasionally accused of being a “filthy Teabagger.”

I find this expression interesting as it is intended to vilify people, thereby sabotaging their arguments. By their baseless accusations, liberals and the media have cleverly clouded the public’s perception of the Tea Party, and turned “Teabagger” into a dirty icon resulting in a Pavlovian response.

Interestingly, the media teaches the public it is okay to ridicule, criticize, and condemn the Right. Not surprisingly, attacking the Left is considered off-limits. As a minor example, if the Republicans were in charge of the White House now, the press would unmercifully attack them for Benghazi, the Budget, the Economy, and the many gaffes of the Vice President. Needless to say, this hasn’t happened. The hypocrisy of the media is overwhelming, yet the public seems unconcerned.

Whereas the Tea Party is unfairly vilified, the left has carte blanche to openly attack conservative candidates and celebrity supporters on social media using vicious discourse, e.g., Stacey Dash. Yet, the media never seems to take them to task over this. Again, hypocrisy in action.

Frankly, I see nothing wrong with the word “Teabagger,” but treat it more as a compliment as opposed to a condemnation. Maybe instead of being offended, we should simply say “Thank you.” Being polite usually confuses the left. As an aside, I am actually quite “clean”, which is more than what I can say about a lot of my liberal opponents.

Keep the Faith!

Note: All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies.

mbatim The Vilification of the Tea PartyTim Bryce is a writer and the Managing Director of M&JB Investment Company (M&JB) of Palm Harbor, Florida and has over 30 years of experience in the management consulting field. He can be reached at timb001@phmainstreet.com

For Tim’s columns, see:
timbryce.com

Like the article? TELL A FRIEND.

Copyright © 2012 by Tim Bryce. All rights reserved.

Photo credit: formatted_dad (Creative Commons)

Filed Under: Commentary, Featured Stories, Floyd Reports Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

GRIDLOCK!

November 7, 2012 by 1 Comment

Republican Democrat SC GRIDLOCK!

Not knowing how the presidential election was going to turn out, I wrote two separate articles depending on the outcome, one if President Obama won the election, and one if Governor Romney had won. Now that we know the outcome, we can proceed.

By a narrow margin, Barack Obama retained his job as president of the United States. It was certainly NOT a mandate, but rather a simple plurality. Nonetheless, it is still his job to perform; and we can only hope he can somehow reduce the unemployment rate, balance the budget, and cut the federal debt. Regardless of what you thought of Mr. Obama before the election, it is up to him to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. Whether he is able to do so is questionable as the country will continue to spiral downward thanks to the gridlock between the Congress and the Oval Office.

Unlike President Clinton, who was able to work with a Republican Congress, it is more likely the president and the GOP will remain at loggerheads, at least until the next Congressional election in two years. If the last two years are any measure, the country will increase the federal debt, unemployment will remain high, and the direction of the country will continue to spiral out of control.

The Republicans will have to go back to the drawing board in order to retake the White House. No matter how they spun it, Mitt Romney was more of a moderate than a conservative. John McCain was essentially no different in 2008. Now, with Mr. Obama firmly in charge of the White House, I believe the next GOP contender to emerge will be a true conservative. If the government stagnates, as I suspect it will, the Tea Party will likely grow and flourish over the next two years and will no longer back down from senior Republicans who are moderate in nature. The conservative movement will become more robust and take control of both houses of Congress in 2014. After that, the White House in 2016.

Four years ago, I wrote a column on “Presidential Legacies.” In it, I publicly thanked President Bush for his service to the country. I was ridiculed for doing so, but I was unapologetic and remain so to this day. Interestingly, Mr. Obama’s legacy will not be his policies or actions (some would say “inactions”), but for re-awakening the conservative movement in this country. It’s an interesting dichotomy whereby the more President Obama wins, the greater his opposition grows. Conversely, if he loses, the conservatives weaken. Consider this: had Barack Obama lost in 2008, it is highly unlikely the Tea Party would have ever surfaced, and the Democrats wouldn’t have lost the House of Representatives in 2010.

Let’s just hope I’m wrong and that the country will work out its differences. You’ll excuse me if I do not hold my breath.

Keep the Faith!

Note: All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies.

mbatim GRIDLOCK!Tim Bryce is a writer and the Managing Director of M&JB Investment Company (M&JB) of Palm Harbor, Florida and has over 30 years of experience in the management consulting field. He can be reached at timb001@phmainstreet.com

For Tim’s columns, see:
timbryce.com

Like the article? TELL A FRIEND.

Copyright © 2012 by Tim Bryce. All rights reserved.

(Click for AUDIO VERSION)
To use this segment in a Radio broadcast or Podcast, send TIM a request.

Photo credit: DonkeyHotey (Creative Commons)

Filed Under: Commentary, Floyd Reports Tagged With: , , , , , , , , ,

Considerations For The Voting Booth

October 29, 2012 by 2 Comments

I Voted SC Considerations for the Voting Booth

obamecon Considerations for the Voting BoothIn less than one week we will know who will serve as our president for the next four years. Forget the polls. As I have said all along, this comes down to a few key variables we have to keep in mind when we’re in the voting booth:

THE ECONOMY

It’s no secret our economy can be described as lethargic at best. Our Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is at a paltry 1.3% and only reached a high of 4.1% in the last four years. The federal debt is now in excess of $16 trillion ($6.4 trillion added over the last four years), and we’re now in excess of 100% of the GDP. Translation: we’re spending more than we bring in.

The United States has dropped to #3 in terms of exports (with China and the European Union ahead of us). The balance of International Trade in Goods and Services is now at -$42 billion.

The federal deficit has grown to $1.2 trillion over the last four years and we have been operating without a budget for the last three years which is inexcusable.

Other indicators of economic woes include:
- The country lost its AAA credit rating.
- In 2011 we experienced 1,410,653 bankruptcies (96.61% of which were consumer filings)
- College loan debt now exceeds credit card debt.
- Average gasoline prices have risen $1.85/gallon to $3.86/gallon over the last four years.
- Food stamp recipients have risen from 32 million to 47 million (+46%)

It is rather remarkable the president discarded the report of his own Council of Economic Advisers which basically concluded it was necessary for the government to cut spending.

UNEMPLOYMENT

Despite the president’s stimulus/bailout programs, there are still 12.1 million Americans unemployed (officially). Understand this though, another 2.5 million persons marginally attached to the labor force in September had not searched for work in the previous four weeks.

Those worker groups particularly affected include: teenagers (23.7%), blacks (13.4%), and Hispanics (9.9%).

The country experienced 43 continuous months of +8% unemployment. This represents the president’s entire term of office, almost.

Interestingly, the president failed to meet with his own Jobs Council for more than six months.

ENERGY

With U.S. oil exploration and drilling slowing to a crawl, Americans questioned why the president would throw the government’s weight behind Brazil, a country that also received a $2 billion loan for its state-owned oil company from the U.S. Export-Import Bank. Meanwhile he has turned his back on the Keystone Pipeline which would help the country become more energy independent while creating thousands of much needed jobs for Americans.

The United States still imports over 341 billion barrels of oil, most of which from OPEC and Persian Gulf countries, thereby cementing our dependency on this dangerous part of the world.

While energy costs have nearly doubled as a percentage of the annual family budget, heavy handed regulations from the EPA are making what we pay for energy an even greater burden on our families and our businesses.

The administration’s “War on Coal” has forced the industry into retreat, eliminating 1,200 jobs and closing eight mines in Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia. The president has created a regulatory environment that’s aggressively aimed at constraining the use of coal, America’s most abundant, reliable resource.

And there remains no policy or course of action for energy independence, despite having considerable gas, oil, and coal resources in our possession.

IMMIGRATION

It is no secret that 13 million illegals currently reside in the United States costing taxpayers an average amount of $1,117 per household. Efforts by states to stem the flow of illegals has been rebuffed by the federal government in the form of lawsuits against them. Interestingly, a new lawsuit was recently filed by federal immigration agents against Homeland Security for policies they say prevent them from doing their job of defending the Constitution.

Then, of course, there is the failure of “Fast and Furious” which cost the life of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry, and destroyed the credibility of the president’s attorney general, the country’s first sitting member of the cabinet to be held in Contempt of Congress for withholding documents related to the scandal.

The attorney general has also been at the forefront of prohibiting states to secure their borders and implement voter identification programs. In addition, he has been an active proponent in implementing the Pretrial System which has jeopardized security by putting criminals back on the streets as opposed to properly processing them through the courts.

FOREIGN POLICY/NATIONAL SECURITY

True, the president is recognized for his approval to eliminate Osama Bin Laden, but the rest of his foreign policy can hardly be called credible. The Muslim Spring led to the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in the Middle East, not democracy. It also led to our ambassador in Libya being killed and our embassies attacked, which is strongly reminiscent of the Carter administration. No matter how the president tries to spin it, we are still engaged in a “War on Terror.”

The Muslim Spring also marked a turning point for the United States as the administration adopted a policy of “leading from behind,” whereby we allowed other countries take the lead in determining policy in the Middle East, thus putting into question our country’s credibility as a superpower.

Defense has been significantly weakened. For example, we can now only fight in one major arena, not two. This is unlike when we were forced to fight in both the Pacific and Atlantic regions during WW2. There is now a strain in America’s relationship with two of its traditional allies, Great Britain and Israel. Should war come again, we may very well find ourselves alone. A recent Pew Research poll reveals the president’s approval ratings have dropped considerably among foreign nations, including Muslim countries.

The biggest concern though in foreign policy is our hands-off position regarding the buildup of Iran’s nuclear program, a potential powder keg in the making.

UN Agenda 21, which the administration has quietly embraced, is perhaps the biggest threat to the country’s freedoms as defined by the U.S. Constitution. This is a program the administration hopes will pass before the people recognize it for what it is, a genuine threat to the American way of life.

In these dangerous times of foreign intrigue, you have to question the wisdom of dodging the presidential intelligence briefings.

SOCIAL REFORM

The president’s Obamacare reform is his signature piece of legislation, yet it is still opposed by the majority of Americans. The complexity of the law has had an adverse effect on business who still doesn’t understand its ramifications. After it was studied by the Supreme Court, Americans were surprised to learn it represented the largest tax increase in U.S. history.

The president also touted gay rights, not only in terms of marriage, but in the military as well. Meanwhile, the existence of God came under attack.

More disturbing, this administration has fostered the cultivation of a Nanny State whereby freewill is supplanted by the will of the government. This has changed the face of America from “the land of opportunity” to “the land of entitlement.”

SO, WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?

This sounds more like the work of an apprentice learning on the job as opposed to an experienced leader and manager. The next question is, do we stay the course or pick a replacement? Staying the course means you approve of the condition of the country as mentioned herein. True, there are people who will vote by blind devotion along partisan lines, but I would like to believe that voting for a person means you feel they are the most competent to do the job, not because of political ideology. Party politics are nice, but supporting job competency is more important, now more than ever.

Some would argue Governor Romney would not do as well as the president under the circumstances. One thing is clear, he cannot do worse. President Obama’s label as an “empty chair” president seems justified or, as I am reminded, “While Nero fiddled, Rome burned.”

I don’t want to give the impression the president is a complete failure. After all, he did succeed in making Jimmy Carter look like a star.

“If I don’t have this done in three years, then there’s going to be a one-term proposition.”
- Barack Obama, February 1, 2009

Keep the Faith!

Note: All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies.

mbatim Considerations for the Voting BoothTim Bryce is a writer and the Managing Director of M&JB Investment Company (M&JB) of Palm Harbor, Florida and has over 30 years of experience in the management consulting field. He can be reached at timb001@phmainstreet.com

For Tim’s columns, see:
timbryce.com

Like the article? TELL A FRIEND.

Copyright © 2012 by Tim Bryce. All rights reserved.

Photo credit: Cali4Beach (Creative Commons)

Filed Under: Commentary, Floyd Reports Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Remembering Black Thursday

October 24, 2012 by Leave a Comment

Great Depression SC Remembering Black Thursday

Today, we commemorate an important day in history, namely “Black Thursday,” which occurred on October 24, 1929, just 83 years ago.

Today, the world is still reeling from “The Great Recession,” which put our global economy into a tailspin thereby affecting not just the United States, but all of the countries of the world. Blame can be placed on a compendium of variables, such as the credit boom, bad banking policies, bursting the real estate bubble, etc. This led to a global tsunami of unemployment and a significant drop in international trade. There were few people who were unaffected by the recession. Business as we knew it was gone and remains so. As devastating as it was though, it paled in comparison to the grand daddy of economic meltdowns, “The Great Depression.”

On October 24th, the stock market lost 11% of its value at the opening bell on very heavy trading. Nothing this dramatic had happened before, thereby earning the nickname “Black Thursday.” Wall Street bankers sought a way to stop the slide and opted to buy U.S. Steel and several other Blue Chip stocks well above their current market value, a trick used to stop the panic of 1907. Indeed, it halted the slide, at least until the following Monday (“Black Monday”) when investors opted out of the market in record numbers. Despite additional attempts to prop up stock prices, the market plummeted, thereby triggering a worldwide depression.

The Great Depression lasted for over ten years. Companies closed their doors, unemployment was rampant, soup lines grew, and investors committed suicide by jumping out of buildings financially ruined. Our lifestyle changed radically, from prosperous to desperate. In the average household, all members of the family were expected to cut costs and chip in to pay bills, regardless of their age. No job was considered insignificant or taken for granted. A High School diploma was a prized possession as many people had to drop out of school to earn a wage to support their family. A lot of people were lucky to earn nothing more than a Junior High School diploma (8th grade). The Great Depression sent shock waves through our very sinew, leaving nobody unaffected. You learned to improvise, adapt, and hustle in order to survive.

Because of its scope and dramatic human impact, The Great Depression made The Great Recession seem like child’s play. There was little government support, certainly nothing like the entitlements known today, such as Food Stamps which weren’t offered until the 1960′s. Soup kitchens sprung up to feed the needy, sponsored by churches and other institutions.

Despite numerous attempts by the government to snap the country out of the depression, it was the industrialization of World War II that brought us out of it. Since then, safeguards have been installed in the stock markets to help avoid another major crash; but they are certainly not foolproof as we have seen with many slippages over the years, most recently:

DATE                   DROPPED PERCENT

2011-08-08      -634.76      -5.55%
2011-08-10      -519.83      -4.62%
2011-08-04      -512.76      -4.31%

Others within the last 25 years:

DATE                   DROPPED PERCENT

1987-10-19      -508.00      -22.61%
2008-10-15      -733.08      -7.87%
2008-12-01      -679.95      -7.70%
2008-10-09      -678.91      -7.33%
1997-10-27      -554.26      -7.18%
2001-09-17      -684.81      -7.13%
2008-09-29      -777.68      -6.98%

The big question though is whether it is possible to experience another depression on the scale of the 1920′s. The answer obviously is Yes, although politicians and economists will resist the use of the word as it is considered political suicide. If the country’s debt rises above the Gross Domestic Product, as it obviously will, the dollar will weaken as will stocks, thereby triggering a collapse. Another variable is the weakened European economy, which affects our own. If Europe collapses, there is a good chance they will drag us down with them.

And when the money is gone, businesses will close, unemployment will rise to record levels, and our lifestyles will once again be dramatically altered. Some would argue this is just the tonic America needs to mend its economic recklessness.

The Great Depression may seem like a distant memory, particularly to young people voting in the upcoming elections for the first time, but we should all pay heed to the lessons it conveys. If you had trouble surviving the recent Great Recession, try to remember that the Great Depression dwarfed it. We are by no means out of the woods yet.

Keep the Faith!

Note: All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies.

mbatim Remembering Black ThursdayTim Bryce is a writer and the Managing Director of M&JB Investment Company (M&JB) of Palm Harbor, Florida and has over 30 years of experience in the management consulting field. He can be reached at timb001@phmainstreet.com

For Tim’s columns, see:
timbryce.com

Like the article? TELL A FRIEND.

(Click for AUDIO VERSION)

To use this segment in a Radio broadcast or Podcast, send TIM a request.

Copyright © 2012 by Tim Bryce. All rights reserved.

Photo credit: Kevin Burkett (Creative Commons)

Filed Under: Commentary, Floyd Reports Tagged With: , , , , ,

How We Will Vote In November

October 18, 2012 by 2 Comments

I Voted SC How We Will Vote in November

The hoopla over the party conventions is over, the debates are coming to an end, and we are now just a couple of weeks away from making an epoch decision regarding the direction of our country. If you do not know who you are voting for by now, you have either had your head in the sand, or you simply do not care and will not be voting anyway (thank God). Just about everyone else has made up their mind and is ready to cast their vote. You can be sure both parties are leaving no stone unturned to find any truly undecided voters out there. If they haven’t made up their minds by now though, they will undoubtedly be voting for the wrong reasons on election day.

I’ve been studying the various polls as to how they predict the people will vote in the Presidential election. Here’s what I found:

Men – Romney will take the majority of male voters.

Women – Obama will take single women voters, while Romney takes the married ones.

The military will be strongly behind Romney as they consider their current commander-in-chief weak.

Law enforcement will vote likewise as the military.

Business people – both men and women will be more in line with Romney.

Teachers – with Obama of course.

Gays  will be more aligned with Obama’s position.

Labor Unions – even though membership in unions is in sharp decline, they will support the president.

African-Americans – as I have written, the president will get the lion’s share of votes from the black community, but it will be substantially less than what he garnered in 2008 as they are disappointed with the president’s performance (and high unemployment among blacks). Voter turnout among this group will be down.

Latinos/Hispanics – legal Latinos who are gainfully employed will vote for Romney while the illegals will vote for the president. This will be a split decision.

Youth will continue to support the president, but their numbers will be down dramatically.

Seniors – there will be a pronounced senior turnout in favor of Romney.

Churchgoers – even though conservative Christians do not like Romney’s association with Mormonism, they will see him more aligned with Christianity than the president. Also, look for Romney to score well with Catholics who do not like the president’s policies pertaining to health care.

Jews – the Jewish vote has historically gone to the Democratic candidate, but the president’s policies regarding Israel have offended many. This will also be a split decision (for the first time ever).

Asians – this will be the big prize that a lot of people are overlooking. Asian-Americans are the new #2 minority, behind Latinos and ahead of blacks. Historically, Asians have voted Democratic, but they may very well find commonality with Romney this go-around. This will be a close decision favoring Romney.

Other variables: President Obama will be unable to recapture the enthusiasm he enjoyed in 2008. Those who are now disappointed in his performance will likely not vote at all as opposed to Romney. The President’s low approval rating has hurt him tremendously and has caused disillusionment among his supporters. The thrill is gone, and people will no longer be voting for him regardless of the color of his skin.

The other variable is the rise and return of “The Silent Majority”, which has been quietly observing the president’s performance and simply does not like what they see. There is perhaps no stronger evidence of “The Silent Majority” than the State of Wisconsin’s recall elections earlier this year, where Gov. Scott Walker was kept in office despite a loud and boisterous campaign coordinated by the unions and the Left. If “The Silent Majority” believes in Romney’s message, they will understandably abandon the president. More than any other group, “The Silent Majority” will decide the November election. What is perhaps most interesting about the “Majority” is that there is no way for any of the polling organizations to know exactly who they are or be able to forecast how they will vote. Make no mistake though, “The Silent Majority” is the faction that will decide the outcome of the election and no other group. If they are fed up with how the country is being run, President Obama will be looking for a new job, regardless of the media spin.

“There are a lot of conservative people, a lot of moderate people, Republicans, Democrats, in Hollywood. It is just that the conservative people by the nature of the word itself play closer to the vest. They do not go around hot dogging it. So — but they are there, believe me, they are there.”

- Clint Eastwood at the RNC, Aug. 30, 2012

Keep the Faith!

Note: All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies.

mbatim How We Will Vote in NovemberTim Bryce is a writer and the Managing Director of M&JB Investment Company (M&JB) of Palm Harbor, Florida and has over 30 years of experience in the management consulting field. He can be reached at timb001@phmainstreet.com

For Tim’s columns, see:
timbryce.com

Like the article? TELL A FRIEND.

(Click for AUDIO VERSION)
To use this segment in a Radio broadcast or Podcast, send TIM a request.

Copyright © 2012 by Tim Bryce. All rights reserved.

Photo credit: Cali4Beach (Creative Commons)

Filed Under: Commentary, Floyd Reports Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

Can You Really Balance A Budget By Cutting Taxes?

October 18, 2012 by 4 Comments

Taxes SC Can You Really Balance a Budget by Cutting Taxes?

As we have long known, the golden rule for making a profit is to maximize income and minimize expenses. Over the last few years though, government agencies at the federal, state, and local levels have violated this rule primarily by spending more than they take in. Such spending sprees are usually the result of campaign promises made to constituents. Let’s face it, it’s easier to get elected by giving things away as opposed to practicing fiscal restraint. Thanks to the Great Recession, though, we have been given a wake-up call that we can no longer afford such giveaways and must learn to live within our means.

Following the golden rule though, in order to balance the budget, politicians should be raising taxes and cutting spending, even though this may place a burden on cash-strapped taxpayers and government officials accustomed to spending money unabated. So, is it possible for politicians to balance budgets while reducing taxes? As implausible as it may seem, yes, it is not only possible, but the precedent was established a long time ago.

The trick is to reduce government spending more than the amount we lower income taxes. Translation: the party is over, and the government has to go on an austerity program whereby services are reduced and the size of government is reduced. Lowering taxes has the added benefit of stimulating the economy by providing taxpayers with more cash to spend and fill government coffers with sales tax revenue in the process. When it is necessary to supplement income in the face of declining taxes, there are other vehicles for doing so, such as raising fees for licenses.

There are many recent examples where governments have been able to balance their budgets in this manner:

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie balanced his state’s $31.7 billion budget this way. He also used his power of the line-item veto to make final adjustments.

Ohio Governor John R. Kasich inherited an economic nightmare, yet was able to balance the budget and finish fiscal year 2013 with a surplus of $552 million, approximately $408 million more than originally planned.

Likewise, Virginia Governor Robert F. McDonnell also announced that his state had finished the previous fiscal year with a surplus of $544.8 million.

During his tenure as Governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney was able to turn the state’s economy around by pushing the legislature to roll back the state income tax from 5.3% to 5.0% (Massachusetts has a flat income tax). He also proposed a “tax-free shopping day”, property tax relief for Seniors, and a manufacturing tax credit, all of which did wonders for rejuvenating the Massachusetts economy.

The real proponent of this concept was President Ronald Reagan, whose “Reaganomics” was another form of supply-side economics. The four pillars of Reagan’s economic policy were to reduce the growth of government spending, reduce the income tax and the capital gains tax (thereby freeing up money with consumers), reduce government regulation of the economy (to stimulate business), and control the money supply to reduce inflation. The rate of growth in federal spending fell from 4% under Jimmy Carter to 2.5% under Ronald Reagan. Many economists have stated that Reagan’s policies were an important part of bringing about the second longest peacetime economic expansion in the country’s history, followed by an even longer 1990s expansion that began under George H.W. Bush in 1991 and continued through the Clinton administration with unemployment rates steadily decreasing throughout his presidency (7.3% at the start of his presidency and 4.2% at the culmination, with the lowest rate reaching 3.9% in 2000). Click HERE for more information.

Balancing a budget means having to make some hard decisions and living within your means. Unfortunately, spending can be irresistible to politicians, particularly those running for reelection. The stark reality though is that when you fail to balance the budget, you go into debt, your credit rating falls, you cannot pay your bills, and a general economic implosion occurs. Sound familiar? This is why most states have a balanced budged amendment and line-item veto (the one exception is Vermont). Even with such legislation, there is no guarantee that states will abide by the budget, which explains why states such as New Jersey, Ohio, Virginia, and Massachusetts got into trouble originally. The budget simply establishes the guidelines for government to operate under. If they violate it, as many have, it usually means that there is either a financial emergency, or someone is spending money irresponsibly. As for the federal government, I would wager on the latter and not the former.

Keep the Faith!

Note: All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies.

mbatim Can You Really Balance a Budget by Cutting Taxes?Tim Bryce is a writer and the Managing Director of M&JB Investment Company (M&JB) of Palm Harbor, Florida and has over 30 years of experience in the management consulting field. He can be reached at timb001@phmainstreet.com

For Tim’s columns, see:
timbryce.com

Like the article? TELL A FRIEND.

Copyright © 2012 by Tim Bryce. All rights reserved.

(Click for AUDIO VERSION)

To use this segment in a Radio broadcast or Podcast, send TIM a request.

Photo Credit: 401K 2012 (Creative Commons)

Filed Under: Commentary, Floyd Reports Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

Our Defining Moment

October 13, 2012 by 4 Comments

 

Republican Democrat SC Our Defining Moment

Over our country’s history, there have been a handful of events that have defined who we are as Americans, such as our Declaration of Independence from Great Britain, our Civil War, our participation in World War II, and the protests of the 1960′s. These events defined who we are, our personality as a country, our determination in the face of adversity, and how we treat others as well as ourselves. All have come at a heavy price in terms of human life and the reconstruction of society. Such moments come along rarely, and we should be mindful of their effect on our country.

We are now on the verge of another epoch event that will define who we are and what we want our country to be. Never before has there been such a disparity in our choices for the election in November. Conservatives want an America with smaller and less intrusive government; they have a fervent belief in capitalism and the free enterprise system. This of course means fiscal responsibility. Liberals on the other hand want more government and truck loads of entitlements which we can no longer afford. By increasing taxes, we are redistributing the wealth of this country and discouraging entrepreneurship and encouraging businesses to move off our shores. Is taxing the answer, or is it cutting our spending? As anyone who has had to manage personal finances or balance a budget can tell you, we must learn to live within our means. Even cities controlled by Democrat administrations facing bankruptcy know this, such as Scranton, PA and Stockton, CA. Not since Nixon/McGovern in 1972 have we seen such disparity among the citizens of this country, but it is even more pronounced in 2012. There are two distinctly different interpretations of America that are simply incompatible.

One thing is for certain; there are only three possible outcomes from the November elections: gridlock as we have experienced over the past two years, a liberal state, or a conservative state. As we have seen, gridlock will paralyze the country, and the last two options will likely cause civil insurrection. Liberals are simply not interested in living in a country as defined by Conservatives, and Conservatives cannot abide the Liberal’s view of the world. Consequently, the elections of November 6th represent a defining moment that will affect our destiny.

Do we take charge of our fiscal affairs or let it continue to run unabated?

Do we establish an environment encouraging business and jobs, or tax and regulate them into obscurity?

Do we continue to adhere to the U.S. Constitution, or do we devise a new form of government?

Do we want to promote personal initiative and individual responsibility or establish a nanny state?

Do we want government to exercise control over business, or do we want government to be a servant of the people?

Should Socialism supersede Capitalism?

We’ll make these choices on November 6, 2012, an epoch event for the history books. Half of the country will interpret it as doomsday, and the other half will see it as a day of salvation. As to our defining moment: We will either survive this tempest or be devoured by it. The world will be watching.

Keep the Faith!

Note: All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies.

mbatim Our Defining MomentTim Bryce is a writer and the Managing Director of M&JB Investment Company (M&JB) of Palm Harbor, Florida and has over 30 years of experience in the management consulting field. He can be reached at timb001@phmainstreet.com

For Tim’s columns, see:
timbryce.com

Like the article? TELL A FRIEND.

(Click for AUDIO VERSION)
To use this segment in a Radio broadcast or Podcast, send TIM a request.

Copyright © 2012 by Tim Bryce. All rights reserved.

Photo credit: DonkeyHotey (Creative Commons)

Filed Under: Commentary, Floyd Reports Tagged With: , , , ,