Category: Politics

Chicago says, “We’ll keep your change”

From WiseBread:

Chicago is testing a coinless parking meter system, The Tribune reported yesterday. You might think that would be great for consumers, eliminating annoyances like the hunt for coins and the need to pay for more time than you actually use.
It’s true, drivers would no longer have to plug the meter with change. But apparently the City of Chicago considers parkers’ tendancy to overpay more of a feature than a bug. In fact, the city is apparently so consumer-hostile that it plans to keep parkers’ overpayments and charge the next customer for the very same time.

The city claims their losing thousands of dollars from people “piggy backing” off time that’s unused from previous cars.
In other words, if you pay for 30 minutes in the parking meter and leave after 20, the city claims that anyone who parks there and uses/takes advantage of those remaining minutes left on the meter is costing the city money. They think they should be able to charge two people for that same parking spot during those left over 10 minutes. With the new meters, the time on the meter will be wiped clean every time a car leaves with minutes remaining on the clock.
Just another example of a governmental authority taking all they can from Joe Citizen.
Seems like many politicians would believe that the salary you get is actually their money and anything you get to take home is simply, “the cost of doing business” and of course, like any good business man, they’ll do all they can to lesson the cost of doing business.

… it’s sounding better and better.

Quote of the day

“You have to question Gov. Romney’s claims of being a fiscal conservative when he’s contributing $20 million of his own money and is polling nationally at 11%,” said Mike Huckabee Press Secretary Alice Stewart. “Gov. Huckabee has sustained his campaign with a strong conservative and consistent message, results-driven record and vision for America’s future – and we’re proud to say he’s at 8% nationally in the polls, and climbing.”

Get rid of the IRS

In the past I’ve been a big fan of a national sales tax – but now I’m reading The Fair Tax Book: Saying Goodbye to the Income Tax and the IRS and I have to say I’m really a big fan.
Did you know that 22% of the cost for each item you purchase in the U.S. goes towards someone covering the cost they had to pay along the way towards taxes? In other words, if we could cut income taxes, corporate taxes, Social Security taxes, Medicaid Taxes and all the others, retailers could sell products for 22% less than they currently do. Granted you might say like I did, well the manufacturers and such will just keep that 22% profit. But in a free market, with competition the costs will eventually be lowered.
Let’s say MyCar Co. makes a $10,000 car. After the IRS is gone the 22% cost of taxes is eliminated from the cost of making their cars. So MyCar Co. CEO says, “Alright, that’s 22% more profit.”
But YourCar Co. also makes a $10,000 car. And while the CEO realizes he could keep prices the same and make a 22% profit, he also realizes that if he cuts his price by 5% he’ll still make a 17% profit and he’ll be able to take more customers away from MyCar Co.
Suddenly MyCar Co. has to cut prices to compete and then YourCar Co. matches. In the end, your $10,000 only costs $7,800.
Even with a 23% sales tax on your car, the total price would be $9,594.
On top of that, imagine:

  • being able to keep 100 percent of your paycheck, pension, and Social Security payments
  • all Americans paying their fair share of taxes
  • enabling families to save more for home ownership, education, and retirement
  • making American products more competitive overseas
  • no changes to the current revenue levels for the federal government
    Imagine….
    Read more at FairTax.org – or just buy the book from the Casa de Blundell Store.
    Oh and another thing, there is one presidential candidate who continues to pledge that he will fight to appeal the 16th amendment and institute the FairTax – any guesses?

    • re: Third party candidates for conservatives

    Here’s more from Dallasblog on Dobson’s threat last week…

    Tara Ross writes:

    Late last week, evangelical leader James Dobson upped the ante in the contest for the Republican presidential nomination. In a New York Times editorial, he confirmed that he and other pro-family leaders will vote for a third-party candidate if the Republican nominee is not pro-life. The threat is aimed directly at Rudy Giuliani, who is pro-choice.
    These leaders feel that they can’t support a pro-choice candidate without unacceptably compromising principles in which they strongly believe. Period. End of discussion.
    Far be it from me to urge anyone to compromise their principles. Yet I can’t help but note that their position may end up doing far more harm than good. Their votes for a third-party candidate are meant to make a stand for life. Ironically, they could instead set the pro-life cause back for many decades.

    Read more