Saturday, January 24, 2015

my philosophy on financial debt

For several years now (most of my life, actually), I have become exaggeratedly irritated with the idea that financial debt is or should be part of the average life. Cars, homes, flat screen TV's, wedding rings, even the wheels on our cars are financed these days. "No money down" and "just [insert an appealingly low number here] payments of $9.95!" are common phrases is advertising today. The idea that you should pay more money over several months that you would pay if you just bought something out right is disturbingly popular.

When did this thinking become the norm?

Undoubtedly, the idea of interest (or usury) has been around probably as long as currency itself. But unlike today, the thought used to be that only the desperate or destitute would resort to a payment method that made absolutely no mathematical--or common--sense. After all, a loaf of bread you can't afford today might have cost you one and a half times its actual worth if you expected someone to give it to you with the understanding that you would pay them later. Obviously, on a fool would do such a thing. Perhaps if you would have died before tomorrow without said bread, you could easily argue that your life is worth more than 50% of the cost of a loaf of bread.

But that's not the case today. No one will die without their TV being brought home today. No one's life is in danger of ending because they could not afford the pay-in-full price of a bedroom suite.

So why is so called "financing" all the rage today?

People are greedy, materialistic, and impatient. But this is true of almost every human being, and it has been the case since shortly after people showed up on this planet. But credit cards and loan notes haven't been around nearly that long. The problem is that culture (and subsequently people of that culture) have created and fostered an underlying belief that they can have what they want, when they want it. This is a very immature way of life. As parents, we teach our children that they can't always have what they want. But those same adults will turn around and go "buy" a $30,000 luxury car or truck that is more expensive than the $10,000 car they need for getting to and from work. Who's acting more childish?

This is also not only an internal problem. Like any other inner problem, it manifests itself on the outside of the individual. According a study done by CreditCards.com, the average American lives in $15,950 of credit card debt. That's not including what they owe on their home, their car(s), student loan(s), or any medical payments. Is this really the way people want to live?

This is usually when phrases like "but I have to have a car," or "I have to have a house", or even "I have to buy  Christmas gifts for everyone" start to come out. Really? Is that what the sheeple are saying these days?

Let's take them one at a time...

A car probably isn't as necessary as one may think. What the debtor probably really means is that they have to have transportation. What they desire is comfort/luxury/social status. And they pay for it all...with interest. Here's some alternatives: Ride the bus. Chances are, your tax dollars are already paying for it, so why not save some money and let someone else chauffeur you around? Who cares is you have to share the ride with people you don't know? Try meeting someone new. Or catch up on those candies everyone's crazy about crushing. And this solution doesn't have to be permanent in your avoidance of debt. Here's a great link on how to drive debt-free and have a ton of money at the same time.

A home is a little less cut-and-dry. But the fact is, financing a home and owning it are totally different terms that people need to stop interchanging. When you finance a home, the bank owns the home and allows you to live there while they collect a steady monthly payment from you. They charge you interest for the convenience of living in the home until it's paid off. Personally, I believe that it's parents' job to provide food, shelter, and clothing for their children, so you'd think you can fend my argument off by saying that by financing a home, you're providing for your family. While that's partially true, it's far from the only method. Here's some tips for the dwelling-bound family: Rent a place within your means and save every month toward the home you want. It may take a while, but no one's going to undo all the years of prompt payments if you can't make your rent money this month. But if you miss your mortgage payments long enough, you'll be evicted all the same, except you'll lose everything you've paid for so far.

A man named Dave decided to get married one day and he and his wife both worked at $50k/year jobs at the time. Instead of living off the cumulative $100,000 they made each year, they rented a garage (a garage!) for the two of them to live in for four years while they disciplined themselves to live on only $50,000 a year, saving the other $50,000 each year. After four years, they had $200,000 in the bank and Dave said goodbye thank you to their landlord and wrote two checks: One for $150,000 to [actually] BUY a house, out right, in cash, and the other $50,000 he wrote in a check to his bride of four years and asked her to kindly furnish the home! This man went on to become a world-renowned financial adviser, business man, and millionaire. His name is Dave Ramsey and he has a website with tons of free tools to help anyone in any financial condition.

And here's a radical idea for singles: Try living at your parents' house! I know. Sounds radical. But if your parents are willing, you should be too. Seriously, swallow your pride, save your cash, and make your parents proud when you sign the first and final check to OWN your own home.

Now, after all this, Christmas presents seem kind of trivial, right? Exactly. Think of what matters. Trust me, your grandchildren won't remember you as the grandparent who didn't give them gifts for one or two years while you got your life in order. But they will remember you as the grandparent that gave them an inheritance of good financial discipline, instead of the grandparent that put their parents in debt for the next 30 years because Grandpa couldn't control his spending. And after all, isn't Christmas supposed to be about more than buying gifts?

Some quick math to hammer the nail in solid:

A $100,000 house will cost you $151,777.45 after 30 years of payments at 3% (which is a pretty good mortgage rate these days).
Alternatively, you could save $400 per month in a decent mutual fund at 11% and buy a $100,000 house in cash after only 20 years and have $6116 left over. Your choice: own a home in 20 years and have a $6116 in the bank, or own a home a decade later and have nothing extra in the bank.

Here's the point I'm trying to make: dump debt, discipline yourself, and stop doing stupid! Debt is the destination of fools, not the path of the free. Rest assured, you will sacrifice for the things you want. But you can chose to sacrifice a little now, or a lot later.

Saturday, September 1, 2012

Beware the Democracy!

Seriously, sheeple?

There is something very important that Americans need to know (other than the Constitution, of course, which NO ONE seems to know these days): The United States government is not, I repeat: NOT a democracy. What may (but shouldn't) surprise you, is that it was never supposed to be a democracy either. The founding fathers had no intention of giving us a democratic government. It was intended as a republic.1

[D]emocracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security, or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.2 James Madison 
Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.3 John Adams
A democracy is a volcano which conceals the fiery materials of its own destruction. These will produce an eruption and carry desolation in their way.4 The known propensity of a democracy is to licentiousness [excessive license] which the ambitious call, and ignorant believe to be liberty.5 Fisher Ames, Author of the House Language for the First Amendment
We have seen the tumult of democracy terminate . . . as [it has] everywhere terminated, in despotism. . . . Democracy! savage and wild. Thou who wouldst bring down the virtuous and wise to thy level of folly and guilt.6 Gouverneur Morris, Signer and Penman of the Constitution
[T]he experience of all former ages had shown that of all human governments, democracy was the most unstable, fluctuating and short-lived.7 John Quincy Adams
A simple democracy . . . is one of the greatest of evils.8 Benjamin Rush, Signer of the Declaration
In democracy . . . there are commonly tumults and disorders. . . . Therefore a pure democracy is generally a very bad government. It is often the most tyrannical government on earth.9 Noah Webster
Pure democracy cannot subsist long nor be carried far into the departments of state, it is very subject to caprice and the madness of popular rage.10 John Witherspoon, Signer of the Declaration
It may generally be remarked that the more a government resembles a pure democracy the more they abound with disorder and confusion.11Zephaniah Swift, Author of America's First Legal Text
Democracy today is lauded as the epitome of social evolution. President [elect] Obama, in his victory speech after having won the 2012 Presidential Election, said "tonight we proved that the true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals: democracy, liberty, opportunity and unyielding hope."12 President Reagan also said "One's country is worth dying for, and democracy if worth dying for, because it's the most deeply honorable form of government ever devised by man."13 When a host of selfish, whinny bandwagoners decide that their jealousy of rich Wall St. executives is justified simply because of their numbers, and no one stands to call them the socialist, lazy, leprous beggars that they are, democracy is king.

Democracy is rule by the masses. It means, everyone gets a vote on everything. There is no leadership, because all decisions are made by the masses, not through leaders. This is totally contrary to even basic human nature. It is natural for human beings to gravitate toward strong leaders, whether they are good or evil. People yearn inescapably to be governed. People want to be led. Hitler, a horrible mass murderer, was no anarchist. He believed in government, he was charismatic, and he was driven. This is why people followed him; not necessarily because they believed in his ideals. Democracy is counter nature.

A Republic, on the other hand, is the natural, (albeit far more formalized) productive form of government. A person (or a few people) represent the masses in governmental assembly. This person (or people) arbitrates for those he or she represents. The representatives congregate (i.e. Congress) to make laws by which to be governed. This is where we get the concept of our US Constitution. a republic streamlines a lawmaking process by which all are governed, instead of people being governed by themselves, as with a democracy.

Democracy: Rule by the masses
Republic: Rule by law through representation.

Another point to make about a democracy is its inherent ability (and inevitability) to destroy the needs of the minority/minorities. If the masses rule, the minorities have to deal. In a republic, instead of everyone getting a vote, everyone gets representation. While these are similar, they give more power to differing stances.

Americans today are deceived into thinking that this word "democracy" is the ultimate goal that every country should have. Granted, it is certainly better than some other forms of government out there, but AT BEST, it should only be used as an extremely brief stop-gap between the extreme tyrannical or anarchical governments and the goal of a republic. Democracy is not a good form of government. It is a lazy and inherently dangerous form of self-destruction that should be treated as more dangerous and less useful than a megaton nuclear bomb.

A final note: It is my personal belief that individuals cannot decide what is best for the whole, but they furthermore should not. The masses cannot know what is best for everyone, especially in a nation the size of ours. I love my country, but I've never lived in California, so I couldn't be trusted with the making of all of their laws. Likewise, asking me to vote on Alaskan law is detrimental to Alaskans because I have no experience in the land where those laws would be enforced. A Pennsylvanian should represent Pennsylvania when their laws are written, and a Texan should make his or her voice heard on behalf of Texas when its government is decided.

Take this with you to the polls when you go to vote in a few months: Remember that democracy cannot stand. Only a Republic, checked by a constitution, composed of representatives of the people, by the people, and for the people can stand the test of time. Vote for the candidate(s) that will work to PRESERVE the founding fathers' dream, not seek to make it into what he thinks it should be. The United States of America are presided by a president, not ruled by one.


Footnotes
1. An example of this is demonstrated in the anecdote where, having concluded their work on the Constitution, Benjamin Franklin walked outside and seated himself on a public bench. A woman approached him and inquired, "Well, Dr. Franklin, what have you done for us?" Franklin quickly responded, "My dear lady, we have given to you a republic--if you can keep it." Taken from "America's Bill of Rights at 200 Years," by former Chief Justice Warren E. Burger, printed in Presidential Studies Quarterly, Vol. XXI, No. 3, Summer 1991, p. 457. This anecdote appears in numerous other works as well.
2. Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, James Madison, The Federalist on the New Constitution(Philadelphia: Benjamin Warner, 1818), p. 53, #10, James Madison.
3. John Adams, The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States, Charles Francis Adams, editor (Boston: Charles C. Little and James Brown, 1850), Vol. VI, p. 484, to John Taylor on April 15, 1814.
4. Fisher Ames, Works of Fisher Ames (Boston: T. B. Wait & Co., 1809), p. 24, Speech on Biennial Elections, delivered January, 1788.
5. Ames, Works, p. 384, "The Dangers of American Liberty," February 1805.
6. Gouverneur Morris, An Oration Delivered on Wednesday, June 29, 1814, at the Request of a Number of Citizens of New-York, in Celebration of the Recent Deliverance of Europe from the Yoke of Military Despotism (New York: Van Winkle and Wiley, 1814), pp. 10, 22.
7. John Quincy Adams, The Jubilee of the Constitution. A Discourse Delivered at the Request of the New York Historical Society, in the City of New York on Tuesday, the 30th of April 1839; Being the Fiftieth Anniversary of the Inauguration of George Washington as President of the United States, on Thursday, the 30th of April, 1789 (New York: Samuel Colman, 1839), p. 53.
8. Benjamin Rush, The Letters of Benjamin Rush, L. H. Butterfield, editor (Princeton: Princeton University Press for the American Philosophical Society, 1951), Vol. I, p. 523, to John Adams on July 21, 1789.
9. Noah Webster, The American Spelling Book: Containing an Easy Standard of Pronunciation: Being the First Part of a Grammatical Institute of the English Language, To Which is Added, an Appendix, Containing a Moral Catechism and a Federal Catechism (Boston: Isaiah Thomas and Ebenezer T. Andrews, 1801), pp. 103-104. 
10. John Witherspoon, The Works of John Witherspoon (Edinburgh: J. Ogle, 1815), Vol. VII, p. 101, Lecture 12 on Civil Society.
11. Zephaniah Swift, A System of the Laws of the State of Connecticut (Windham: John Byrne, 1795), Vol. I, p. 19.
12. President [elect] Obama, in his victory speech before taking office as President of the United States of America. July 12, 2012.
13. President Ronald Reagan, in Remarks at a Ceremony Commemorating the 40th Anniversary of the Normandy Invasion, D-day, June 6, 1984.

Friday, April 20, 2012

How to have free cars for life!

Ever heard someone tell you "you'll always have a car payment"? My supervisor is the same way. He believes that it's not possible to live the American life without debt. How lost and confused some sheeple are...

While I'm not going to make a post on how to avoid all debt in life, I will post about a very easy way to pay cash for cars and never have a car payment again. The principles in what I'm about to show you can be easily transferred to nearly every other kind of recurring debt of this kind, so I guess you could say it's a sort of debt-free advice post.

So, you just can't wait to get a new car, right? Think the dealer made you a great deal? Okay, let's say you're like one-third of Americans that now have a 6-year car note of $26,000 at around 9.6% interest. That's about a $475 monthly payment. Now, buying a new car is never a good idea, because the second you drive your new car off the lot, it looses 25% off its value! So, not only are you in debt for $26,000 (which is really way more when you factor in interest), but you can't even turn around and sell your brand new car for what you paid for it 30 minutes ago! You're car is now worth $6500 less, and you haven't even put your first mile on it yet. And it gets worse. In four years, your wonderful car has lost about 70% of it's value and you still have 2 more years of car payments left! And it gets worse. After you've paid the car off, you've ended up spending $33,000 on your $26,000 car, which is probably only worth $6000+ six years later. Baaaaaaad sheeple. Not to mention, you're probably going to get car fever at the end of that six years, then go out and get another car loan and start this whole process over again. That is how sheeple live, and that is why they say you'll always have a car payment.

The problem is not just the math, it's the mentality. If you let yourself think that you're always going to be sending hundreds of dollars a month to a bank so you can drive a nice car, then the bank is only going to be too happy to help you live that dream. But, if you want to break off from the flock of brainwashed sheeple and start making your money work for you, here's an alternative:

Using our previous example, you wanted a car that came with a $475 monthly payment, right? Okay, well, let's lowball it and say that your current car is worth $1500. Let's say you keep driving your current car a while and pay yourself the $475 a month. After 10 months, you'll have $4750. Add that to the $1500 you can get for your current car, and you could buy a used car for $6250...and have NO MONTHLY PAYMENTS! So, to reiterate, you can upgrade your $1500 car to a $6250 car in 10 months, never having dealt with a bank! And it gets better! Let's say you keep paying yourself $475 a month after you buy the used car. In another ten months, you'll have another $4750 in your bank account. Since you bought a used car instead of a new one, the depreciation value over 10 months is probably negligible, so let say you can sell it for $6250. Add that to the $4750 you have in the bank, and you could buy an excellent, used $11,000 car in just 20 months!

So, by paying yourself instead of a bank, you upgraded your $1500 car to an $11,000 car in less than two years! And you were about to sign up for a 6-year contract at $475...you see where I'm going with this..?

And it gets better! Let's blow this only slightly out of proportion: Okay, so for 20 months, you've paid yourself and upgraded your car to a kinda nice one that you completely own. But let's say you keep paying the $475 to yourself in the form of a mutual fund specifically earmarked for car replacement for the remaining 52 months you would have been paying on the original car loan, and fast forward to the end of the six years...

...If you had gone through with the old plan, gotten a car loan, made payments of $475 to the bank every month, you will have just paid off your car, lost $27,000 over the past 6 years (if you include the interest you will have paid by now), and only have a $6000 car to show for it.

But if you had paid yourself instead, you'd have a paid-for $11,000 car which is probably still running, but getting a little old and you're wanting to upgrade. Want to know how much money you'd have in that mutual fund? Well, if the average stock market holds at its 12%, you'd have $32,000! So, you have a car that you own, and money in the bank, versus having a $6000 car and nothing in the bank. Which would you rather have?

At this point, if you go out and buy a used (or even new at this point) car for $12,000, you'd still have $20,000 sitting in the mutual bank earning 12% interest (did you catch that whole earning thing instead of paying?).

Now here's where things really start to go crazy.

If you never pay a single dollar more into your mutual fund, you'll still be able to buy $14,000-$18,000 cars IN CASH every five years! Woohoo! Free cars for life!

And it gets even better! Now that you're not making car payments anymore and the interest from your mutual fund is running on autopilot, let's see what you could do if you decided to start paying yourself $475 every month again. Of course, there's no hassle with the banks, no late payment fees, no repossession pressure that you'd have with a car loan, just money in your pocket.
If you did this, you'd have $100,000 in just 10 years! Wow!
In 20 years, you'd have about $470,000!
In 30 years, you'd have $1,600,000!
And in 40 years, that $475 car payment would be worth $5,588,385! That's a 40-year retirement plan with free cars!!!

I put this to you: If you can live with your car for just a little while longer and pay yourself first, you can really go somewhere. So make the choice today, break off from the herd of sheeple and change your economy. Recession-proof yourself by staying out of debt, being patient, and being the master of your money.

Modern Day Slaves

"The rich rules over the poor, And the borrower becomes the lender's slave." Proverbs 22:7

Sounds like a condemning Old Testament verse, right? That totally doesn't apply to today, does it? I mean, America did away with slavery in 1865, and they even had a war to solidify the decision! How can this not be a fallacy?

I believe the Bible to be completely infallible, inerrant, and God-breathed. If this is true, then slavery certainly still exists today, and it is absolutely rampant. I thought about writing this blog post about how credit card companies are run by amoral, lying scum, but realized I didn't have the time today (if you would like me to elaborate with several examples in a future post, please respond likewise in a comment).

"For the love of money is a root of all sorts of evil, and some by longing for it have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs." I Timothy 6:10

Some people think money is good. Some people think it's bad. Both assumptions are wrong. The Bible doesn't exactly call money either. Money is a tool. It is an instrument by which both good and bad things can be done. In that, money is like fire. Fire can be destructive, burning homes, forests, and killing people. But if used correctly, fire can create stronger materials (like steel), purify gold and precious metals, and heat a home, keeping people alive. Likewise, money can be used to buy someone food, pay for a home, buy a gift, or build a school or church. Alternatively, money can be used to bribe an official into voting opposite his conscience, or it can be spent to fuel a destructive gambling addiction, or it can be lent to someone with unmanageable interest, and then the borrower finds himself the slave of the lender.

Have you ever borrowed money from family? If you have, you probably know that this can be an extremely volatile situation. First off, the Bible strictly forbids lending money with usury (interest) to people who are your countrymen (Leviticus 25:35-38). Second, even if the family member doesn't specifically ask for interest, many times, they do expect to be repaid, and if you've ever been there, you know the relationship is never the same until restitution is made, and sometimes even after the recompense is made, there's a lingering awkwardness. 

Jesus warned against lending in Luke 6:35 - "...and lend, expecting nothing in return..."I believe that Christ's intention was to give to others freely according to their needs and your abundance. The early church was a model for this in Acts 4:32, 34-35 - "And the congregation of those who believed were of one heart and soul; and not one of them claimed that anything belonging to him was his own, but all things were common property to them... ...For there was not a needy person among them, for all who were owners of land or houses would sell them and bring the proceeds of the sales and lay them at the apostles’ feet, and they would be distributed to each as any had need."

So, if we know we are not to lend to others expecting return or interest, can we not conclude that we are not to allow ourselves to become slaves to lenders by accumulating debt? I believe we can assume this. Consider the following:

1. "You shall have no other gods before me..." Exodus 20:3-4"
2. "...the borrower becomes the lender's slave." Proverbs 22:7
3. "No one can serve two masters..." Matthew 6:24 & Luke 16:13

Therefore, if you borrow money knowing you'll owe it back, you are temping yourself toward idolatry and bondage to someone other than God! What a radical thought!

Too many Christians think that you can't live life without some kind of debt. I can't tell you how many times I've heard sheeple say "you'll always have a car payment." I'm sorry, but if you believe that, you're an idiot because no one can make you sign for a car. And you're also deceived because having a car payment has only been the norm for about 50 years. If you want a smart, reliable way to have a car and not have a car payment, check out my next blog post. I'm going to do a plug on how to drive free cars for life and retire on around $5.5 million;) 


In summary, I say this: if you're borrowing money, you're turning yourself into a slave to someone other than God, because He does not loan out His gifts. And remember not to loan out anything, especially with interest. This is not God's plan for His people, His church, or His servants.

Saturday, August 27, 2011

Aw....*^_^* This is so sweet:) .....or not:-p

Originally posted by Joseph L. Kilbreth on Tuesday, December 5, 2006 at 6:04pm


This is a reposting of an old blog from several years ago on Facebook and has not been proof-read or edited, so keep this in mind as you read typos and culturally late items. Thanks for reading!

---

You know, I've been reading all those "What every guy should do for his girl" and "what girls should do for their guy" and all that fuzzies junk, and I really have to be honest. The plethra of notes, facebook groups, and quotes that are dedicated to this subject are really a little too high school for me.

When you think about it, what gives some single, lonely, chivalrous guy the right to tell all other guys that they should be more like him because he treats women correctly and with respect? Or what about the broken-hearted girl who got mixed up with a guy who just wanted sex, and she was forced to dump him? Should she start a chain note or facebook group just because she thinks she knows the standard to which every male in the world must hold himself to just so that she'll have more dating options?

Sure, some of the things listed are what guys and girls should think about doing, but not because some crazy self-righteous guy or girl starts a facebook group and gets all the "awwwwww"'s from the opposite sex for it.

I'm sorry, but Facebookers today are getting so caught up in the fuzzies and the actions of their significant other that they forget some underlying, undetectable characteristics that are only discernable through time and getting to know someone. Such as:

Girls, should a guy hold the door open for you? "Of course!" you say. Okay, I'll agree with that. But why? Why should he do that? Because you can't open it for yourself? Because women are better than men? Because guys should treat women with respect? You may or may not agree with one or more of those reasons, but the underlying idea has not been realized.

Guys, should your girlfriend restrain herself from going through your list of text messages on your phone? "Yeah! She should never do something like that!" Okay, but why? Why should she not do that? Because it's rude to do that? Because you'd never cheat on her, but she still should respect your privacy? Because you should be honest enough with her that she doesn't have to suspect anything? Which one is the good reason why she shouldn't do that?

The point I'm trying to drive at, is that IT'S NOT THE VISIBLE THINGS THAT THE BOYFRIEND OR GIRLFRIEND SHOULD BE LOOKING FOR IN THEIR SIGNIFICANT OTHER! It's their heart! And how do you know someone's heart? They tell you, right? Wrong. The only way to get to know someone, and what they want and need is to be around them. Make him/her a part of your life. Make them an IMPORTANT part of your life. Not the center of your universe, just a big chunk of it.

Yes, many girls may like their boyfriend to hold open the door, to watch the occasional chick flick, to deal with her period. But is that why you love your boyfriend? It shouldn't be. You should love him because you love him!
Yes, guy want their girl to let him have space, to let him have his geeky moment and hang with his friends that she just doesn't relate to as well as he does, but is that why you love her? NO! You should love her because you love her! Not because of something he/she does or doesn't do for you, but because TRUE LOVE IS NOT REACTIVE! It does not depend on what kind of person they are, It depends on what kind of person YOU are.

When I tell my Sarah that I love her, it's not because she's kind to me. It's not because she's sweet and considerate. It's not because she's beautiful. It's not because she does "the little things." True, my Sarah is all those things, but that's not why I love her. They just make it easy for me to LIKE her.

No, I love my Sarah because I choose to. I know what she likes/dislikes because I choose to invest in her life and getting to know her. And I know what she likes because SHE TELLS ME. Not because I had to track down her facebook groups that give some crazy list of what I should do because I'm a guy with a girlfriend. My Sarah is unique. She is not like "every girl." She has her own special likes and dislikes, and I take much pleasure in learning them, because I choose to. Not because of anything she can give me or do for me (and believe me, she has more to offer than any girl I could dream up), but because I have a love that originates from God, that doesn't wait for the other person to be "worth it" or to show some kind of characteristic that appeals to me.

This, I think, is what all couples need to do for their loved one. THEN, all that other stuff like good communication, "the little things", and the fuzzies just simply because a natural byproduct of decisions (and emotions) to love the other person.

Friday, August 26, 2011

Joe Legal vs. Jose Illegal

Thought this was interesting...

Here is an example of why hiring illegal aliens is not economically productive for the State of California...

You have 2 families..."Joe Legal" and "Jose Illegal". Both families have 2 parents, 2 children and live in California.

"Joe Legal" works in construction, has a Social Security Number, and makes $25.00 per hour with payroll taxes
deducted....

"Jose Illegal" also works in construction, has "NO" Social Security Number, and gets paid $15.00 cash "under the table".

Joe Legal...$25.00 per hour x 40 hours = $1000.00 per week, $52,000 per year.

Now take 30% away for state federal tax...Joe Legal now has $31,231.00.

Jose Illegal...$15.00 per hour x 40 hours $600.00 per week = $31,200.00 per year.
Jose Illegal pays no taxes...
Jose Illegal now has $31,200.00

Joe Legal pays Medical and Dental Insurance with limited coverage $1000.00 per month $12,000.00 per year.
Joe Legal now has $19,231.00.

Jose Illegal has full Medical and Dental coverage through the state and local clinics at a cost of $0.00 per year.
Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00.

Joe Legal makes too much money is not eligible for Food Stamps or welfare.
Joe Legal pays for food $1,000.00 per month = $12,000.00 per year.
Joe Legal now has $7,231.00.

Jose Illegal has no documented income and is eligible for Food Stamps and Welfare.
Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00.

Joe Legal pays rent of $1,000.00 per month = $12,000.00 per year.
Joe Legal is now in the hole... minus (-) $4,769.00

Jose Illegal receives a $500 per month Federal rent subsidy
Jose Illegal pays rent $500.00 per month = $6,000.00 per year.
Jose Illegal still has $25,200.00

Joe Legal now works overtime on Saturdays or gets a part time job after work.

Jose Illegal has nights and weekends off to enjoy with his family.

Joe Legal's and Jose Illegal's children both attend the same school.
Joe Legal pays for his children's' lunches while Jose Illegal's children get a government sponsored lunch.

Jose Illegal's children have an after school ESL program. Joe Legal's children go home.

Joe Legal and Jose Illegal both enjoy the same Police and Fire Services, but Joe paid for them and Jose did not pay.

Also consider the fact that there are some illegal immigrants/aliens that "buy" a Social Security Number illegally from American frauds who sell them. Those immigrants/aliens use those Social Security Numbers to get "legit" jobs. Those illegal immigrants/aliens get a job that pays (for example) 40k annually. Social Security is taken out of these "legit" incomes. These Social Security witholdings total about 60,000,000,000.00 annually. Because the identity of these illegal immigrants/aliens cannot be reconciled to their actual identity, those SS witholdings ARE NEVER COLLECTED. Where does this money go? It goes one of two places: It is absorbed into the national debt, or In the event of notional budget overflow, the money is held indefinitely until such time as national debt occurs, or budget changes are made that require this money.

In short, the government is making an average of $60 BILLION off of illegal immigrants/aliens every year!!!!!

Please take into consideration these statements before voting for/supporting any governmental leadership that would support illegal immigrants/aliens.

Folks, there's a right way and a wrong way to be an American. Granted, the process of becoming an American needs a LOT of work, and it is a tedious (and sometimes ridiculous) undertaking, but you don't rob a bank to make a living do you? So why cheat the citizens of America (and possibly yourself) by supporting those in power (or potentially in power) that would allow such things to occur?

p.s. A BIG "congratulations" to my friend, Jose G. and my other friends who have suffered the process of becoming an American the proper way. You guys (and gals) rock! You'll make better American than most of us!






just a thought:)A Little over the top, but thought-provoking.

Monday, August 1, 2011

I shall call him...mini-"G"

So, I was watching Private Practice (in truth, it was on TV and I was barely paying attention) when I heard a character make the comment that while she didn't believe in God, even if she did, she couldn't believe that God would allow her mom to suffer a painful, drawn out death via brain tumor.

I can't tell you how many times I've heard people make comments just like this one. "I don't believe in a god who sends people to hell," "I don't want to believe in a god that lets millions of African children die of starvation," and "I don't believe in a god that [doesn't fit the description I have in my mind]" are just a few comments I've heard.

While (1) God doesn't send anyone to hell--Acts 16:30-31, Genesis 4:17 & 3:17 etc. and (2) God doesn't cause famine from spite--Genesis 3:17, Mark 6:41-42, the bigger question is:

WHO ARE WE TO SAY WHO GOD IS AND ISN'T OR WHAT HE IS/ISN'T LIKE?

It sounds like these people are creating a god IN THEIR OWN IMAGE. Last time I checked, the Bible was the source that states who God is. It defines Him by His actions and words.

Consider these statements:
1. The God of the Bible is the Creator of EVERYTHING.
2. This same God exercises sovereignty (meaning complete control and power) over His creation.

Now, if you believe both of the above statements, then the following statement must also be true: God can do whatever He wants, whenever He wants, to whomever He wants, with or without anyone else's permission or approval. Now, if all three of these statements are true, then why do people who claim to be Christian (and Christ claimed that He Himself was God in John 1:1,14 & 10:30) say and/or think things like those original statements? It seems like too many people want to make God a mini-me version that they've conceived in their own mind, rather than looking to Scripture to get a true definition of who He is...