Caricamento
Trova il tuo prossimo book preferito
Abbonati oggi e leggi gratis per 30 giorniInizia la tua prova gratuita di 30 giorniInformazioni sul libro
"Taking Back America"
Azioni libro
Inizia a leggereLunghezza: 332 pagine4 ore
- Editore:
- iUniverse
- Pubblicato:
- Apr 11, 2011
- ISBN:
- 9781462008506
- Formato:
- Libro
Descrizione
When the federal government starts to provide the American citizens with facts about what they are doing instead of making decisions that they believe are best for the common folk. The pathetic part is that the President and Congress for the most part do not listen to what the American citizen is telling them. When we make every member accountable we will be starting the process of Taking Back America. The citizens of the United States need to express our opinions to the representatives of our local districts and make sure that they understand we will not be voting for them in 2012 if they do not start acting in the best interest of the people. Could it be that the reason that the main stream media is always backing the Democrats and the unions is because they are union shops. That is correct. The main stream media are union shops and therefore are usually biased in their reporting in favor of the Democrats and the unions. This sure explains some of their very biased articles.
Informazioni sul libro
"Taking Back America"
Lunghezza: 332 pagine4 ore
Descrizione
When the federal government starts to provide the American citizens with facts about what they are doing instead of making decisions that they believe are best for the common folk. The pathetic part is that the President and Congress for the most part do not listen to what the American citizen is telling them. When we make every member accountable we will be starting the process of Taking Back America. The citizens of the United States need to express our opinions to the representatives of our local districts and make sure that they understand we will not be voting for them in 2012 if they do not start acting in the best interest of the people. Could it be that the reason that the main stream media is always backing the Democrats and the unions is because they are union shops. That is correct. The main stream media are union shops and therefore are usually biased in their reporting in favor of the Democrats and the unions. This sure explains some of their very biased articles.
- Editore:
- iUniverse
- Pubblicato:
- Apr 11, 2011
- ISBN:
- 9781462008506
- Formato:
- Libro
Informazioni sull'autore
I was born in Grundy Center, Iowa on October 21, 1937 and raised in Cedar Falls, Iowa until I enlisted in the United States Air Force. I have served my country for over 8 years. I have been the Committee Chairman of the American Citizens Political Action Committee since it was founded. It really disturbs me that the governments at all levels are more concerned about keeping their voting support than they are about the welfare of all the citizens of this great country. I was involved in the stock brokerage business for about 20 years and was an accountant for about 25 years. In addition, for about 10 years I have attempted to help start-up companies to have a method of raising capital. As with all start-up companies some of them made it and the majority of them did not. I try to use common sense. I have also written the following books: “A Beautiful America” “America Can Recover” “Bashing Sarah Palin” “Proud To Be American” “Taking Back America” and “My American Dream”. For more information on my views and photos visit my websites: www.thomasmeinders.com | www.americancitizenspac.com
Correlati a "Taking Back America"
Anteprima del libro
"Taking Back America" - Thomas R. Meinders
CHAPTER ONE
THE GREAT AMERICIAN CONSPIRACY
The American Citizens Political Action Committee would like to know if there really is a Great American Conspiracy
against the citizens of the United States. We have a federal government that operates in total secrecy concerning the source of funding for their outrageous pension funds. Where are these funds coming from? Where are these funds invested? What are the ties to the To Big To Fail
corporations? What are the federal pension funds connections to the corporations that have been bailed out by the government? How are the government’s pension funds tied to the investment firms of Morgan Stanley, J. P. Morgan, Chase and the other large investment firms? Are the federal government and their pension funds stable or are they under funded like several of the states? The government employees enjoy some of the most lucrative pensions in the world and the American taxpayer does not have any information about their solvency. Why is that? Are we living in a house of cards? If we are, when is it going to come tumbling down?
The people of the United States need to start paying attention to what the select 535 individuals of Congress and the President are doing to America. Why has the government provided the unions with rewards and let the American citizen take a complete loss of their investments and retirements. The case in point is the General Motors fiasco. This is one scary point. Are some of the federal government’s pension funds invested in union programs? Where is the transparency?
The United States provides pensions to members of Congress that are for life and are earned with a very short period of participation by the members. In addition, why does the government have a class structure on the members so that they do not have to belong to the social security system like most of the population? They pass laws that exclude their members from compliance and expect the citizens of the country to comply with their ideas. These types of laws should not be allowed since they only benefit a small fraction of the population. The President and Congress need to start making sure that if a law is passed that affects the general public it also is a requirement that all members of government are also affected.
The President and Congress of the United States should pass legislation that all unions are abolished in the operation of the federal government. There should not be collective bargaining by any government group of employees. The government should demand that all employees are on a grading system that expects these employees to produce at a level that justifies the amount of compensation that they are paid. If they are not producing they need to be given a pink slip just like in the private sector.
Simple quote from Franklin D. Roosevelt:
Public Sector unions = tax payers pay.
Private Sector Unions = the company you work for pays.
See the difference. Below are FDR’s own words……the Godfather
of liberalism. Every time you post this or bring this up liberals actually go into convulsions or just stutter. I had one liberal actually just tell me You don’t have the right to quote FDR, only Liberals can
. Read carefully what FDR himself said and why he warned us, it is EXACTLY what’s happening today!
It is impossible to bargain collectively with the government.
The founders of the labor movement viewed unions as a vehicle to get workers more of the profits they help create. Government workers, however, don’t generate profits. They merely negotiate for more tax money. When government unions strike, they strike against taxpayers. F.D.R. considered this unthinkable and intolerable.
The process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service,
Roosevelt wrote in 1937 to the National Federation of Federal Employees. Yes, public workers may demand fair treatment, wrote Roosevelt. But, he wrote, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place
in the public sector. A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government.
The government has continued to expand and the number of employees at December 31, 2010 is expected to be about 300,000 more than on March 31, 2009. We have eliminated any agency that had less than 100 employees.
FEDERAL CIVILIAN WORKFORCE STATISTICS
EMPLOYMENT AND TRENDS
AS OF MARCH 2009
ALL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES 2,690,238
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH 30,532
U.S. SENATE 6,511
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES SUMMARY 10,833
ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL 1,987
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE 227
GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE 3,190
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 2,977
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 4,251
U.S. TAX COURT 234
JUDICIAL BRANCH 33,800
U.S. SUPREME COURT 390
U.S. COURTS 33,410
EXECUTIVE BRANCH 2,625,906
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT 1,682
WHITE HOUSE OFFICE 397
OFFICE OF THE VICE PRESIDENT 19
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET 511
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION 197
OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL POLICY 110
OFFICE OF THE U.S. TRADE REPRESENTATTIVE 197
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS 1,604,079
DEPARTMENT OF STATE 28,719
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 168,811
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 667,987
DEFENSE, MILITARY FUNCTION TOTAL 643,591
DEFENSE, CIVIL FUNCTION TOTAL 24,396
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 230,074
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, MILITARY FUNCTION TOTAL 205,679
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, CIVIL FUNCTION TOTAL 24,395
CORP OF ENGINEERS 24,377
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 183,465
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 151,664
DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY 23,551
OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES (EXCLUDING DEFENSE LOGISTICS
AGENCY) 79,233
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 129,319
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 70,119
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 98,320
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 38,359
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 16,319
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 65,204
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 10,052
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 67,541
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 15,912
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 4,670
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS 222,747
INDEPENDENT AGENCIES 1,020,145 *
AMERICAN BATTLE MONUMENTS COMMISSION 367
ARMED FORCES RETIREMENT HOME 736
ARMED FORCES RETIREMENT HOME - GULFPORT 152
ARMED FORCES RETIREMENT HOME - WASHINGTON 584
FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD OF GOVERNORS 1,693
COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION 516
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION 466
CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE 600
COURT SERVICES AND OFFENDER SUPERVISION AGENCY FOR THE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 903
When we look at these numbers it is real obvious that the federal government could reduce the number of employees by 15 to 20 percent and we would not have any noticeable reduction in the quality of government. We would have a real reduction in the federal deficit every year. That is what the President and members of Congress should be working for. Cut the spending the United States is broke. Increasing taxes will not work. The only thing that is going to solve our deficit problems is reduced spending. Start with the federal government’s payroll and benefit programs.
The United States could make these cuts to the federal budget and according to the statistics outlined in the budget it would save the federal government $24.212 billion in salaries alone. Then you can add the savings from the benefits that would be eliminated. The federal governments savings using a conservative estimate of 15% of the salaries that would save an additional $3.632 billion in government expenses that would be a direct reduction to the annual budget deficit. We have just shown how to reduce the annual deficit by $27,844 billion and in addition it would make the remaining government employees aware that if they do not perform to acceptable standards they will also receive a pink slip. We need to start eliminating the employees that have been there the longest. Those usually are the ones that are free loading the most.
The members of the 112th Congress need to read the President’s proposed budget and learn how to understand what it means. I am concerned that the Democratic members of the Senate are fighting budget cuts but are not even looking at the budget to see if there is room to cut anything. They are more interested in sucking up to Harry Reid and the President than doing their jobs and seriously looking for ways to cut the deficit. More spending is not the answer. Austerity is the real answer and it needs to be implemented now.
I would like to do some basic mathematics concerning the cost of these government employees. I will utilize an average salary of each employee of $45,000 per year. I believe that this number is much lower than the actual average salary of the government employees. Using the March 31, 2009 date there were 2,690,238 employees drawing salaries during the period. When we eliminate 20% of these workers we will reduce the size of the federal government’s workforce by 538,048 employees. Remember, government employees and their benefits are paid by the tax payers of the United States. Private employees are paid by the companies that they work for. How come the President and the Congress don’t understand this basic part of economics?
The easiest way to reduce the size of the government payroll would be to bust the unions. When the government is providing the best place to work in the United States why do these employees need a union? Do your job properly and you will not have to worry about losing it.
WHERE THE GOVERNMENT INVESTS
THEIR PENSION FUNDS?
The American Citizens Political Action Committee would like to know the answer to the above question. There is supposed to be transparency in the operation of the federal government. The American people deserve to know what the government is doing to protect the retirement funds of their employees.
Could there be some sinister plot by the government about why the unions were given 4.8 million shares of the newly formed General Motors which was approximately 16% in the bailout? Does the federal government have investments in union programs? I do not know the answers to these types of questions but I really would like to have the answers provided. Were the major banks bailed out due to the fact that the government pension money was invested with them? What about the bailout of AIG? Was the government protecting their pension funds by bailing out AIG? How about the government providing some answers to these questions? I would be willing to bet that there is a major cover up concerning where the governments funds are invested. It is past the time for secrecy by the government. Publish the information for all of the citizens to review and see what is happening. The government should have let General Motors go into reorganization under the bankruptcy laws of the United States and busted the unions. Ironically the government forced General Motors into a structured bankruptcy that benefited the unions and left every American shareholder of the common stock and bonds of General Motors with worthless pieces of paper. That is what I call real government for the people. Then the President brags that it was in the best interests of all Americans and was a huge success. What has he been smoking is his cigarettes.
When the federal government starts to provide the citizens facts about what they are doing instead of making decisions that they believe are best for the common folk. The pathetic part is that the President and Congress for the most part do not listen to what the American citizen is telling them. When we make every member accountable we will be starting the process of Taking Back America
.
What about the bailout of American International Group, Inc.? Did the federal government have their pension funds invested in this company? It would explain why we poured $49.1 billion into their bailout for what is supposed to be 92.1% of the company. Then we have Morgan Stanley who is promoting this repayment to the government instead of paying the United States cash. The New York Stock Exchange ticker service reported on February 25, 2011 that there was a short interest of 21.260 million shares of AIG common stock. Could it be that these financial institutions know something that they are not telling the investing public? How about this one? The reporting services state that there are 135,140,000 common shares outstanding. What has happened to the 1.66 billion shares that the United States government is supposed to own? That would sure make the numbers for AIG be extremely fabricated. How does the Securities and Exchange Commission let this type of reporting continue? Morgan Stanley and their affiliates are pushing the American citizens to purchase shares at the current levels of $38.50 to $44.00. Then they can try to work some of the governments shares into the mix and sell securities that are not worth nearly as much as the prices they are being sold at today. How about truth in investing and government? Then we have the Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner praising this type of situation.
What is the connection to Morgan Stanley, J. P. Morgan, Chase and the other major investment firms to the Federal Reserve Bank? The Federal Reserve Bank is controlling the lending to the major banking institutes of the United States. The Federal Reserve is providing billions to these banks virtually interest free. The banks are supposed to be lending these funds to business and individuals to promote and stimulate the economy. The banks however are more interested in charging outrageous fees for processing loans, which is current income and risk free, and the businesses are not taking out any new loans. They understand that the fees more than offset the lower interest rates. Then while the banks have all this money they are more than likely investing in high risk investments in the market. That would explain why the market is performing better. The banks are planning to unload their investments when there has been enough publicity by the main stream media to get the poor American suckers back into the market. This will provide for the banks to sell their investments profitably. It did not do one thing to stimulate the economy. It did help the banks increase their profits. The side effect is that the 59 million retired citizens that are living on a fixed income have seen their earning power decline due to the lower interest rate that they receive on their savings and investments. That is on top of the senior citizens not getting any raise in their social security for two years. The Federal Reserve needs to be investigated for fraud and policies that are not for the benefit of all Americans.
Anything to help the major banks survive! President Obama will deny the facts but the acquisition of Merrill Lynch by the Bank of America has to be one of the biggest scams in the history of government intervention. How much of the government’s pension funds were controlled by Merrill Lynch and what effect would it have had if they were to go bankrupt? I do not know the answer but I would bet that the funds were substantial and the government did not want to take the hit on their pension funds.
The citizens of the United States need to express our opinions to the representatives of our local districts and make sure that they understand we will not be voting for them in 2012 if they do not start acting in the best interest of the people.
CHAPTER TWO
FEBRUARY 12, 2011 - PRESIDENT’S ADDRESS
EXERTS FROM OBAMA’S WEEKLY ADDRESS
ON FEBRUARY 12, 2011
President Obama said Saturday he is about to follow through on a promise to freeze some government spending for five years — even on programs I care deeply about
— in an effort to restrain a budget deficit likely to hit $1.5 trillion in 2011.
Obama likened the federal government’s predicament to that of a hard-hit American family. And he offered as an example a Missouri couple, short on money because the husband was forced into early retirement when an auto plant closed. Still, David and Brenda Breece scrimp and save, he said, and find money to send their daughter to college.
Then we should be able to understand that the federal government is going to scrimp and save to have a balanced budget. One major step would be to reduce the amount of discretionary spending by every department of the federal government. If Americans can adapt to the reduction in spending then so can the government. With a federal budget projected at $3.518 trillion the United States could trim the deficit by $351.8 billion dollars per year by mandating a 10 percent reduction in the spending by every department of the government. Then this could be compared to some couple in Missouri.
Unfortunately, we have too many representatives in the Congress that are not willing to offend any of the departments of government by making a decision that will affect all the departments. What is good for the people should be good for the government.
They understand what it takes to make ends meet without forgoing important investments like education,
Obama said. Well, it’s time Washington acted as responsibly as our families do… I’m proposing a new budget [for 2012] that will help us live within our means while investing in the future.
Obama’s budget for the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1 comes as deficit hawks on Capitol demand substantial program cuts in response to public concerns about growing gaps between government spending and receipts. Republicans said Saturday that he needs to do more. In the U.S. House, the GOP is hard at work on a 2011 budget resolution that targets deep cuts in current spending.
Obama said his new spending plan would shrink annual deficits by $400 billion over the next decade. But his flat line exempts Social Security, Medicare and other entitlements, as well as defense and other security-related programs. That means the president is putting ice on only a narrow section of his budget — less than 15 percent by most estimates.
The United States has a President that has not served one day in the military and does not have a clue concerning the abuses that are contained in the military budget. The President should reduce the budget for the military by at least 10 percent and make every department justify their expenses. We do not need the excessive waste that has gone on for decades in the military. The budget for the year ending September 30, 2011 contains provisions for $548.9 billion in discretionary spending by the military. Giving the military carte blanch to spend is not in the best interests of the United States. If they have legitimate expenses then they should be explained and accounted for in the budget. By reducing the discretionary spending by 10% it will save the government $54.9 billion per year. The vast majority of Americans have had to reduce their spending by more than 10 percent. Reducing the entire Department of Defense budget by 10% will decrease the deficit by $71.9 billion per year.
Obama has continued the rhetoric in his weekly address concerning the vast savings he is proposing during the next decade. How about reducing the deficit this year and proposing a balanced budget next year? Obama proposes the savings of $400 billion over a decade. That would work out to $40 billion per year but nowhere in his rhetoric is there any mention of how much it will save this year. We have shown how to reduce the deficit by over $100 billion over the next 12 months.
Even so, he said, we’ve stripped down the budget by getting rid of waste.
As one example, Obama said thousands of unneeded government buildings, sitting empty, would be unloaded because they aren’t needed.
This is classic rhetoric. President Obama is stripping down the budget by getting rid of waste. Since we are getting rid of waste in the government does that mean that the Air Force One will be grounded? Obama has wasted more money flying around the country spreading his rhetoric. The perfect president would be one that is staying in the White House promoting policies that are for the benefit of the nation. A perfect president would be one that is doing his job and not spending his days on television and out making speeches about how great he is. The president that accomplishes what the American people want does not need to be heard every day about everything under the sun. The perfect president will rely on his functioning for the best interest of the people and will let his actions and results speak for him. We do not need to see and hear about everything the President is promoting. Then the United States would not have lost respect from the rest of the world due to the fact that our President has waffled on the countries foreign policy concerning Egypt.
But he said the federal government would continue to invest in job-creating enterprises related to education, technology and rebuilding the nation’s roads and bridges. It would be a mistake,
he said, to balance the budget by sacrificing our children’s needs.
What Obama does not realize is that it would be a bigger mistake to continue the budget deficits and totally destroy any hope of our children and grandchildren ever paying for his mistakes. The President has used the same rhetoric about rebuilding the nation’s roads and bridges in every speech he has made to justify his outrageous spending habits.
If the President and the federal government want to see the quality of education improve then the government needs to get out of dictating policies that affect our school systems. The Department of Education needs to be abolished and return the educational systems to the state and local level where it belongs. The federal government is trying to force programs upon the school systems that are not taking into consideration the state and local needs. Instead the government is mandating policies that will not work throughout the entire nation. By abolishing the Department of Education it will reduce the federal deficit by $71.479 billion annually. Page 68 of the 2011 proposed budget.
Due to the developing situation in Egypt the United States needs to suspend the $1.5 billion in annual aide to the Egyptian government. Egypt can recover more than that by seizing the assets of the ousted President. The Egyptian government has been confiscating more than that per year from their people. When will American learn that they can not buy another countries respect? Keep the American taxpayers money in the United States.
No worry there. The 2012 budget won’t be balanced. And Republicans,
Hai raggiunto la fine di questa anteprima. Registrati per continuare a leggere!
Pagina 1 di 1
Recensioni
Recensioni
Cosa pensano gli utenti di "Taking Back America"
0Valutazione: 0 stelle su 5
0 valutazioni / 0 recensioni
Cosa ne pensi?
Valutazione: stelle su 5