tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-170688882024-03-13T20:53:29.061-07:00AndrewsDad<a href="http://www.cafepress.com/andrewsdad">Global Warming... It's The Sun Stupid.</a>AndrewsDadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060145267580346676noreply@blogger.comBlogger477125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17068888.post-452286649007443542014-03-06T10:21:00.001-08:002014-07-03T11:43:41.962-07:00Net Worth<b>The Net Worth Post</b><br />
<b><br /></b>
<br />
The <a href="http://andrews-dad.blogspot.com/2014/02/net-worth-primer.html">Net Worth Primer</a> in case you want to understand what I calculate and why.<br />
<br />
Last value, $1,106,713<br />
<br />
<b><u>End of June Net Worth</u></b><br />
<br />
Net Worth number for the end of June... ok July 3rd, 1,106,713. A drop of $8,622 for the month. Stocks did well, again, but big drops in house values. At one point houses were down $40K for the month. Zillow must have made a change to the algorithm as today the residence went up 26K and the rental went down 15K. Normally, if Zillow updates, they may move a couple of hundred, a thousand once in a while.<br />
<br />
Cash and investments have overtaken home equity, 566,899 to 539,814.<br />
<br />
The neighbors house I had mentioned in last months post was taken off of the market.<br />
<br />
<br />
<u><b>End of May Net Worth</b></u><br />
<u><b><br /></b></u>Net Worth number for the end of May.... $1,115,335. An increase of $19,239 or 1.755% or 21.6% annualized. That included a withdrawal of $5,000 from an account I include in the net worth to an account I don't include in the calculation. So, the number should kind of sort of be 5K higher. But its not.<br />
<br />
Not the 30% annualized gains we have been seeing but I will take 21% every single month. It would have been 26.54% with that additional 5K. The goal for this year, which I feel is aggressive, is to get to 1,190,000 and at the current rate, on track to get to 1,204,000.<br />
<br />
The hope during the last week of the month was maybe getting to 1,120 but a decrease in the house values by Zillow spoiled that dream. House equity stands at 575,736, cash and investments, 539,599. I had thought cash would surpass home equity by now but still a ways to go.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The neighbors house that I mentioned was on the market in the March update is still on the market and still not sold and they have not changed the price. I will be golfing with the owner tomorrow morning so may get some insight.</div>
<br />
<u><b>End of April Net Worth</b></u><br />
<u><b><br /></b></u>
Net Worth number for the end of April.... $1,096,096. An increase of $40,636 or 3.85% or 46.2% annualized. Both the house values and stocks did very well. It was a really good month and I have no time to comment more on it now.<br />
<br />
<u><b>End of March Net Worth</b></u><br />
The net worth value for the Start of April is... $1,055,460. An increase of $23,745 or 2.3% which annualized is 27.6%<br />
<br />
House values were up slightly, cash and investments had another good month. At the current rate the value of the cash and investments should overtake the equity in the houses at some point in the next month. We increased our retirement account contributions right at the end of the month so the monthly numbers were just slightly affected by that change. Going forward, there should be additional contributions made. In addition, there was discussion about a change to the investments to move additional money from non retirement accounts to a 401K. The plan is to make that change in a few months.<br />
<br />
I was a little surprised to not see the residential house value go up, per Zillow, right at the end of the month. I friend who live about a block away and whose house is similar in size and # of bed and baths went on the market last Friday at a price more than 10% above the Zillow estimate, 15% above our estimate. I thought that might bump up our price but we actually had a very slight decrease. A year and a half ago, the house around the corner from us sold for 25% above the Zillow estimate and that raised our value per Zillow. It will be interesting to see what change, if any happens when the house sells.<br />
<br />
<u><b><br /></b></u>
<u><b><br /></b></u>
<u><b>End of February Net Worth</b></u><br />
The net worth number to start the month of March is.... $1,031,715. The increase for Feb was $24,790, a 2.46% gain, which annualized is about a 33.8% return. This gets us to just over where we were at the start of the year, $1,030,262, At one point the number was in the 997K range a week into the month and then the number really started turning around.<br />
<br />
I wanted to mention one thing about the net worth number.... as mentioned in the net worth primer, that does include both houses. I read some discussions in some of last months net worth postings about including houses or not and here is my reason.... I have substantial equity in my houses. Just consider a couple of examples and see if you do not agree. Lets say two people have similar net worths when calculated without equity in houses. Lets put those numbers right around 500K. Now lets say both of those people have a house and both of those houses have a mortgage of about 375K. Now what if I told you one of those houses was worth 415K and the other was worth 860K? Would you say both of those people had the same net worth? If you said yes, do you realize that the person with the 860K house could sell it and take the proceeds, after expenses and pay cash for a 450K house, own it outright and live with no mortgage expense? Still think they have the same net worth?<br />
<br />
The truth is, I own both of those houses. My residence is worth about 860 and the rental about 415 and both mortgages are currently in the 375 range. So I have slightly more than 500K equity in the two houses. What if I sold both, rented someplace cheap and put the 450K money in the bank or in stocks. That would be included in my net worth, correct? So to not include those in my net worth calculations would say that my net worth would be the same even if I did not own those houses or regardless of the amount of equity. I just do not see the logic in that reasoning.<br />
<br />
Now another argument centered around houses as an investment. While I would argue that a house can be an investment, I would not compare a house to stocks but regardless, my residence has been a great investment.. In less than 4 years for the residence, I took a less than 250K down payment and mortgage payments that have totaled less than 100K and the result has been 500K equity. That's a return of close to 45% or about 10% annually and most of those mortgage payments should not be included since I would have incurred the same or similar costs paying rent had I not bought the house. Now do I expect my equity to increase that 10% each year?... maybe. On the one hand the market is the market and it goes up and down so who knows. On the other hand I now control an asset worth 860K and the predictions say house prices in this area should increase 7% in 2014. So if that holds true, I would have another 60K worth of appreciation and even using the down payment and the full mortgage amount extended out another year for my cost, that would still be a 15% return for the year.<br />
<br />
So here is my tip for the month about doing well with an investment or any purchase for that matter. You make your money at the time of the buy so don't put yourself in a position where you have to buy right now. When I bought the house I did not need to buy but I had done my homework and spent the time looking at enough houses to know that this house was worth way more than what they were asking. Why was it under priced?.... long story that involves Paris, Microsoft, Iran, cheating spouse and Canada. The same goes for other purchases. I buy on eBay occasionally, most of the time shoes and almost all of the time a specific brand. I know what I want and I know what they are worth. I check a few times a week and if I find something of interest at an exceptional price, I consider buying. I have that luxury because I do not need to buy right now. If I needed to have a pair of shoes right now, I am limited to what is being offered right now and its probably not going to include that one really great deal a month I manage to find. I am currently watching 2 pairs of shoes. 1 of the pairs I have that exact shoe and I love them but they are starting to show some age. I just don't love the price they are asking and I highly doubt they will get it. If they come down, I will be ready.<br />
<br />
Be patient, know the market, know when something, a stock, a house, a pair of shoes is being offered at a great price and when you recognize it, pull the trigger. Chances are you made or saved yourself some money.<br />
<br />
<br />
<u><b>End of Jan 2014 Net Worth</b></u><br />
Down about 23K this month. Final number was 1,006,925. As I said before, this includes bank accounts, stocks, houses both residence and rental but not other assets that are hard to value such as vehicles, jewelry, furniture and ownership in my small business. I want my number to be very conservative and easy to calculate.<br />
<br />
We did have a change in cars. My old car, an Acura MDX had some issues so we traded it in on a used Subaru. I am now driving the Honda hybrid which was something we were considering doing anyway because of my long commute. Bottom line, I am going to save close to $200 a month just in gas. I loved the MDX but the one knock on it, which I knew about when I purchased was the mileage would be poor, maybe 18 mpg and that was 90% highway driving. I am averaging 47 mpg with the hybrid.<br />
<br />
The drop in net worth was a fairly even combination of the houses and stocks. The stock market has been a challenge or late and I just need to remind myself that this opens up buying opportunities. I have talked both online and in person on this subject a number of times over the month that those who do well in the market see downturns as the chance to buy and those who do not see downturns as the time to sell and get out. Then of course when things turn around and the market is going crazy, those who do well tend to sell and those who do not are eager to put in all they have. Now one of these approaches is buy low, sell high and one is not.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b><u>End of 2013 Net Worth Number</u></b><br />
Just ran the "official" end of the year number and the answer is.... 1,029,876. Other big news... I holed out for eagle on the #1 handicap hole at my home course on New Years Day. Great drive right down the slot, 130 yards to a front pin. Played extra club to make sure I got it there, rather be long than short in this case. Its in the hole. Nice way to start the year.AndrewsDadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060145267580346676noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17068888.post-88837601146281869712014-02-28T15:20:00.000-08:002014-02-28T15:25:18.886-08:00March 1st 2014 Net Worth NumbersThe net worth number to start the month of March is.... $1,031,715. The increase for Feb was $24,790, a 2.46% gain, which annualized is about a 33.8% return. This gets us to just over where we were at the start of the year, $1,030,262, At one point the number was in the 997K range a week into the month and then the number really started turning around.<br />
<br />
I wanted to mention one thing about the net worth number.... as mentioned in the net worth primer, that does include both houses. I read some discussions in some of last months net worth postings about including houses or not and here is my reason.... I have substantial equity in my houses. Just consider a couple of examples and see if you do not agree. Lets say two people have similar net worths when calculated without equity in houses. Lets put those numbers right around 500K. Now lets say both of those people have a house and both of those houses have a mortgage of about 375K. Now what if I told you one of those houses was worth 415K and the other was worth 860K? Would you say both of those people had the same net worth? If you said yes, do you realize that the person with the 860K house could sell it and take the proceeds, after expenses and pay cash for a 450K house, own it outright and live with no mortgage expense? Still think they have the same net worth?<br />
<br />
The truth is, I own both of those houses. My residence is worth about 860 and the rental about 415 and both mortgages are currently in the 375 range. So I have slightly more than 500K equity in the two houses. What if I sold both, rented someplace cheap and put the 450K money in the bank or in stocks. That would be included in my net worth, correct? So to not include those in my net worth calculations would say that my net worth would be the same even if I did not own those houses or regardless of the amount of equity. I just do not see the logic in that reasoning.<br />
<br />
Now another argument centered around houses as an investment. While I would argue that a house can be an investment, I would not compare a house to stocks but regardless, my residence has been a great investment.. In less than 4 years for the residence, I took a less than 250K down payment and mortgage payments that have totaled less than 100K and the result has been 500K equity. That's a return of close to 45% or about 10% annually and most of those mortgage payments should not be included since I would have incurred the same or similar costs paying rent had I not bought the house. Now do I expect my equity to increase that 10% each year?... maybe. On the one hand the market is the market and it goes up and down so who knows. On the other hand I now control an asset worth 860K and the predictions say house prices in this area should increase 7% in 2014. So if that holds true, I would have another 60K worth of appreciation and even using the down payment and the full mortgage amount extended out another year for my cost, that would still be a 15% return for the year.<br />
<br />
So here is my tip for the month about doing well with an investment or any purchase for that matter. You make your money at the time of the buy so don't put yourself in a position where you have to buy right now. When I bought the house I did not need to buy but I had done my homework and spent the time looking at enough houses to know that this house was worth way more than what they were asking. Why was it under priced?.... long story that involves Paris, Microsoft, Iran, cheating spouse and Canada. The same goes for other purchases. I buy on eBay occasionally, most of the time shoes and almost all of the time a specific brand. I know what I want and I know what they are worth. I check a few times a week and if I find something of interest at an exceptional price, I consider buying. I have that luxury because I do not need to buy right now. If I needed to have a pair of shoes right now, I am limited to what is being offered right now and its probably not going to include that one really great deal a month I manage to find. I am currently watching 2 pairs of shoes. 1 of the pairs I have that exact shoe and I love them but they are starting to show some age. I just don't love the price they are asking and I highly doubt they will get it. If they come down, I will be ready. <br />
<br />
Be patient, know the market, know when something, a stock, a house, a pair of shoes is being offered at a great price and when you recognize it, pull the trigger. Chances are you made or saved yourself some money.<br />
<br />
Here is my <a href="http://andrews-dad.blogspot.com/2014/02/net-worth-primer.html">Net Worth Primer</a> in case you want to understand what I calculate and why... plus a few more thoughts.<br />
<br />AndrewsDadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060145267580346676noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17068888.post-25862692051088588652014-02-07T16:59:00.001-08:002014-02-07T17:33:06.054-08:00Net Worth PrimerI have been debating if I should write this post for a while but since now I am part of the <a href="http://www.budgetsaresexy.com/">J. Money</a> Bloggers Net Worth list at <a href="http://rockstarfinance.com/blogger-net-worths/">Rockstar Financial</a>, I feel like I really need to. This is a primer on how I do my net worth calculations, what is included and what is not. Some thoughts on my financial philosophy. A few links that may be of use and some do's and don'ts.
<br />
<br />
<b>What is included in calculating my net worth?</b>
<br />
Not everything to be honest. Bank accounts, investment and retirement accounts. Equity in the houses, plural, our residence and 1 rental house. That is it. I want to make it easy, I want to be able to calculate a number in a few minutes and I want to be very conservative.<br />
<br />
What I do not include are those assets that are hard to value, furniture, jewelry, art,<a href="http://www.rockjwalker.com/m.c._escher/works/emblemata_178_balance/"> yes I have some</a> and if you knew me that would come as a surprise, or those things that have minimal net value, such as the 3 cars, 2 of which are newer, 1 is a 2000 Honda Accord. I am not including the ownership in a small business that doubles as my employer. I own 50% and while it does have value, and has the potential for significant value, I have no idea how much that would be today and I don't really want to guess. I am also not including a personal loan in the mid 5 figure range made to friends... more on that later but the shorter version is don't.<br />
<br />
So the bottom line is this. If I had to fire sale everything, sell it all tomorrow...I should have no problem getting at least the number I have listed for my net worth and realistically, I would probably end up with a decent amount more.<br />
<br />
<b>Why am I doing this?</b><br />
Why am I putting my finances online for the world to see? I enjoy finances, specifically stock market investing. My wife and I are working hard towards building wealth so we can retire with enough to enjoy life. This is a way to keep me motivated and maybe pass on some of the information of what has worked for me and almost certainly some things you may not want to do. Have I mentioned not to loan money to friends?<br />
<br />
<b>What are some personal finance places on the internet that I frequent?</b><br />
-My most common finance related internet site is <a href="https://finance.yahoo.com/portfolio/pf_11/view/v3">Yahoo Finance</a>. Not claiming its the best, its just what I have always used.<br />
<br />
-I am also a fequent visitor to <a href="http://justadrone.blogspot.com/">MFI Diary</a> MFI, Magic Formula Investing, is a stock picking philosophy by Joel Greenblatt that I find interesting. The guy that runs the MFI Diary does a good job of looking at stocks to buy and occasionally that leads me to a buy. <br />
<br />
-J. Money's <a href="http://www.budgetsaresexy.com/">Budgets Are Sexy</a> The reason I am writing this. I found J's blog when I was looking for personal investing sites, specifically site by people like me who manage their own stocks. My hope was to find a couple of sites that talked about stocks of interest. Glad I found BrS but still looking for stock sites.<br />
<br />
-Budgets are Sexy's sister site <a href="http://rockstarfinance.com/">Rockstar Finance</a> A nice collection of personal finance related articles that most of the time I agree with. Which leads me to...<br />
<br />
<b>What is my personal finance philosophy?</b><br />
Spend less than you make and invest as much as you can. That about sums it up.<br />
<br />
I am about 95% on the same page as <a href="http://www.daveramsey.com/home/">Dave Ramsey</a>. They guy really knows his stuff and goes about life the right way. We have a couple of differences, mainly the whole investing in individual stocks, but for the most part, we agree.<br />
<br />
For the record, I would not advise most people to pick their own stocks. It is something I have always enjoyed and I think I have the personality and some background to allow me to do the appropriate research but for most people, probably not the best choice.<br />
<br />
One more piece of advice, not really personal finance related but a little bit. Be careful who you pick as friends and who you hang out with. Being around smart successful people who make good decisions goes a long ways in how your life turns out. Its something that took a long time for me to truly understand and I try to pass it along whenever I get a chance.<br />
<br />
Now about loaning people money... my wife, who is the best human I have ever known, has been friends with a couple for many more years than I have known her. They would not qualify as the best managers of personal finance and got into some debt at a very high rate. I had recently come into some cash and was trying to figure out where to put it when I found out about their situation. They mentioned Dave Ramsey, in fact that is where I first heard about Dave. They talked about how they were all in on his program etc. So my wife and I decided to loan them a non insignificant amount of money at a reasonable rate that was significantly less than what they were paying. Well fast forward and they did not end up following the Ramsey plan. Now they have been paying me back as scheduled and I am not concerned about getting repaid at this point but if you listen to what Dave says about loaning money... there is a lot of truth to it.<br />
<br />
<br />
You can <a href="https://twitter.com/Andrew_Dad">follow me on twitter</a> but be warned, that is where I let out my sarcastic fiscal conservative, social libertarian angst. If you are the type that is easily offended.... Consider yourself warned.AndrewsDadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060145267580346676noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17068888.post-6237754243117796412014-02-04T09:50:00.002-08:002014-02-07T17:02:36.736-08:00February Net Worth NumbersDown about 23K this month. Final number was 1,006,925. As I said before, this includes bank accounts, stocks, houses both residence and rental but not other assets that are hard to value such as vehicles, jewelry, furniture and ownership in my small business. I want my number to be very conservative and easy to calculate.
<br />
<br />
We did have a change in cars. My old car, an Acura MDX had some issues so we traded it in on a used Subaru. I am now driving the Honda hybrid which was something we were considering doing anyway because of my long commute. Bottom line, I am going to save close to $200 a month just in gas. I loved the MDX but the one knock on it, which I knew about when I purchased was the mileage would be poor, maybe 18 mpg and that was 90% highway driving. I am averaging 47 mpg with the hybrid.
<br />
<br />
The drop in net worth was a fairly even combination of the houses and stocks. The stock market has been a challenge or late and I just need to remind myself that this opens up buying opportunities. I have talked both online and in person on this subject a number of times over the month that those who do well in the market see downturns as the chance to buy and those who do not see downturns as the time to sell and get out. Then of course when things turn around and the market is going crazy, those who do well tend to sell and those who do not are eager to put in all they have. Now one of these approaches is buy low, sell high and one is not.<br />
<br />
Here is my <a href="http://andrews-dad.blogspot.com/2014/02/net-worth-primer.html">Net Worth Primer</a> with some background about what I do and why I do it.AndrewsDadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060145267580346676noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17068888.post-52993023281516352842014-01-02T08:27:00.000-08:002014-01-02T08:27:01.041-08:00End of year numberJust ran the "official" end of the year number and the answer is.... 1,029,876.
Other big news... I holed out for eagle on the #1 handicap hole at my home course on New Years Day. Great drive right down the slot, 130 yards to a front pin. Played extra club to make sure I got it there, rather be long than short in this case. Its in the hole. Nice way to start the year.AndrewsDadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060145267580346676noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17068888.post-53395555018440039792013-12-31T10:00:00.001-08:002013-12-31T10:01:44.506-08:00Last day of 2013, time to focus on finances.Its the last day of the year and me and the Mrs. have decided to focus on increasing our net worth..... We are at the point in our lives where we need to add to our investments so we can make sure we are able to afford the retirement we would like.
A little background.... we are both early, early 50s. Our current net worth is slightly over 1 million. Now don't start thinking we could write a check for a million because we can't. About half of that net worth is in houses, our residence and a rental. About half in cash and investments. Of those investments, most, maybe 65% is in retirement accounts so its not really available. One more point, that net worth number does not include a lot of assets, cars, furniture, jewelry, etc. that are hard to value. It is just stock investments, bank accounts, house values, from Zillow, etc. Numbers that I can put into a spreadsheet in about 3 minutes. I am sure if we were to liquidate everything, our net worth would be substantially more but I want to be ultra conservative.
So that is where we are. My hope is that I will post updates to how things are going on a somewhat regular basis, every few days, maybe when I have some from time or the mood hits. Probably more when something happens such as I am thinking of buying or selling a stock.
That is all, it should be an interesting year.
AndrewsDadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060145267580346676noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17068888.post-53424513358027161222012-08-29T10:01:00.000-07:002012-08-29T14:31:40.373-07:00Meet Jay Inslee supporter, warrior spirit RamthaJay Inslee and the WA state Dems are getting <a href="http://publicola.com/2012/08/28/mystic-jolt-ramtha-guru-gives-50000-to-the-democrats/">large donations courtesy of 35,000 year old warrior spirit Ramtha channeler JZ Knight</a>. I would try to explain what that means but you would not believe me.<p>
So the question I have is this... does Mr. Inslee believe in what JZ Knight is selling? Seems like a good question for tonight's debate.<p>
Update: Since this was linked, <a href="http://orbusmax.com/">thanks Orbusmax</a>, I thought I should try to explain Ramtha. Emphasis on try.... From <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Z._Knight">Wikipedia</a>
<blockquote>
Ramtha (the name is claimed to be derived from Ram and to mean "the God" in Ramtha's language) is an entity whom Knight claims to channel. According to Knight, Ramtha was a Lemurian warrior who fought the Atlanteans over 35,000 years ago.[17] Ramtha speaks of leading an army over 2.5 million strong (more than twice the estimated world population at about 30,000 BC) for 63 years, and conquering three fourths of the known world (which was allegedly going through cataclysmic geological changes). According to Ramtha, he led the army for ten years until he was betrayed and almost killed.[18] Ramtha says he spent the next seven years in isolation recovering and observing nature, the seasons, his army making homes and families, and many other things. He later mastered many skills, including foresight and out-of-body experiences, until he led his army to the Indus River while in his late fifties. Ramtha taught his soldiers everything he knew for 120 days, he bid them farewell, rose into the air and in a bright flash of light he ascended before them. He made a promise to his army that he would come back to teach them everything he had learned. JZ Knight says that in 1977 Ramtha appeared before her and told her that he had come to help her over the ditch. JZ Knight became his first student of what he calls the great work </blockquote>
<p>
I kid you not.<p>
I sent a tweet to @jayinslee asking if he thought @jzknight and @ramtha were a fraud. No reply. Found out later that Knight has also contributed to President Obama. Sent @barackobama the same tweet. No reply.
AndrewsDadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060145267580346676noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17068888.post-52603762049663196452012-08-28T12:44:00.000-07:002012-08-28T12:44:20.177-07:00Seattle University's Socialist Econ Professor / CandidateAn <a href="http://blogs.seattletimes.com/politicsnorthwest/2012/08/27/socialist-candidate-sues-to-get-party-preference-on-ballot/">article in the Seattle Times</a> talks about a lawsuit by Kshama Sawant. She filed to run in the 43rd L.D. position 1 and was endorsed as a write in candidate for the 43rd L.D. position 2. She finished 2nd in both primaries but can only be on the ballot in one race. So she picked position 2. State law says a write in candidate can't show the political party. Ms. Sawant is a member of the Alternative Soclialist Party. Ms. Sawant also does not think the current rules should apply to her and wants the party affiliation listed on the ballot and has sued. Now I will skip all discussion on the sanity of someone thinking that listing Alternative Socialist Party on the ballot will actually help them because, well it is Seattle after all so maybe it would help. <p>
Here is my issue with the story. Ms. Sawant is an econ professor at South Seattle C.C. and Seattle University. The Alternative Socialist Party candidate is an econ professor at Seattle University, the school where I earned my degrees. OK, whatever, as long as I guess you understand econ and is not promoting some wacky ideas, like privatizing successful businesses that have created substantial wealth in the area...
<blockquote>
•Break the power of Wall Street and Corporate America! Take the giant corporations that dominate Washington state such as Boeing, Microsoft, and Amazon, into public ownership under democratic workers' control to be run for public good, not private profit.</blockquote>
Oops... guess not.
AndrewsDadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060145267580346676noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17068888.post-14537141749241427952012-08-23T09:44:00.000-07:002012-08-27T15:47:37.919-07:00Is Jay Inslee a Tax Cheat?Jay Inslee released his tax returns... and by released, I mean he let accredited reporters see some documents, not the voting public. <p><br />
What the reporters have permitted us to learn was that Jay Inslee does not appear to be much of a manager of his own money. While reporting a household income of $237,000 in 2011, putting him in the top 2% of households in the country, he had to borrow from an IRA to replace his roof. Anyone who has an IRA knows that withdrawing money early from an IRA incurs a penalty. So Mr. Inlsee withdrew $45,000 and paid a penalty of $10,000 as a result. Seems like someone who is 60+, an attorney, has been bringing in a significant amount of income for a number of years should have other ways to come up with the money. Especially when it was used to replace a roof, an expense that is almost always anticipated many years in advance. But poor money management by someone who wants to run for Governor of the state of Washington is not the point of this post. Also included in the <a href="http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2018964023_insleetaxreturns22m.html">Seattle Times article</a> is a mention of a loss incurred on a membership in a country club. <br /><p>
<blockquote>
They also reported a loss on a membership in the Wing Point Golf and Country Club on Bainbridge Island. The tax returns show the couple acquired the membership in 1988 and sold it in 2009, reporting a $5,500 loss.</blockquote><p>
Now I am not a tax attorney but I am curious why exactly would a loss on a country club membership need to be included on a tax return? Did they take a deduction from the loss? If so, the question is under what circumstances would a loss from a sale of a country club membership qualify as a legitimate write off? If it was for personal use, I can't imagine that it would be allowed. I called the Inslee office but nobody has got back to me. I emailed the Seattle Times reporter but no answer. Its impossible for me to know the answers to my question since the tax records that were "released" are not available to the voting public. <p>Update: The Seattle Times reporter replied that he had to go to get a copy of the return and did not know of any restrictions on what he could do with the copy. He had not scanned what he has as of yet. Has not had the time to look into anything regarding the country club loss. <p>Update2: I called the country club and asked about membership and they only have equity memberships. To join you buy an existing share and pay an initiation fee. I was told there are a number of current members selling shares at no cost. Initiation fee is $5500, which of course is the same amount listed as the loss on the tax form. Which makes you wonder if the amount listed as the loss was on the stock, which just happens to match the initiation fee, or if it was in fact the initiation fee. If they are claiming a loss on an initiation fee, then that would raise even more questions as it should have been clear that was not an amount they would ever receive back and would in no way be seen as a capital loss. As I have said, I am not a tax attorney, I don't know the answers to these questions. I do think they are legitimate questions that should be answered. <p><a href="http://mynorthwest.com/76/728384/Dori-finds-red-flags-in-Jay-Inslees-tax-returns">Update3: Dori Monson covers the story</a>. <a href="http://www.orbusmax.com/">Thanks to Orbusmax </a>for letting me know and for the link. Mr. Inslee's spokesperson seems to be confused between the concept of a country club membership and what Mr. Inslee has, an equity membership. Some country clubs are equity clubs. When you buy a membership, you are buying ownership, stock, in the club. Some clubs are non equity, your membership does not include any ownership. Some clubs have both membership options. Mr. Inslee's club is an equity club. As I stated previously, those current members who are selling their stock are doing so today for $0. As I also mentioned, for this club, to buy stock, you also need to pay an initiation fee to the club which is currently $5500. The amount of the loss Mr. Inslee stated on his tax return... wait for it... $5500. Sure, it could be a coincidence but it seems like there is a reasonable chance that Mr. Inslee deducted his initiation fee from his taxes and not a loss in his equity ownership stock. So once again, I am not a tax attorney but my best guess regarding the probability of legitimately deducting an initiation fee from your taxes is somewhere between 0 and 0. Now if the loss really was from an equity ownership, the probability in my opinion of that being a legit deduction on personal taxes would be approximately 0. <br />
<br />AndrewsDadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060145267580346676noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17068888.post-43985717009112035092012-03-01T21:16:00.002-08:002012-03-01T21:26:25.783-08:00<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-OTGmf_x3MLU/T1BX6WFkdOI/AAAAAAAAFjE/UHTxTFLhWx0/s1600/andrew-breitbart-80014-530-453-300x256.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 300px; height: 256px;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-OTGmf_x3MLU/T1BX6WFkdOI/AAAAAAAAFjE/UHTxTFLhWx0/s400/andrew-breitbart-80014-530-453-300x256.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5715164587006129378" /></a><br />Andrew Breitbart<br /><br />He inspired me to stick up for what I believe. It was a shock to hear this morning of his passing. This afternoon I was dropping off a package at UPS here in Seattle when another customer was ranting to the help about how it was "the bankers" who were behind all of the global financial problems. And by "bankers", I am fairly certain what he meant was "the Jews". And I said nothing. After I was out the door, on the way back to the office, I thought what I should have said was..."well maybe what we should do is find all of those "bankers" who held a gun to everyones head and forced them to borrow money... oh that's right, none of them did." And I felt horrible that I did not have the guts to confront him and ridicule him in public like he deserved. Because I did not want to put myself out there. Never again do I want to feel that way.<br /><br />Never again, Andrew, never again.<br /><br />You will be missed.AndrewsDadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060145267580346676noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17068888.post-55452495431974090142012-01-24T15:25:00.000-08:002012-01-24T16:08:03.025-08:00<strong>1000 Days Without a Budget</strong><br /><br />I noticed this morning that this was day 1000 without a budget for the U.S. government. Later I saw a video of Senator Kent Conrad, D-ND, chair of the Senate Budget Committee claiming to correct the falsehood that we have not had a budget for 1000 days. His reasoning is the Budget Control Act of 2011 is a budget. <a href="http://budget.senate.gov/democratic/index.cfm/multimedia?ContentRecord_id=d5d8b91f-7537-4bb2-9217-fd8975eb3f31&ContentType_id=9732d7bc-d5dd-40ed-ba87-c20683c9ac6a&Group_id=20f6915d-0050-49d0-8a28-13ef967028ee&MonthDisplay=1&YearDisplay=2012">Click here to watch for yourself</a>.<br /><br />Now you may be asking yourself, "The Budget Control Act of 2011? What exactly is that?" Well its S. 365, also know as the law that came out of the debt ceiling debate we had in August that led to the infamous debt super committee right before we were downgraded... or as my Congressman Jay Inslee said, <a href="http://andrews-dad.blogspot.com/2011/08/jay-inslee-says-his-vote-avoided.html">which helped us avoid a downgrade</a>. Wrong again Jay.<br /><br />I called the Senate Budget committee asking where I could see the budget that Senator Conrad insists was passed. Got a call back and was told they would send me a link to the actual budget and that yes indeed it was an actual budget, not a continuing resolution. Great, can't wait. <a href="http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s365enr/pdf/BILLS-112s365enr.pdf">Here is the link.</a> The link is to S. 365, "an act to provide for budget control". In addition to allegedly containing the entire U.S. budget, it also covers:<br /><br />1) 10 year discretionary caps<br />2) Vote on balanced budget amendment<br />3) Debt ceiling process<br />4) Deficit reduction<br />5) Pell grant and student loan<br /><br />Seems like a lot for 28 pages. Seems to me that the U.S. budget alone would take more than 28 pages.<br /><br />So I took a quick look at the document to see how much money we were going to spend on the Department of Education. No mention. The word Education comes up 4 times in reference to the Higher Education Act of 1965. What about the Department of the Interior. The word Interior does not appear. What about Health and Human Services. 1 reference where it states that "If a bill or joint resolution making appropriations for the fiscal year is enacted that specifies an amount for the health care fraud abuse control program at the Department of Health and Human Services...", then it goes on to set caps for the amount that can be included in the bill or joint resolution. It does not budget anything for HHS, just caps the amount that can be spent on HHS' fraud abuse control program.<br /><br />So I replied back to Director of Planning and Outreach for the Senate Budget Committee asking where exactly is the budget part in this budget. Where does it specify how much is going to be spent on what? I am awaiting a reply.<br /><br />I also called the local office of Senator Patty Murray who is on the budget committee and asked where I could see the budget and I was told they would have to research that and let me know.AndrewsDadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060145267580346676noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17068888.post-52394816117762408672011-08-24T11:03:00.000-07:002011-08-24T15:08:09.267-07:00<strong>Jay Inslee Says His Vote Avoided A Downgrade</strong>
<br />
<br />I called my Representative, Jay Inslee, about 6 weeks ago asking about his involvement in the debt ceiling talks. I received a reply yesterday.
<br />
<br />Rep. Inslee says his vote avoided a downgrade and then goes on to let me know about the additional spending he was able to save or increase as part of the debt deal.
<br />
<br />Here is the letter:
<br />
<br /><blockquote>August 23, 2011
<br />
<br />Dr. Mr. XXXXXXXXX
<br />
<br />Thank you for contacting me with your concerns over the agreement reached to raise the statutory federal debt limit. I appreciate hearing from you.
<br />
<br />On August 1st, I voted in favor of S.365, the Budget Control Act of 2011 to prevent an economic disaster. This bill was unfortunately an unbalanced proposal that doesn't meet the expectations that the American people have for solutions to the debt problem. But because passage was necessary to avoid serious harm to our economy and because this bill takes steps to reduce our deficit, while protecting Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare and education, the right solution was to move forward.
<br />
<br />This legislation will allow increases to the statutory federal debt limit estimated to last until 2013 while directing more than $2.1 trillion in cuts to federal spending over the next ten years. House leaders from both parties were able to come together with President Obama <strong>on an agreement that has averted a predicted downgrade of U.S. bond ratings and other harmful economic effects</strong> associated with the inability of the Treasury Department to provide funds for Congressionally-ordered expenses. I think from this point forward we must focus on growing the economy and creating jobs to put our fiscal house in order.
<br />
<br />It is unfortunate that such decisions are being made during this difficult time for the American people. Our economic challenges can only be solved by a balanced and fair approach, which is why I voted against extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. We must also look to responsibly downsize our federal budget without putting our most vulnerable citizens at risk, which is why I support our social safety programs and education that will aid our economic recovery.
<br />
<br />I am dedicated to preserving the solvency of Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare. Social Security is one of the most successful poverty reduction programs in United States history. Fewer than 12 percent of older Americans today fall below the poverty line, without Social Security that number would be nearly 50 percent. I believe we have an obligation to provide both current and future retirees with public retirement benefits that they have paid into through hard work over their lifetimes.
<br />
<br />You may be interested to know that during the debates on health reform legislation, I fought hard to include language in the final package that will help correct the geographic inequities in Medicare reimbursement rates that have long hurt both Medicare enrollees and caregivers in Washington state. <strong>The agreement, negotiated with Speaker Pelosi and the White House, will provide $800 million to providers and hospitals that are currently under-reimbursed in Medicare yet perform high-quality care. I also supported H.R. 2, the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009 (CHIPRA) which seeks to enroll 4.1 million new children in the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) and Medicaid, bringing the total number of children covered by the program to over 11 million.</strong>I also strongly believe that we must adequately fund our education priorities because our children's education is too important of an investment to underfund. With regard to concerns about student aid, I want you to know that I am a strong supporter of the Pell Grant program and <strong>this agreement includes enough new funding to maintain the maximum Pell Grant at its current level</strong>, despite increases in student enrollment.
<br />
<br />Education is one of my top priorities in Congress and I will continue to do everything I can to improve learning environments for students, teachers and administrators in our schools. Like you, I believe that we must address pressing issues in our education system. The federal government has a responsibility to act as a partner to the states and local school districts in order to provide the funds necessary to meet our children's educational needs. You can be sure that I will fight to make sure our students have the tools they need to succeed in school.
<br />
<br />Our short term economic crisis and long-term debt problem should be about bringing people together in an honest and transparent debate about how best to marry our principles with economic reality. I will continue to work across the aisle to accomplish these goals.
<br />
<br />Again, thank you for taking the time to contact me about such an important issue. For news on current federal legislative issues, please visit my website at www.house.gov/inslee, where you can also sign up to receive my e-newsletter. My office is here to serve you, so please feel free to contact us in Shoreline at 206-361-0233 or in Washington, D.C. at 202-225-6311 for assistance.
<br />
<br />Very truly yours,
<br />JAY INSLEE</blockquote>
<br />
<br />Beyond the fact that my Representative seems unaware that we were downgraded, my biggest issue with the letter is calling social security a successful poverty reduction program. Anyone who is willing to spend a few minutes to understand how social security works would know that the only ones who really benefit from it are those who would not have been responsible enough to save for their own retirement at all if not forced into this ponzi scheme of a retirement plan. The average senior citizen would have been substantially better off if they would have invested the money in any reasonable secure investment instead of having the money taken to give to current retirees.
<br />
<br />And those of us who are responsible are forced to pay into this system and suffer as a result.AndrewsDadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060145267580346676noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17068888.post-59503675048018805972011-05-26T16:56:00.000-07:002011-05-26T16:59:33.960-07:00Jay Inslee, Still No Opinion on Congress Doing It's Job<br /><br />How long has it been since that last Jay Inslee Libya post? Still waiting to hear about his position on the war powers act almost a week past the legal deadline.AndrewsDadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060145267580346676noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17068888.post-71666090517085635982011-05-01T20:51:00.000-07:002011-05-01T20:52:48.617-07:00Waiting almost 10 years for this one...<br /><br />Ladies and Gentleman, Johnny Cash<br /><br /><iframe width="425" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/k9IfHDi-2EA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe><br /><br />Thank you United States Military.AndrewsDadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060145267580346676noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17068888.post-62210810806176193222011-04-15T19:37:00.000-07:002011-04-15T19:40:43.802-07:00Atlas Shrugged Part 1<br /><br />Sitting in the Lincoln Square theater with Andrew watching the previews before Atlas Shrugged. Andrew appears to be the only one here under 30.AndrewsDadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060145267580346676noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17068888.post-44416298530433997272011-04-07T17:24:00.000-07:002011-04-07T17:55:02.243-07:00<strong>Jay Inslee Admits He Does Not Understand The Role Of Congress And That He Is Really Ineffective</strong><br /><br />I called Rep. Inslee's office recently and asked for a statement regarding the military action in Libya, specifically the fact that the Obama Administration did not get authorization for military action from Congress. Rep. Inslee replied letting me know that the administration muse be accountable to Congress and that nothing he is for ever seems to happen.<br /><br />Here is the full reply:<br /><br /><blockquote> April 7, 2011 <br /><br />Mr. XXXXXX XXXXXXXX <br />XXXX XXXth XXXX XX <br />XXXXXXX, Washington 98XXX <br /><br />Dear Mr. XXXXXXXX: <br /><br />Thank you for contacting me regarding you concern about U.S. participation in the international no-fly zone over Libya in response to oppressive violence by the country's dictatorship. I appreciate hearing from you on this very important issue. <br /><br />I have been gravely concerned by the violence carried out by the regime of Muammar Gaddafi upon citizens of Libya who have sought to improve their political and economic freedoms through public protests. As members of the opposition rose up to defend themselves, joined by defecting military forces, the United Nations Security Council acted with unprecedented speed and in concert with NATO and the Arab League to adopt a resolution condemning the Gaddafi regime's actions and calling for international humanitarian intervention including a no-fly zone. After initially leading in the military effort to enforce the no-fly zone starting on March 19th—in time to prevent major civilian bloodshed in the city of Benghazi—the U.S. has shifted to a supporting role in the ongoing humanitarian effort. <br /><br /><strong>I believe that any Administration must be accountable to Congress for the use of military power.</strong> That is why I am participating in Congress's ongoing oversight of the Administration to seek definitive answers about plans to quickly transition from a leading role to a supporting role in the international no-fly zone. I will work in Congress to make sure that any costs of the Administration's actions are appropriately budgeted and shared heavily with other with other participating nations, and that the U.S. is not left with the sole responsibility to rebuild yet another middle-eastern country. I will keep your thoughts in mind as events move forward. <br /><br />As an opponent of the President's costly and dangerous Afghanistan surge strategy, I have voted against war funding and voted for requiring an exit strategy. Most recently, I joined with 98 of my colleagues in voting for an amendment to the Continuing Resolution for 2011 that would have limited funding for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan to no more than $10 billion from the requested amount of $157.8 billion over the next six months. <strong>Though that amendment failed to pass</strong>, on February 19th, I voted against the full war funding as part of a short-sighted spending bill proposed by the House Republican Majority, <strong>which unfortunately passed</strong> by a vote of 235-189. This Continuing Resolution, to fund government operations until October, has been rejected by the Senate in its current state. <br /><br />As you may know, I voted against the authorization to invade Iraq and I organized opposition in Congress to fight that resolution, as well as voting against this year's Emergency Supplemental Appropriations bill which funded the continuation of the conflicts. I will continue to pressure the Administration to bring an end to our foreign military operations and bring our troops home responsibly. <br /><br />Please continue to contact me about the issues that concern you, as I both need and welcome your thoughts and ideas. Because security measures in the House cause delays in receiving postal mail, I encourage you to contact me by telephone, by fax, or through my website at http://www.house.gov/inslee/contact. For more information on my activities in Congress, and for information on services that my office can provide, please visit my website at http://www.house.gov/inslee/ or stay current with my new blog at http://blog.inslee.house.gov/. If you would like to subscribe to my email updates, please visit http://www.house.gov/inslee/signup.htm. <br /><br />Very truly yours,<br /><br />JAY INSLEE<br />Member of Congress</blockquote> <br /><br /><br />Jay Inslee, not sure what Congress is suppose to do and not very good at doing it.AndrewsDadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060145267580346676noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17068888.post-14083890778473022102010-12-02T17:59:00.000-08:002010-12-02T18:06:35.311-08:00I am currently on a plane flying over Oregon After a stop in Portland. Sitting next to a guy from Oregon but not Portland. I know this even though we have not talked because he has an Oregon hunter magazine. I don't hunt. I don't plan on hunting. I don't get hunting but that does not bother me. What does is I was reading over his shoulder about how some Oregon hunting group is going to lobby to get government funds to compensate Oregon landowners who are severely affected by the excess of geese. Really! Is that the governments fault that there Are too many geese? Seems to me the hunters group needs to spend more time at the range nAndrewsDadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060145267580346676noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17068888.post-34738288513986964102010-11-22T18:09:00.000-08:002010-11-22T18:12:25.241-08:00Sitting in unbelievable traffic due to snow and cold trying to get home. Thinking how pissed off I am that Al Gore finally admitted he has been lying to us for his own gain.AndrewsDadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060145267580346676noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17068888.post-42606501064278094512010-03-30T14:44:00.000-07:002010-03-30T14:50:04.991-07:00<strong>Jay Inslee Is A Liar According To His Shoreline Office</strong><br /><br />About 2 weeks ago I called Rep. Inslee's office and asked about the claim that with healthcare reform, if I liked my doctor, I can keep my doctor and how does that work since for most people, like myself, our employer decides what insurance plan we are on and if our employer changes plans and the doctor we have is not on the new plan, oh well. So how do I keep my doctor if my employer changes plans. I was told I must have misunderstood. Well guess what...<br /><br /><blockquote>Those who currently have insurance they like, for example those receiving coverage through their employer, would be able to keep it.</blockquote><br /><br />Below is the entire email I just received today from Rep. Inslee.<br /><br /><br />Thank you for contacting me to share your concerns with legislation to<br />reform our nation's health care system. I appreciate hearing from you.<br /><br /><br /><br />As you know, beginning in July 2009, both chambers of Congress began<br />considering legislation that would bring important and long-overdue changes<br />to our health care delivery system. The decision to reform health care was<br />not made lightly or for political gain, but rather because the rapidly<br />increasing cost of health care is both financially unsustainable for our<br />country and harmful to the quality of life enjoyed by average American<br />families. Congress undertook this process with clear goals and bipartisan<br />consensus on a few key issues: ensure Americans have the freedom to choose<br />their own health insurance provider (including keeping your own health care<br />plan if you like it), prevent insurance companies from dropping customers<br />because they become ill or have a preexisting condition, and take steps to<br />reduce the cost of medical inflation to save our country's long term<br />economic viability.<br /><br /><br /><br />While I am aware that the reform process has been controversial and partisan<br />at times, I am confident that the bill will have a positive impact on<br />Americans who are struggling to provide health coverage for themselves and<br />their families. I want to share some of the important reforms that will be<br />brought about by passage of this legislation:<br /><br /><br /><br />o Beginning six months after passage, insurance companies will no longer<br />be allowed to drop coverage when an individual becomes sick. Beginning in<br />2014, individuals will no longer be denied care simply because they have a<br />preexisting condition.<br /><br />o Tax credits to small businesses will ease the expense of employer<br />coverage. Beginning immediately, qualifying small businesses will receive<br />up to 35 percent of premiums, and in 2014 the available subsidy will<br />increase to 50 percent.<br /><br />o Cost-control will be addressed by provisions in the bill that allow for<br />states to enter into agreements that allow for the purchasing of insurance<br />across state lines.<br /><br />o Controversial provisions, such as the "cornhusker compromise," were<br />eliminated from the final version of the health reform legislation.<br /><br />o Under the reform package, Members of Congress and their staff will be<br />required to secure health insurance coverage through a plan created by the<br />bill, or offered on an exchange that is established by the bill.<br /><br />o At the request of President Obama, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius is<br />currently directing a pilot program to evaluate the impact of tort reform on<br />the cost of medical care in specific states.<br /><br />The reforms mentioned above are just a few of the highlights of the health<br />reform package. If you would like more information on the legislation,<br />including the full text of the bills, please follow this link:<br /><http://dpc.senate.gov/dpcdoc-sen_health_care_bill.cfm><br />http://dpc.senate.gov/dpcdoc-sen_health_care_bill.cfm<br /><br /><br /><br />In the weeks and months leading up to the passage of health reform<br />legislation, I received calls and letters from constituents who expressed<br />various concerns with different aspects of the legislation, as well as the<br />process by which it was passed. I would like to take a moment to address<br />some of those concerns here, and what follows is a summary of the most<br />common questions associated with the health reform package:<br /><br /><br /><br />1.Will the passage of this legislation deprive me of choice in selecting my<br />health insurance coverage, or force me to change providers?<br /><br />I can confidently answer this question with an emphatic no. The legislation<br />actually expands the choices available to Americans when it comes to<br />purchasing health insurance. Those who currently have insurance they like,<br />for example those receiving coverage through their employer, would be able<br />to keep it. Further, individuals without employer-provided coverage, along<br />with small business owners, will be eligible to purchase coverage through<br />health insurance exchanges, in which competition among insurers will bring<br />down the price of coverage. These exchanges will offer a variety of<br />insurance plans, and the information regarding the specifics of each plan<br />will be readily available for consumers to compare.<br /><br /><br /><br />2.Will the Medicare reforms enacted by this legislation hurt access to care<br />for America's seniors?<br /><br /><br /><br />No, it will not. Inflation in the medical sector is being felt by all<br />Americans, but may be most harmful to our nation's seniors. Currently, the<br />average combined cost of Medicare Part B premiums and the donut hole in Part<br />D drug benefits is estimated to be 12% of the annual Social Security<br />benefit, with that share climbing to 18% by 2018. This legislation will<br />close the donut hole by 2020, with savings felt immediately in the form of a<br />$250 rebate to Part D enrollees who hit the donut hole in 2010. Also,<br />recommended preventive care services will be provided under Medicare at no<br />charge, including a free annual wellness visit. Seniors will still be able<br />to choose their health care provider, and the cost containment provisions of<br />this bill will extend the solvency of the Medicare Trust Fund by a decade.<br /><br /><br /><br />3.Can our country really afford this legislation?<br /><br />There are two important points to be made here. To begin with, when one<br />considers the overall cost of medical care, the annual increase in premium<br />rates, and the overall impact on our economy and the international<br />competitiveness of American companies, one conclusion is inevitable: We<br />can't afford not to act. In the last ten years, our country has increased<br />spending on health care by 90%, with premiums more than doubling for those<br />receiving employer-sponsored insurance. Further estimates predict inflation<br />in the health sector to outpace overall economic growth in the next decade,<br />and by 2018 one out of every five dollars spent in the United States will go<br />towards health care-related expenses.<br /><br /><br /><br />The health reform legislation that was recently passed by Congress will<br />reverse this trend, helping both the families who have witnessed a<br />devastating increase in their premiums, and our nation's overall economic<br />competitiveness. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that, in the<br />next ten years, this legislation will trim $130 billion from our federal<br />deficit, and these savings will increase to $1.3 trillion over the following<br />decade. In addition, by reining in administrative costs and requiring<br />insurance companies to explain severe premium increases, as well as<br />providing affordability credits to those who can't afford coverage, this<br />legislation will reduce the overall cost of care, and make affordable care<br />more accessible to individuals and families who are currently without it.<br /><br /><br /><br />4.Does the federal government have the constitutional authority to require<br />Americans to purchase health insurance?<br /><br />The answer to this question is yes, for two reasons. The constitution<br />provides Congress with the power of taxation, and essentially the individual<br />requirement to purchase insurance under this bill is enforced through the<br />tax code - creating one tax structure for those who purchase insurance and<br />one for those who do not. Additionally, under the constitution, Congress<br />has the power to regulate interstate commerce that has a substantial effect<br />on the overall economy. Health insurance, at almost one-fifth of our<br />country's GDP, clearly falls within that authority.<br /><br /><br /><br />Furthermore, I would like to share with you that the idea of mandated<br />insurance is not a new one. In fact, it isn't an idea unique to the<br />Democratic Party. The idea was promoted by Republicans in the early 1990s,<br />including Senator John McCain, and embraced by George W. Bush's Health and<br />Human Services (HHS) Secretary Tommy Thompson as late as 2008.<br />Additionally, in 2006, Massachusetts' Republican Governor Mitt Romney<br />adopted this approach when he passed comprehensive health care reform in his<br />state. Romney explained his position in a Wall Street Journal opinions<br />piece in April, 2006: "Some of my libertarian friends balk at what looks<br />like an individual mandate. But remember, someone has to pay for health<br />care that must, by law, be provided: Either the individual pays or the<br />taxpayers pay. A free ride on government is not libertarian." As Mr.<br />Romney points out, as long as a federal law exists requiring emergency rooms<br />to administer treatment regardless of a patient's ability to pay, every<br />insured American will pay a hidden tax to help provide these uninsured<br />individuals with health care at an inflated expense. Therefore, the system<br />that new health reform legislation puts in place will save money for<br />individuals who have insurance currently, while expanding the number of<br />Americans who can access affordable coverage<br /><br /><br /><br />5.Was this legislation passed in a fair, bipartisan, and transparent manner?<br /><br />As you may know, the first step in the health reform legislative process,<br />H.R. 3200, was introduced in July, 2009. This bill was marked up in three<br />House Committees, with republican committee members offering amendments and<br />taking full part in debating the bill. The majority of these hearings were<br />broadcast on C-SPAN, and the full text of the original legislation, along<br />with all amendments offered, has been available on the internet since July.<br />In all, the House held 79 bipartisan hearings on health reform legislation,<br />while the Senate Finance Committee held 53 hearings and the Senate Health,<br />Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee held 47. During these<br />hearings, more than 350 amendments were considered in both chambers, offered<br />by both Democrats and Republicans. The Senate bill, which President Obama<br />signed into law on March 23, 2010, includes 147 Republican amendments.<br />Also, to allow for full consideration by members and the public, the bill<br />was posted online for three months before becoming law.<br /><br /><br /><br />As your representative in Congress, I am staunchly committed to the<br />democratic ideals that I have sworn to uphold. H.R. 3962, America's<br />Affordable Health Choices Act, passed with a majority in the House of<br />Representatives, by a vote of 220-215. The Patient Protection and<br />Affordable Care Act, the Senate's version of health reform, was passed by<br />that chamber with a supermajority, by a vote of 60-39. Following passage by<br />the Senate, this bill was then passed in the House of Representatives by a<br />vote of 219-212, with a package of budgetary adjustments then passed by the<br />House and awaiting approval by the Senate in a process known as<br />reconciliation. This is a completely transparent process, and the votes cast<br />on both the Senate bill and the package of adjustments are a matter of<br />public record. Also, you may be glad to know that the "deem and pass"<br />procedural tactic, known informally as the "Slaughter rule" was not used to<br />pass the Senate health reform legislation through the House.<br /><br /><br /><br />As I said, the questions listed above represent some of the most common<br />concerns expressed to me by constituents over the course of the health<br />reform debate. I am confident that, despite the controversial atmosphere in<br />which this legislation was debated and passed, the reforms enacted by it<br />will preserve American's right to choose their health provider, maintain<br />access to care for our nation's seniors, and expand access to health<br />coverage for those American's currently without it. Please rest assured, I<br />will keep your thoughts on this important issue in mind as the process of<br />implementing these reforms goes forward.<br /><br /><br /><br />Please continue to contact me about the issues that concern you, as I both<br />need and welcome your thoughts and ideas. Because security measures in the<br />House cause delays in receiving postal mail, I encourage you to contact me<br />by telephone, by fax, or through my website at<br /><http://www.house.gov/inslee/contact> http://www.house.gov/inslee/contact.<br />For more information on my activities in Congress, and for information on<br />services that my office can provide, please visit my website at<br /><http://www.house.gov/inslee/> http://www.house.gov/inslee/. If you would<br />like to subscribe to my email updates, please visit<br /><http://www.house.gov/inslee/signup.htm><br />http://www.house.gov/inslee/signup.htm.<br /><br /><br /><br />Very truly yours,<br /><br /><br />JAY INSLEE<br /><br />Member of CongressAndrewsDadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060145267580346676noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17068888.post-27143017287852889162010-03-10T19:01:00.000-08:002010-03-10T19:15:06.548-08:00<strong>Bryan Suits Interviews Shirley Phelps</strong><br /><br />Or as Bryan refers to her, a lying whore from Babylon.<br /><br />Not sure what I found more entertaining, the actual interview...<br /><br /><p><iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.blogger.com/video.g?token=AD6v5dybky42oS1v3VNMbhtJS4AkVtBziM8VYDoTIigjdI78HrbMgJps9sVDLkrP21XsIoRJ_XjqLkcGkfU' class='b-hbp-video b-uploaded' frameborder='0'></iframe></p><p></p><p></p><br /><br />or the fact the intro music was The Cult - Love Removal Machine<br /><br /><object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/vneFS48Z4Ws&hl=en_US&fs=1&"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/vneFS48Z4Ws&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object><br /><br />How perfect.AndrewsDadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060145267580346676noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17068888.post-51968890733394455262009-10-08T18:11:00.000-07:002009-10-08T18:13:19.919-07:00<strong>Nancy "What Is In It For Us" Pelosi Wants Higher Taxes</strong><br /><br /><a href="http://hotair.com/archives/2009/10/08/pelosi-wants-windfall-profits-tax-on-insurance-companies/">And by "us" you mean???</a><blockquote>House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) called the windfall profits tax idea “very preliminary,” saying she’s asked House Ways and Means Chairman Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) to look at how much the tax could raise.<br /><br />“I have asked Chairman Rangel to see <strong>what is in it for us</strong>,” Pelosi said. “There’s more that the insurance companies could contribute to this health care reform. They’re going to get 50 million new consumers, <strong>many of them subsidized by the taxpayer</strong>. They can put more on the table.”</blockquote>AndrewsDadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060145267580346676noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17068888.post-63197484710483221432009-10-03T18:40:00.000-07:002009-10-03T18:47:51.638-07:00<strong>The Copenhagen Climate Change Treaty, <a href="http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/10/03/the-copenhagen-treaty-draft-wealth-transfer-defined-now-with-dignity-penalty/">Now Paying For Loss of Dignity</a></strong><br /><br />How very scientific<blockquote><br />17. [[Developed [and developing] countries] [Developed and developing country Parties] [All Parties] [shall] [should]:]<br />(a) Compensate for damage to the LDCs’ economy and also compensate for lost opportunities, resources, lives, land and <strong>dignity</strong>, as many will become environmental refugees;<br />(b) Africa, in the context of environmental justice, should be equitably compensated for environmental, social and economic losses arising from the implementation of response measures.</blockquote>AndrewsDadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060145267580346676noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17068888.post-84667384534303327022009-09-29T18:39:00.000-07:002009-09-29T18:45:27.724-07:00<strong>Lake Forest Park Peace, Social Justice and Hypocrisy</strong><br /><br /><a href="http://www.lfpfp.org/11.html">From the web page</a><br /><blockquote>Nonviolence is not passive, but requires courage. Nonviolence seeks reconciliation, <strong>not defeat of an adversary</strong>. Nonviolent action is directed at eliminating evil, <strong>not destroying an evil-doer</strong>. Nonviolence requires a willingness to accept suffering for the cause if necessary, but <strong>not to inflict it </strong>- <strong>a rejection of hatred</strong>, <strong>animosity or violence of the spirit</strong>, ans well as a refusal to commit physical violence - faith that justice will prevail.</blockquote><br /><br />From the captions on the Right Follies page:<br /><blockquote>My Name Is Always M. Wright and I made an ass of myself.<br /><br />Last observed at Lake Forest Park frothing at the mouth while 'splaining why he was right and everyone else was wrong. A personal observation; before Mr. Wright gets in front of a camera to make an ass of himself, he should check that his shirt doesn't end before his belly begins.<br /><br />The very unattractive Mr Always M. Wright spurns the truth again and again. <br /><br />BUT WAIT... It Gets Better<br /><br />We were blessed with a visit from yet another right winger last week. Notice the finger in the air. As usual they like to point things out with one digit, never two. Wouldn't want to confuse an IQ number with the peace sign.<br /><br />Now this lady looks harmless but let me tell you, she'll chew you up and spit you out. She thinks the current health care system is just fine. Got medical bills & can't afford insurance? Tough, get a job. Lost your job? Tough, your a loser. Can't afford to see a doctor? Tough, heal yourself. Lost your home due to catastrophic illness and medical bills? Tough. Tough. Tough. Given a chance this kindly looking grandma will beat you to death with her cane. She must get her nastiness from her hero, George (the shoe) Bush.</blockquote>AndrewsDadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060145267580346676noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17068888.post-27516349360066553632009-09-28T09:05:00.001-07:002009-09-28T09:10:18.827-07:00<strong>Global Warming's Exhibit #1, The Hockey Stick Is Shown To Be A Fraud*</strong><br /><br />Here is the not as technical explanation of the whole story from <a href="http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/09/27/quote-of-the-week-20-ding-dong-the-stick-is-dead/">Watts Up With That</a>.<br /><br /><blockquote>1- In 1998 a paper is published by Dr. Michael Mann. Then at the University of Virginia, now a Penn State climatologist, and co-authors Bradley and Hughes. The paper is named: Northern Hemisphere Temperatures During the Past Millennium: Inferences, Uncertainties, and Limitations. The paper becomes known as MBH98.<br /><br />The conclusion of tree ring reconstruction of climate for the past 1000 years is that we are now in the hottest period in modern history, ever. <br /><br />See the graph http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/image/mann/manna_99.gif<br /><br />Steve McIntyre, a Canadian mathematician in Toronto, suspects tree rings aren’t telling a valid story with that giant uptick at the right side of the graph, implicating the 20th century as the “hottest period in 1000 years”, which alarmists latch onto as proof of AGW. The graph is dubbed as the “Hockey Stick” and becomes famous worldwide. Al Gore uses it in his movie An Inconvenient Truth in the famous “elevator scene”.<br /><br />2- Steve attempts to replicate Michael Mann’s tree ring work in the paper MBH98, but is stymied by lack of data archiving. He sends dozens of letters over the years trying to get access to data but access is denied. McIntyre and Ross McKitrick, of the University of Guelph publish a paper in 2004 criticizing the work. A new website is formed in 2004 called Real Climate, by the people who put together the tree ring data and they denounce the scientific criticism:<br /><br />http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/false-claims-by-mcintyre-and-mckitrick-regarding-the-mann-et-al-1998reconstruction/<br /><br />3- Years go by. McIntyre is still stymied trying to get access to the original source data so that he can replicate the Mann 1998 conclusion. In 2008 Mann publishes another paper in bolstering his tree ring claim due to all of the controversy surrounding it. A Mann co-author and source of tree ring data (Professor Keith Briffa of the Hadley UK Climate Research Unit) used one of the tree ring data series (Yamal in Russia) in a paper published in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society in 2008, which has a strict data archiving policy. Thanks to that policy, Steve McIntyre fought and won access to that data just last week.<br /><br />4- Having the Yamal data in complete form, McIntyre replicates it, and discovers that one of Mann’s co-authors, Briffa, had cherry picked 10 trees data sets out of a much larger set of trees sampled in Yamal.<br /><br />5- When all of the tree ring data from Yamal is plotted, the famous hockey stick disappears. Not only does it disappear, but goes negative. The conclusion is inescapable. The tree ring data was hand picked to get the desired result.<br /><br />These are the relevant graphs from McIntyre showing what the newly available data demonstrates.<br /><br />http://www.climateaudit.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/rcs_chronologies1.gif<br /><br />http://www.climateaudit.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/rcs_merged.gif</blockquote><br /><br />And by "fraud" I mean the "scientists" were purposely being deceitful.AndrewsDadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060145267580346676noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17068888.post-48645756105974444252009-09-25T23:36:00.001-07:002009-09-26T00:02:28.751-07:00<strong>A Health Care Solution</strong><br /><br />Listening to Congressman Jay Inslee at the August townhall forum in Edmunds, he claimed the following:<br /><br />A government run public option will cover pre existing conditions.<br />A government run public option will not have a limit on coverage.<br />A government run public option will cost less than existing health care insurance.<br />A government run public option will self finance through premiums and will not be subsidized by the tax payers.<br /><br />So in a nut shell, it sounds like better coverage for less money.<br /><br />Also observed at the townhall forum was a strong pro public option presence by unions.<br /><br /><br />So here is my idea, why not put all of the union represented government employees on a public option health insurance plan. The unions get what they want, a public option health insurance plan. Those on the right get lower cost government.<br /><br />Everyone is happy... as long as Congressman Inslee is being truthful.AndrewsDadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03060145267580346676noreply@blogger.com1