(Reprinted from Reason.com 4/28/11 by John Stossel)
The U.S. government has "helped" no group more than it has "helped" the American Indians. It stuns me when President Obama appears before Indian groups and says things like, "Few have been ignored by Washington for as long as Native Americans."
Ignored? Are you kidding me? They should be so lucky. The government has made most Indian tribes wards of the state. Government manages their land, provides their health care, and pays for housing and child care. Twenty different departments and agencies have special "native American" programs. The result? Indians have the highest poverty rate, nearly 25 percent, and the lowest life expectancy of any group in America. Sixty-six percent are born to single mothers.
Nevertheless, Indian activists want more government "help."
It is intuitive to assume that, when people struggle, government "help" is the answer-- the opposite is true. American groups who are helped the most, do the worst.
Consider the Lumbees of Robeson County, N.C.—a tribe not recognized as sovereign by the government and therefore ineligible for most of the "help" given other tribes. The Lumbees do much better than those recognized tribes.
Lumbees own their homes and succeed in business. They include real estate developer Jim Thomas, who used to own the Sacramento Kings, and Jack Lowery, who helped start the Cracker Barrel Restaurants. Lumbees started the first Indian-owned bank, which now has 12 branches.
The Lumbees' wealth is not from casino money. "We don't have any casinos. We have 12 banks," says Ben Chavis, another successful Lumbee businessman. He also points out that Robeson County looks different from most Indian reservations. "There's mansions. They look like English manors. I can take you to one neighborhood where my people are from and show you nicer homes than the whole Sioux reservation."
Despite this success, professional "victims" activists want Congress to make the Lumbees dependent—like other tribes. U.S. Rep. Mike McIntyre (D-N.C.), has introduced the Lumbee Recognition Act, which would give the Lumbees the same "help" other tribes get—about $80 million a year. Some members of the tribe support the bill. Of course they do. People like to freeload.
Lawyer Elizabeth Homer, who used to be the U.S. Interior Department's director of Indian land trusts, say the Lumbees ought to get federal recognition. "The Lumbees have been neglected and left out of the system, and have been petitioning for 100 years. ... They're entitled, by the way."
People like Homer will never get it. Lumbees do well because they've divorced themselves from government handouts. Washington's neglect was a godsend.
Some Lumbees don’t want the handout.
Friday, April 29, 2011
Monday, April 25, 2011
The Mexican Immigrant: The Stress Recipient
Nancy and I work with Mexican and Central American immigrants every Tuesday and Thursday mornings at Crossroads of the Rockies, a food and clothing bank. Most of these people are illegal immigrants.
We receive various reactions from friends and associates about that work. The reactions vary. “You should never do that—you are only encouraging illegal immigration.” Some say, “We think what you are doing is commendable.” Well…both reactions are wrong.
The first comment is wrong because the Bible clearly instructs us to care for and help the immigrant living in our midst. We are not instructed to first consider the immigration laws of our federal legislature to see if we are acting correctly. We are to show mercy first and foremost.
The second response is also incorrect, because the work we do is to be done as to the Lord; and commendation is not the goal.
We, American Christians, should consider who it is who comes through the doors of Crossroads and other compassionate ministries in our country. The Mexicans/Central Americans in these ministries are suffering from lack of money, few jobs, poor education, and systematic discrimination from society in general and the government in particular. In addition to all the above, these poor people live in a drug, alcohol, and violence/crime-soaked society. Their children go to schools where many bad forces influence them. TV and movies encourage them to participate in immoral activities. Their families are riven with spousal abuse and desertion. In addition to all this, they do not have the Spirit of Christ to guide them through the difficulties in life.
We, Christians, need to help these people as long as they are on our doorsteps. However, I must say, that constructive government policies and enforcement of good laws would help this immigration situation immeasurably. Unfortunately, we have neither. Correct government policy could stop a lot of the pain, which these very poor people suffer.
Blanket amnesty for these people would not help them much. They need to be selectively admitted to U.S. citizenship and to a reasonable guest worker program.
We receive various reactions from friends and associates about that work. The reactions vary. “You should never do that—you are only encouraging illegal immigration.” Some say, “We think what you are doing is commendable.” Well…both reactions are wrong.
The first comment is wrong because the Bible clearly instructs us to care for and help the immigrant living in our midst. We are not instructed to first consider the immigration laws of our federal legislature to see if we are acting correctly. We are to show mercy first and foremost.
The second response is also incorrect, because the work we do is to be done as to the Lord; and commendation is not the goal.
We, American Christians, should consider who it is who comes through the doors of Crossroads and other compassionate ministries in our country. The Mexicans/Central Americans in these ministries are suffering from lack of money, few jobs, poor education, and systematic discrimination from society in general and the government in particular. In addition to all the above, these poor people live in a drug, alcohol, and violence/crime-soaked society. Their children go to schools where many bad forces influence them. TV and movies encourage them to participate in immoral activities. Their families are riven with spousal abuse and desertion. In addition to all this, they do not have the Spirit of Christ to guide them through the difficulties in life.
We, Christians, need to help these people as long as they are on our doorsteps. However, I must say, that constructive government policies and enforcement of good laws would help this immigration situation immeasurably. Unfortunately, we have neither. Correct government policy could stop a lot of the pain, which these very poor people suffer.
Blanket amnesty for these people would not help them much. They need to be selectively admitted to U.S. citizenship and to a reasonable guest worker program.
Friday, April 22, 2011
It Costs Too Much To File Taxes
On 18 April 2011, the Wall Street Journal published an editorial called “The 30¢ Tax Premium,” indicating that for the average taxpayer, it costs him $1.30 to send the government $1.00 of tax revenue. This added cost comes from the need to pay the government $1.00 of tax plus the cost of his own time spent filing and complying with the tax code plus the tax collection costs of the IRS plus the tax compliance outlays that individuals and businesses pay to help them file their taxes.
I can identify with these facts, because in our personal 2010 tax returns to the Feds and to the State of Colorado, Nancy and I paid $6,313 while paying $261.75 to H & R Block for our filing costs. That amounts to paying 4% of our money trying to comply with the tax codes. Four percent does not seem like a lot of money; but, for us, $261 is a big bite. We would like to avoid that outlay of money if possible.
Some might say that we should have filed our tax returns by ourselves and not used H & R Block. Although our tax return was relatively simple, one of our 1099’s from an income source did not arrive in our mailbox until 15 April. This caused a last minute need to file an amended tax form, a much more complicated procedure than we are capable of performing. We are glad we used H & R Block, but it costs us too much to file our income tax reports.
What is the solution to this problem? A tax reform to a simple flat-rate tax with no deductions would significantly reduce the current complexity inherent in our progressive tax system, which is full of loopholes, exemptions and special interest carve-outs.
I can identify with these facts, because in our personal 2010 tax returns to the Feds and to the State of Colorado, Nancy and I paid $6,313 while paying $261.75 to H & R Block for our filing costs. That amounts to paying 4% of our money trying to comply with the tax codes. Four percent does not seem like a lot of money; but, for us, $261 is a big bite. We would like to avoid that outlay of money if possible.
Some might say that we should have filed our tax returns by ourselves and not used H & R Block. Although our tax return was relatively simple, one of our 1099’s from an income source did not arrive in our mailbox until 15 April. This caused a last minute need to file an amended tax form, a much more complicated procedure than we are capable of performing. We are glad we used H & R Block, but it costs us too much to file our income tax reports.
What is the solution to this problem? A tax reform to a simple flat-rate tax with no deductions would significantly reduce the current complexity inherent in our progressive tax system, which is full of loopholes, exemptions and special interest carve-outs.
Sunday, April 17, 2011
Parental Effects On Their Children
In 2003, I did a study on the sex habits of young adults in Nigeria. An interesting and useful fact came out of that study that is worth revisiting.
One question was asked on my research questionnaire was, “Have you ever heard your pastor tell you to avoid sexual intercourse outside of marriage?” A “yes” answer on that question had absolutely no correlation with the avoidance of illicit sex.
Another question was asked of my respondents: “Have your parents ever told you to avoid sex outside of marriage?” A “yes” answer to that question had a positive correlation with abstinence of sex outside of marriage.
The point is that parents have a decided and important role to play in guiding their children away from sex outside of marriage. Teenagers may not appear to be listening to their parents, but often they are. Pastors have relatively little influence on sex habits; but parents should certainly exert all the influence they can muster to help their children reach the wedding day with integrity and without a load of guilt on their consciences about their past behavior.
One question was asked on my research questionnaire was, “Have you ever heard your pastor tell you to avoid sexual intercourse outside of marriage?” A “yes” answer on that question had absolutely no correlation with the avoidance of illicit sex.
Another question was asked of my respondents: “Have your parents ever told you to avoid sex outside of marriage?” A “yes” answer to that question had a positive correlation with abstinence of sex outside of marriage.
The point is that parents have a decided and important role to play in guiding their children away from sex outside of marriage. Teenagers may not appear to be listening to their parents, but often they are. Pastors have relatively little influence on sex habits; but parents should certainly exert all the influence they can muster to help their children reach the wedding day with integrity and without a load of guilt on their consciences about their past behavior.
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
The Best Pro-Life Experience Ever!
Yesterday, Nancy and I spent most of the day at an event on the Auraria College Campus in downtown Denver. The event was the showing of huge Pro-Life signs and posters by the college organization, Justice For All. The pictures revealed very graphic portrayals of actual abortion results and asked pointed questions of the observers about their attitudes toward abortion.
Nancy and I and about 30 volunteers circulated through the crowd asking the people what they thought about the demonstration and dialoguing with them about their attitudes toward abortion. Of course, we found that the majority of the students there were “Pro-Choice,” but their Pro-Choice position was only relative in many cases, i.e., a lot of them were opposed to late term abortions but in favor of early abortions.
The striking thing about those “interviews” on the street was that many of the people we talked to had not adequately thought out their position. One young man told me that he had no objection to the killing of unborn babies. Nor did he object to the idea of killing babies who were already born, nor anyone else, for that matter. He even told me that he would not even object if someone were to kill him! (Now, THAT, is dedication to a belief, if you ask me!!)
Of course, some in the crowd had actually done some deep thinking about the issue, and they sometimes concluded that abortion is an acceptable procedure. Nancy and I and the other counselors would reason with them, trying to show them that it is really important to defend unborn human life; but their beliefs were almost always deeply ingrained in their minds. We concluded by asking them to look closely at the pictures and ask themselves the question: “Do you think that, looking at those pictures, abortion can be a right decision?”
The day was exhilarating to both Nancy and me. The opportunity to speak the words of Christ and His truth into a harsh culture and to practice reasoning with hard hearts was an inspiration to us.
We were very impressed with the organization, Justice For All. If any of my readers would like to get more information about this organization, I would invite them to look at the organization’s web site. www.JFAweb.org.
Nancy and I and about 30 volunteers circulated through the crowd asking the people what they thought about the demonstration and dialoguing with them about their attitudes toward abortion. Of course, we found that the majority of the students there were “Pro-Choice,” but their Pro-Choice position was only relative in many cases, i.e., a lot of them were opposed to late term abortions but in favor of early abortions.
The striking thing about those “interviews” on the street was that many of the people we talked to had not adequately thought out their position. One young man told me that he had no objection to the killing of unborn babies. Nor did he object to the idea of killing babies who were already born, nor anyone else, for that matter. He even told me that he would not even object if someone were to kill him! (Now, THAT, is dedication to a belief, if you ask me!!)
Of course, some in the crowd had actually done some deep thinking about the issue, and they sometimes concluded that abortion is an acceptable procedure. Nancy and I and the other counselors would reason with them, trying to show them that it is really important to defend unborn human life; but their beliefs were almost always deeply ingrained in their minds. We concluded by asking them to look closely at the pictures and ask themselves the question: “Do you think that, looking at those pictures, abortion can be a right decision?”
The day was exhilarating to both Nancy and me. The opportunity to speak the words of Christ and His truth into a harsh culture and to practice reasoning with hard hearts was an inspiration to us.
We were very impressed with the organization, Justice For All. If any of my readers would like to get more information about this organization, I would invite them to look at the organization’s web site. www.JFAweb.org.
Thursday, April 7, 2011
How to Influence the Government via E-mail
We, Americans have the privilege of freedom of speech. We are entitled to express our opinions to our government representatives. They have the right to pay attention to what we say or to ignore our opinions. Sometimes, they actually listen to what we are saying. Especially, they will listen when large numbers of constituents write to them on the same subject. Following are some directions on how to contact our government and our representatives:
Go to USA.gov. You will see a list of contacts you might like to make on the left side of the page starting with the President and Vice President of the United States. Below, you will see listed U.S. Senators, U.S. Representatives, State Governors, State Representatives, and then agencies you might like to contact. Follow the links, and you will be able to contact the person to whom you might want to speak.Here are a few tips on what to say:
1) Write each e-mail concerning only one issue.
2) Put the main point in the subject line. Very likely that is all that your addressee will read. For instance, your subject line should read something like this—Vote Yes on S. 528, the STAND UP Act.
3) Whenever you can, always refer to legislative bills by number as well as name.
4) Familiarize yourself with Thomas.loc.gov, the web page for the U.S. Congress and Senate, you should read at least the summary of a bill you are petitioning about. Often, advocates for a bill may unfairly represent that bill on the web or in an e-mail. Always try to look at the bill, yourself—it only takes a minute to do that.
5) In examining state legislation, go to USA.gov and choose State Legislators; choose the state; then, choose bills. I have found that in most states, when looking for a concise and accurate summary of a bill, it is best to look at “fiscal impact” in the bill menu.
6) Limit your message to one or two short paragraphs. The longer your message, the less likely it will be read.
7) Be sure to mention how this issue will affect you.
8) Write to legislators whom you know disagree with your point of view—they need to hear from you, too; and they are the ones you really want to influence, anyway.
9) Be sure to include the President or the Governor in your addressee list. Do not write only to Senators or Representatives.
10) Write to the same representatives repeatedly on the same issue. This is especially important when writing to United States legislators or the President. Those representatives will seldom read your e-mail; but they have aides who read and tabulate issues for their bosses. The legislator will only see the tabulation of the issues.
11) Be courteous always.
Go to USA.gov. You will see a list of contacts you might like to make on the left side of the page starting with the President and Vice President of the United States. Below, you will see listed U.S. Senators, U.S. Representatives, State Governors, State Representatives, and then agencies you might like to contact. Follow the links, and you will be able to contact the person to whom you might want to speak.Here are a few tips on what to say:
1) Write each e-mail concerning only one issue.
2) Put the main point in the subject line. Very likely that is all that your addressee will read. For instance, your subject line should read something like this—Vote Yes on S. 528, the STAND UP Act.
3) Whenever you can, always refer to legislative bills by number as well as name.
4) Familiarize yourself with Thomas.loc.gov, the web page for the U.S. Congress and Senate, you should read at least the summary of a bill you are petitioning about. Often, advocates for a bill may unfairly represent that bill on the web or in an e-mail. Always try to look at the bill, yourself—it only takes a minute to do that.
5) In examining state legislation, go to USA.gov and choose State Legislators; choose the state; then, choose bills. I have found that in most states, when looking for a concise and accurate summary of a bill, it is best to look at “fiscal impact” in the bill menu.
6) Limit your message to one or two short paragraphs. The longer your message, the less likely it will be read.
7) Be sure to mention how this issue will affect you.
8) Write to legislators whom you know disagree with your point of view—they need to hear from you, too; and they are the ones you really want to influence, anyway.
9) Be sure to include the President or the Governor in your addressee list. Do not write only to Senators or Representatives.
10) Write to the same representatives repeatedly on the same issue. This is especially important when writing to United States legislators or the President. Those representatives will seldom read your e-mail; but they have aides who read and tabulate issues for their bosses. The legislator will only see the tabulation of the issues.
11) Be courteous always.
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Is Common Sense Returning to Government?
Well, well, it seems that the longer the Obama Administration remains in power, the more it returns to the policies of George W. Bush. How strange!
Ever since President Obama took office, our problems with the economy have gotten worse. Major spending increases have failed to deliver promised jobs. The safety net for the poor is coming apart at the seams. Government health and retirement programs are growing at unsustainable rates. The new health-care law is a fiscal train wreck. And a complex, inefficient tax code is holding back American families and businesses. (However, that last problem can hardly be laid at the foot of President Obama, alone.)
The president’s recent budget proposal would accelerate America’s descent into a debt crisis. It doubles debt held by the public by the end of his first term and triples it by 2021. It imposes a $1.5 trillion in new taxes, with spending that never falls below 23% of the economy. His budget permanently enlarges the size of government. It offers no reforms to save government health and retirement programs.
Now, we are seeing more and more of President Bush’s policies being resurrected to remedy the problems we have at this time. Even the closing of Guantanamo seems to have been cancelled.
In my opinion, the most problematic part of the current governmental formula is its discouragement of private business. As I noted in my last blog post, Blacks in America are recognizing these problems with the welfare state; and they are migrating to parts of the United States where business and employment possibilities are better.
I think the new GOP Path to Prosperity being proposed by the House Budget Committee is very probably the best policy for our country at this time. I think we should try it. The current policy is just not working.
This blog post was partly inspired by articles in the Wall Street Journal of 5 April 2011, pages A15 and A13.
Ever since President Obama took office, our problems with the economy have gotten worse. Major spending increases have failed to deliver promised jobs. The safety net for the poor is coming apart at the seams. Government health and retirement programs are growing at unsustainable rates. The new health-care law is a fiscal train wreck. And a complex, inefficient tax code is holding back American families and businesses. (However, that last problem can hardly be laid at the foot of President Obama, alone.)
The president’s recent budget proposal would accelerate America’s descent into a debt crisis. It doubles debt held by the public by the end of his first term and triples it by 2021. It imposes a $1.5 trillion in new taxes, with spending that never falls below 23% of the economy. His budget permanently enlarges the size of government. It offers no reforms to save government health and retirement programs.
Now, we are seeing more and more of President Bush’s policies being resurrected to remedy the problems we have at this time. Even the closing of Guantanamo seems to have been cancelled.
In my opinion, the most problematic part of the current governmental formula is its discouragement of private business. As I noted in my last blog post, Blacks in America are recognizing these problems with the welfare state; and they are migrating to parts of the United States where business and employment possibilities are better.
I think the new GOP Path to Prosperity being proposed by the House Budget Committee is very probably the best policy for our country at this time. I think we should try it. The current policy is just not working.
This blog post was partly inspired by articles in the Wall Street Journal of 5 April 2011, pages A15 and A13.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
