Once again I am writing to you about Mike Rogers...
This time he has taken up the Health Care Reform mantra and he has some good points.
The bill as approved Friday night by the Energy and Commerce Committee will almost surely eliminate our private health care system as we know it. We will be forced to accept government run health care and any benefits from our HSA (Health care Savings Account) will be thrown out the window. In other words if you have been RESPONSIBLE with your health care programs. Paid all your bills and worked hard to put your families well being first, the YOU are screwed. Now if you have not gone out and supported your family by working hard then hey, this program is for you. Of course all the hype is that "Oh My... There are people without INSURANCE !!!"... I say "SO WHAT" I have been in jobs with no health care but I was 18 and in college. That is part of growing up. Since I have gotten out of college I have worked hard and have either had a job with insurance provided or I found a way to get it. Funny how the State mandates that you "have auto insurance or you don't drive", why don't they just say you must have health insurance too and be done with it. Then people could pick and choose the right programs for themselves (Geico, Progressive, State Farm...) AND save money. Instead the Government screwed it all up by making it only tax deductible if you get it through your employer. Hey, If I am self employed or a student or working at a low end job I do not have that luxury. If the government wanted to do it right they would give tax breaks on ALL health care related expenses and drop the whole employer provided model that exists. For that matter, open up the whole 401K program too and drop Social Security !!!! If I had the 14% the Government is taking out of my pay (7% out of me and 7% from the employer which is basically out of my paycheck) I could have a whole lot more in my mutual funds then they are gonna pay me when I retire!!!
The whole thing is about RESPONSIBILITY!! The government (Democrats/Liberals) feels that you the people should not have to worry about responsibility and they will gladly do everything for you. They know that if they do, then they can control you and they have the power. If this bill passes you will now be going to work and laboring for less then half of your paycheck.
You went to school (government run) and to college (government funded), and worked hard for your grades. You went out and got a low end job and worked hard to work your way up and along the way you started a family. Now all that work, studying, labor and stress is going to pay the government to tell you what you can do with your money. After all you are NOT taking it home, you are giving over half of it (or will soon) to other people who did not go to school, did not work hard, and did not show responsibility to their nation or family. Oh BTW,,, some of those that DID go to school did not pay much for their education (I bet you did) as the money came from the government. They are also the ones who got the job you really wanted because the employer needed to be "diverse" so they could get the government off their backs. Of course you worked hard to pay for your education and you worked hard to get good grades and learn something... Too bad you did not get the job.
NOW comes the time to make yourself heard. NOW is the time to stand up and say, my money is my money, quit giving it to other people. Government is for the people by the people. "The people" is YOU, why are you getting screwed by the government.
Governments role is to protect me and my stuff, not to take my money and give it to other people. Education is nice, but I want to pay for my education, not someone else's. Health care is nice, but I want to be rewarded for keeping myself healthy not penalized by paying for some slob who has to be rescued by Jerry Springer by knocking a hole in his house to get him out. Car insurance is nice, I want to pay for MY insurance and not for someone who is driving illegally without insurance (Michigan charges 100 bucks of a $200 policy for uninsured motorists that motorcycles can not apply for...).
I was once thanked by a business for "complaining" about the service at a store/restaurant because if I had not, they would not know there is a problem. Let your reps know there is a problem, a very big problem, called government spending. Tell them to "Get out of my wallet", and start cutting into the budget. In a recession, cutting spending is the only way to go. Makes sense doesn't it??? If the country does not have money, don't spend more....
Tuesday, August 04, 2009
Monday, June 29, 2009
Cash for Clunkers - My note to cashforclunkersfacts.com
I have been reading the comments left on here regarding the Clunker Bill... Why did the complainers NOT contact their representatives BEFORE this got passed? I know I did! There are a couple of inconsistencies in the complaints.
One is people complaining about sub 18 mpg in cars that classically have done better then 27 mpg. Quit complaining and get your foot off the gas. Even the best cars get bad mileage at 80 mph.
Two is, what happened to Toyota being so great on fuel mileage and quality? I have never seen so many people whine about poor economy on Toyota cars. Check out any number of mid 90's Gm cars and find 27+ mpg even on big daddy's like Old Delta 88 and Pontiac Bonneville (30+ if driven below 70 not 80+mph)with the 3800 V6. Even the Dustbuster (Pontiac Transport) gets 24 mpg (mine has 250,000 miles and gets 24 mpg) which is great for a van. Stick to US built/ US owned companies to support the US economy.
In closing, from what I am reading on these postings is that America does not need government to buy them cars, America needs the government to teach them how to drive. Accelerate slowly, drive at a reasonable speed (sub 70), and take your foot off the gas wayyy before the stop signs and lights. Any time you use the brake you are wasting fuel.
p.s. I don't think the Gov should be buying anybody anything with my money. Make your voice heard before the votes to stop goof ball bills like this from occurring.
One is people complaining about sub 18 mpg in cars that classically have done better then 27 mpg. Quit complaining and get your foot off the gas. Even the best cars get bad mileage at 80 mph.
Two is, what happened to Toyota being so great on fuel mileage and quality? I have never seen so many people whine about poor economy on Toyota cars. Check out any number of mid 90's Gm cars and find 27+ mpg even on big daddy's like Old Delta 88 and Pontiac Bonneville (30+ if driven below 70 not 80+mph)with the 3800 V6. Even the Dustbuster (Pontiac Transport) gets 24 mpg (mine has 250,000 miles and gets 24 mpg) which is great for a van. Stick to US built/ US owned companies to support the US economy.
In closing, from what I am reading on these postings is that America does not need government to buy them cars, America needs the government to teach them how to drive. Accelerate slowly, drive at a reasonable speed (sub 70), and take your foot off the gas wayyy before the stop signs and lights. Any time you use the brake you are wasting fuel.
p.s. I don't think the Gov should be buying anybody anything with my money. Make your voice heard before the votes to stop goof ball bills like this from occurring.
Friday, June 26, 2009
Plan for Health Care Reform - My Letter to the Honorable Mike Rodgers
Dear Congressman Rogers
I have read your recent e-mailing regarding health care reform and while I agree there needs to be a change in the Health care system I know that Government intervention/funding needs to be reduced not increased. Government caps on profits, and fees lead to less available product from the manufacturers. This is one problem other countries have run into with Government capped pricing. They are now buying US made drugs instead of producing product in their own country. If the manufacturers cannot make a profit, then they no longer want to produce the drugs. Hillary found this out when she capped the Flu Vaccine price. The next year we ran out of vaccine since no one was making it because there was no profit. Now YOU want to do this on a grander scale? Sorry, history shows it does not work. Forget caps, and help eliminate wasteful legislation and allow US businesses to do what they do best, manufacture goods (drugs) people want.
The main problem I see with our health care program is that people (insurance customers) have no reason to watch their choices, no reason to negotiate with doctors on price, and no reason to choose cheaper medications that are available. IF the US had a reason to watch their spending you would DEFINITELY see a reduction in Health Care Spending, a reduction in Health Care Pricing, and a happier more informed populace.
HSA is a very good program (Health Care Spending Account) that allows reduced monthly fees, savings account for copay and deductible that rolls over and collects interest, and a sense of investment that encourages thrifty use of health care dollars. Existing Health Care system encourages "get the most I can for my dollars" and increases spending and decreases Insurance company profits (thus higher prices to end customer).
HSA should be expanded to include the current Flexible Spending Account system that encourages users to blow their money in a "use it or lose it" system that benefits no one.
Government needs to get out of the way and make people responsible for their Health Care spending and allow the insurance companies to offer more savings incentive programs and drug companies to develop new drugs while making the older ones cheaper.
Bottom line... The insurance industry and drug companies were developed BY INDIVIDUALS. NOT the government. So why should it be controlled BY the government. It would not exist without Profit, Incentive, and a Need.
I have read your recent e-mailing regarding health care reform and while I agree there needs to be a change in the Health care system I know that Government intervention/funding needs to be reduced not increased. Government caps on profits, and fees lead to less available product from the manufacturers. This is one problem other countries have run into with Government capped pricing. They are now buying US made drugs instead of producing product in their own country. If the manufacturers cannot make a profit, then they no longer want to produce the drugs. Hillary found this out when she capped the Flu Vaccine price. The next year we ran out of vaccine since no one was making it because there was no profit. Now YOU want to do this on a grander scale? Sorry, history shows it does not work. Forget caps, and help eliminate wasteful legislation and allow US businesses to do what they do best, manufacture goods (drugs) people want.
The main problem I see with our health care program is that people (insurance customers) have no reason to watch their choices, no reason to negotiate with doctors on price, and no reason to choose cheaper medications that are available. IF the US had a reason to watch their spending you would DEFINITELY see a reduction in Health Care Spending, a reduction in Health Care Pricing, and a happier more informed populace.
HSA is a very good program (Health Care Spending Account) that allows reduced monthly fees, savings account for copay and deductible that rolls over and collects interest, and a sense of investment that encourages thrifty use of health care dollars. Existing Health Care system encourages "get the most I can for my dollars" and increases spending and decreases Insurance company profits (thus higher prices to end customer).
HSA should be expanded to include the current Flexible Spending Account system that encourages users to blow their money in a "use it or lose it" system that benefits no one.
Government needs to get out of the way and make people responsible for their Health Care spending and allow the insurance companies to offer more savings incentive programs and drug companies to develop new drugs while making the older ones cheaper.
Bottom line... The insurance industry and drug companies were developed BY INDIVIDUALS. NOT the government. So why should it be controlled BY the government. It would not exist without Profit, Incentive, and a Need.
Thursday, April 02, 2009
Cash for Clunkers - My letter to The Honorable Mike Rogers
I am writing in opposition to the "Cash for Clunkers Bill". As a proud owner of older cars (1985 Cavalier 30 mpg and a 1994 Pontiac Transport 27 mpg) I am frightened by the high and mighty thinking of those in Congress that believe that everyone should drive brand new cars. If this bill passes I will in the very near future be forced to pay much MORE for a used car since now ANY old car is essentially worth $4500 as a trade in. This is more money out of my pocket in wasteful government spending AND more money in purchasing my next used car PLUS I will most likely have to take a loan out for my next one (all previous purchases have been cash in hand "responsible" buying) including all the bank fees PLUS I will then need "Full Coverage" insurance since it is funded by a bank. This is 4+ times more than I have previously spent on cars due to needless government interaction. This defiantly hurts my ability to survive in this recession.
I guess when someone makes $150 thousand a year and gets a raise every year since 2000 http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/97-1011.pdf (I have not had a raise in Michigan since the 90's and not likely too in the future) you can tell everyone to "buy new".
I personally respect cars as historical objects and worthy of preservation. If some of this garbage legislation had happened years ago there would be NO Model A or T Fords, No Auburns/Cords/Dusenbergs, NO 52 Chevy Pickups, NO 1957 Chevys, NO 1965 Mustangs, NO 1969 Chargers, NO 1984 Buick Grand Nationals, NO 1985 Cavaliers, left anywhere, and ABSOLUTELY NO supporting aftermarket industry, NO Custom Industry, NO Classic Car restoration industry, and NO incentive to look back and see older cars as beautiful and historical pieces of AMERICAN art. IF the current "older" cars (past 8 years??? I cannot afford a 2001 right now...) are scrapped, then there will be NO used parts, NO reason to make aftermarket parts, NO reason to continue an industry based on "older" cars.
My running comment to people is when I see a new car I like I say "I am going to have one of those... 10 years from now". With this bill, that will not come true, since it will be over 8 years old.
In closing (and I doubt you actually get to read this) the Cash for Clunker bill is harmful to the supporting aftermarket/parts industry, harmful to taxpayers depending on the used car market for transportation, and harmful to those wishing to collect these future classics. The Cash for Clunkers bill is lopsided thinking that everyone wants and deserves a new car. You only deserve a new car if you want and work for it, not given to you by government. The Cash for Clunkers bill is a clunker in itself and the cash should be given back to the taxpayers instead of eating up funds and killing an industry for the sake of socialism. p.s. Hitler funded VW "The Peoples Car", another classic older historical vehicle.
BTW this clunker bill is redundant as last years high steel prices generated a record amount of older vehicle scrapping for recycled steel. Even fully drivable cars were sacrificed as they were worth more as scrap then for resale. See, the FREE market has a use for everything if left to it's own devises instead of government controlled.
Government is "BY the people and FOR the people", not just for the people that fit the little mold that is established by government.
I guess when someone makes $150 thousand a year and gets a raise every year since 2000 http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/97-1011.pdf (I have not had a raise in Michigan since the 90's and not likely too in the future) you can tell everyone to "buy new".
I personally respect cars as historical objects and worthy of preservation. If some of this garbage legislation had happened years ago there would be NO Model A or T Fords, No Auburns/Cords/Dusenbergs, NO 52 Chevy Pickups, NO 1957 Chevys, NO 1965 Mustangs, NO 1969 Chargers, NO 1984 Buick Grand Nationals, NO 1985 Cavaliers, left anywhere, and ABSOLUTELY NO supporting aftermarket industry, NO Custom Industry, NO Classic Car restoration industry, and NO incentive to look back and see older cars as beautiful and historical pieces of AMERICAN art. IF the current "older" cars (past 8 years??? I cannot afford a 2001 right now...) are scrapped, then there will be NO used parts, NO reason to make aftermarket parts, NO reason to continue an industry based on "older" cars.
My running comment to people is when I see a new car I like I say "I am going to have one of those... 10 years from now". With this bill, that will not come true, since it will be over 8 years old.
In closing (and I doubt you actually get to read this) the Cash for Clunker bill is harmful to the supporting aftermarket/parts industry, harmful to taxpayers depending on the used car market for transportation, and harmful to those wishing to collect these future classics. The Cash for Clunkers bill is lopsided thinking that everyone wants and deserves a new car. You only deserve a new car if you want and work for it, not given to you by government. The Cash for Clunkers bill is a clunker in itself and the cash should be given back to the taxpayers instead of eating up funds and killing an industry for the sake of socialism. p.s. Hitler funded VW "The Peoples Car", another classic older historical vehicle.
BTW this clunker bill is redundant as last years high steel prices generated a record amount of older vehicle scrapping for recycled steel. Even fully drivable cars were sacrificed as they were worth more as scrap then for resale. See, the FREE market has a use for everything if left to it's own devises instead of government controlled.
Government is "BY the people and FOR the people", not just for the people that fit the little mold that is established by government.
Friday, October 03, 2008
More Junk Mail
Just an FYI... I got ANOTHER junk mail ad supporting Obama the very same day I posted how O' supports junk mail and spam. Just another proof that our inconvenience or imposition means nothing to Obama...(or at least his staff eh?)
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
OBAMA supports junk mail and spam
Hey, if Obama can talk about all the big business tax cuts and how the White House will be run by Lobbyists if McCain gets in, then I guess I can talk about how OBAMA supports junk mail and spam.
Thursday I got a large flyer from Obama. It was big, full color and full of Obamaisms. Too bad that I as a taxpaying business man cannot afford to send out fliers like this due to all the taxes that Granholm (DEM) has implemented. Actually in the flier it says that Obama will end tax breaks for businesses. Lucky us in Michigan, Granholm has already done that. Technically it says he is going to end them for companies that deal with overseas, but in this day of WalMart and Harbor Freight, there is no way to compete unless you do at least something overseas. Nice global thinking there O'.
So then Friday, I get ANOTHER flyer from O'. Now mind you, I am NOT a Democrat (really???) and I have never voted DEM, registered DEM, or ever even hinted I may be open to DEM, and yet O' thinks I may be swayed to his side by a high dollar flyer with the nice picture of grumpy looking Cheryl VerEllen saying the economy is crashing. Apparently the implication is that McCain IS Bush and it is Bush's fault that Michigan slid from high status to almost last. Guess she does not realize that the slide happened AFTER she voted Granholm in TWICE!!! Look at how Michigan fell and that is how the rest of the country will fall if we tax the heck out of it.
Funny how these fliers have a lot of pictures and very little text... Hmmmm...
Do you really want more junk mail???? Do you really want more SPAM???? According to OBAMA, poor John McCain does not even know how to work a computer... How is he going to send you spam???
Vote for less Spam, Vote for less junk mail, vote McCain.
Thursday I got a large flyer from Obama. It was big, full color and full of Obamaisms. Too bad that I as a taxpaying business man cannot afford to send out fliers like this due to all the taxes that Granholm (DEM) has implemented. Actually in the flier it says that Obama will end tax breaks for businesses. Lucky us in Michigan, Granholm has already done that. Technically it says he is going to end them for companies that deal with overseas, but in this day of WalMart and Harbor Freight, there is no way to compete unless you do at least something overseas. Nice global thinking there O'.
So then Friday, I get ANOTHER flyer from O'. Now mind you, I am NOT a Democrat (really???) and I have never voted DEM, registered DEM, or ever even hinted I may be open to DEM, and yet O' thinks I may be swayed to his side by a high dollar flyer with the nice picture of grumpy looking Cheryl VerEllen saying the economy is crashing. Apparently the implication is that McCain IS Bush and it is Bush's fault that Michigan slid from high status to almost last. Guess she does not realize that the slide happened AFTER she voted Granholm in TWICE!!! Look at how Michigan fell and that is how the rest of the country will fall if we tax the heck out of it.
Funny how these fliers have a lot of pictures and very little text... Hmmmm...
Do you really want more junk mail???? Do you really want more SPAM???? According to OBAMA, poor John McCain does not even know how to work a computer... How is he going to send you spam???
Vote for less Spam, Vote for less junk mail, vote McCain.
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
A lesson from the United Way
What do you think about when you think United Way? Worthy charity? Doing good for other people? Helping your fellow man? You would be correct. United Way has actually been around since 1887. In fact it is older than the act that created a "non-profit" status.
How about "Goodwill"? They help those with disabilities and "cannot work" situations. They started back around 1902. Are they doing good work? Have they failed miserably? If so why are they still around?
So.. If the United Way and Goodwill (and many many other charitable organizations) are doing such a great job then WHY does the government need to do it? All of these "programs" that Obama wants to implement, and many that are in place (welfare to name one) are already being done by other people. Actually being done by other people BETTER then the government can do it. The thing the government is good at is taking your money and giving it to someone else (and losing half of it on the way there) without YOU choosing to do so. What the next president should do is instead of taking my money they should give me a 1 to 1 credit for giving donations to Goodwill, United Way, and the whole slew of other worthy organizations the I CHOOSE to give it to. That way the government does not need to waste time, energy, and my money, by giving away to people I do not even think deserve it.
A little history, the government is "for the people, by the people". That does not mean "for the poor people", it does not mean "for the uninsured people" and it definitely does not mean "for the I do not want to work so I am gonna get welfare people". It means "for the people", ALL the people, of which the MAJORITY have jobs, work, and make money so they can survive themselves. Why take "the peoples" money and give it to those who do not contribute? Groups like United Way and Goodwill have stipulations about who gets money, the government cannot do this since it is by all the people. YOU can decide who to give your money to when you donate and you can be assured it gets used correctly. With the government, do you think it is getting used correctly??? Who has his hands in the pot? Who is influencing what state gets the most of it? You just do not know!
Let your government representatives know that you want to be in control of who gets your money. Tell them to back off on government spending and let we the people handle our own charities instead of the government acting like one big mandatory charity.
How about "Goodwill"? They help those with disabilities and "cannot work" situations. They started back around 1902. Are they doing good work? Have they failed miserably? If so why are they still around?
So.. If the United Way and Goodwill (and many many other charitable organizations) are doing such a great job then WHY does the government need to do it? All of these "programs" that Obama wants to implement, and many that are in place (welfare to name one) are already being done by other people. Actually being done by other people BETTER then the government can do it. The thing the government is good at is taking your money and giving it to someone else (and losing half of it on the way there) without YOU choosing to do so. What the next president should do is instead of taking my money they should give me a 1 to 1 credit for giving donations to Goodwill, United Way, and the whole slew of other worthy organizations the I CHOOSE to give it to. That way the government does not need to waste time, energy, and my money, by giving away to people I do not even think deserve it.
A little history, the government is "for the people, by the people". That does not mean "for the poor people", it does not mean "for the uninsured people" and it definitely does not mean "for the I do not want to work so I am gonna get welfare people". It means "for the people", ALL the people, of which the MAJORITY have jobs, work, and make money so they can survive themselves. Why take "the peoples" money and give it to those who do not contribute? Groups like United Way and Goodwill have stipulations about who gets money, the government cannot do this since it is by all the people. YOU can decide who to give your money to when you donate and you can be assured it gets used correctly. With the government, do you think it is getting used correctly??? Who has his hands in the pot? Who is influencing what state gets the most of it? You just do not know!
Let your government representatives know that you want to be in control of who gets your money. Tell them to back off on government spending and let we the people handle our own charities instead of the government acting like one big mandatory charity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)