Junker Credit

July 18, 2009
Junker Credit

http://www.letfordrecycleyourride.com/default.aspx

Ford Clunker Calculator

http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/f12/driving-gas-guzzler-may-worth-4500-more-congress-considers-new-program-74120/

GM Clunker Calculator

A $3500 or $4500 junker credit. That is the question. Whether you trade up by a 4, 2, 1, or NA MPG increase for $3500 tax credit or 10, 5, 2 increase and a $4500 junker credit really is the question. The above web addresses will help in determining what combination your particular situation may dictate.

http://www.letfordrecycleyourride.com/ProgramBasics.aspx

The above would be a web address with a grid list. Look at this grid also.

Purchasing or getting a qualified leased car which is new. But it must also be a more fuel-efficient car or truck.

WARNING: This credit allowance of a total of $1 Billion program is good until November 1, 2009 or until the money runs-out. So effectively you need to treat this as grant money and know that grant money does run out eventually and the ones in line first get the money first. And Yes, November 1, 2009 does land on a Sunday but the law specifically ends on a Sunday for the grants.

What are the qualifications for this program. What vehicles qualify.

* The trade-in vehicle must meet the following criteria.

* Have been manufactured less than 25 years before the date you trade it in.

* Have a “new” combined city/highway fuel economy of 18 miles per gallon or less.

* Be in drivable condition.

* Be continuously insured and registered to the same owner for the full year preceding the trade-in.

* If leased the lease must be for a five year period of time minimum.

As an example Ford, Lincoln and Mercury have 20 vehicles together which qualify as new or leased vehicles which may give you a $3500 or $4500 purchasing credit. Notice that the cost of a vehicle cannot exceed $45,000.

Will the full value of the clunker be a fair value. I do not believe it will be fair at all. If you present your purchase first and get the deal and then bring in your clunker for the end of the deal. At the present time the scrap metal value is low. Steel is still at a high price in the warehouses and the price of steel spot is lower. Ship owners are stalling on retrofiting their boats and waiting for the price of steel to come down. Your car would be just reducing the spot price further and stalling the ship yard work until a later day and time. Could this be further than November 1. This is a question which you will have to ask. This boat owner stall has already lasted for over one year. Will it continue. I believe it will. The price of fish is lower. The price of the cabin is lower. The price of shipping and the amount of tonnage shipped is lower.

One caveat is that a truck which does not have an EPA fuel economy number must be from a model year of 2001 or earlier. Scrap metal and $3500. Even with this qualification satisfied look at the powertrain to see if your vehicle also would qualify. Again, the value of the purchase cannot exceed $45,000.

Remember to negotiate on all aspects of your vehicle. Check the weight of the vehicle. Look at the spot price of steel for the day. I do not know which day the spot price is generally better if any. Call a commodities broker and ask. Maybe a seasonal swing occurs each year. Rough weather in the fall perhaps might be a heavy steel purchasing time.

Combine your purchase with a hybrid vehicle tax credit. But also keep in mind that hybrid vehicles have a maximum life also. New year vehicle purchases end when 60,000 vehicles are purchased. The Prius expired last year for its credit. Other models which came out after the Prius are still available. Do not forget to look at Diesel Engine models as well. Don’t forget to include the sales tax of the general sales tax for your state as an add-on for your standard deduction amount on your federal income tax return. Some states may also provide an additional standard amount for the auto sales tax purchase as well. With the sales tax standard deduction a maximum purchase price is $49,500 and a phased out over modified AGI range of $125,000-$135,000 ($250,000-$260,000 if married filing jointly) may need to be looked at as well. The standard deduction applies only to purchases made after February 16, 2009, and before January 1, 2010. Caution says to keep track of the dates. Or better yet make sure you purchase prior to November 1, 2009 or before the Junker Credit runs out and keep the purchase price below $45,000 or negotiate the purchase price down to $45,000 or below.

If all else fails, buy a used car and wait for a hydrogen fuel source vehicle. A new hydrogen plant to be built was announced last week for Arizona.

Don’t forget about the plug-ins. Oh, are they available as of yet. Too late for this credit.

Or just give up and tell your boss you need to apply for the $20 per month credit for riding your bicycle to work every day under the Commuter Transportation Benefits. Restrictions do apply, yet they are for providing for the reimbursement by an employer to an employee for reasonable expenses for the purchase of a bicycle, improvements, repair, and storage if he bicycle is regularly used for commuting. Hopefully you commute one mile. Maybe with a unicycle it is $10 per month. I have not specifically looked to see if unicycles are considered a qualified alternative mood of transportation. If it is then roller blades or skateboards should be included if they are not motorized.

Good Luck!!

 


GM should say “NO” to Government Demands for Bankruptcy

April 13, 2009

There is absolutely no reason that GM should bow their knee to the wishes of the United States Government.  The U.S. Government is out of bounds.  The United States Constitution does not say GM needs to take directions from the Government. 

When I am trying to make offers to the IRS I always see or look for what is best for the client and not what is best for the government.  The government always looks at whether they can settle a claim and if not settle or if the client cannot make payments and still pay all of their taxes then and only then do they recommend that a client close down its operations. 

Government taxes must be paid first.  The reason for this is that if they are not paid then the government will get their money out of the executives and the bookkeepers and the payroll clerks.  If the government is not paid first then the operations must be terminated. 

The income taxes cannot be paid or settled in bankruptcy unless the taxes are in arrears and filed and not paid. 

Another fault of going into bankruptcy is that the government will not have to pay back taxes which have been previously paid.  In another name this is called an NOL.  If one has a Net Operating Loss this amount can go backwards for up to five years (the timeframe depends upon if a business, farm or individual, etc.) and starting at a minimum of five years.  Could this indicate that the government would not have enough money in its coffers to payback the back taxes paid to GM or forward for up to 15 years in time.  Come on let’s get real. 

Bankruptcy is not the solution nor is it the answer. 

Leave the running of the automobile business up to the owners of the company.  A small ownership does not need to dictate what needs to be done.

A once proud company just needs to have big brother out of its way.  A once proud company just needs the thugs out of the way.  Government should be striving to get the threat of bankruptcy out of the ownership and put the out-of-touch contracts back into a reality basis.

But the government is not the solution.  Government is the problem.  Always has been and always will be.


Seattle Tunnel versus Viaduct alternatives

March 18, 2009

Mr. Scott White.

I believe you are on the Transportation Committee when I looked this up previously.

Am the treasurer for the initiative I-99 which seeks to take away the right-of-way for the Seattle Tunnel as proposed by Mayor Nickels.

The cost of a tunnel at this time is extremely expensive and Elizabeth Campbell who is the sponsor of the initiative will be having a 100% effort in gathering signatures for this initiative after her Winter 09 class ends.  I will join the signature gathering efforts after the tax season ends on April 15, 2009.

However, this effort would be null and void if the funding for the Seattle Tunnel is not approved by the State Legislature and yourself and the committee on Transportation.

Have spoken with many people concerning this effort, obviously, and almost virtually everyone is opposed to the Seattle Tunnel idea.  Some comments circle around the State Budget and the need to balance the budget and others also still do love the idea of the beautiful travel route which the current Seattle Waterfront Viaduct passes by.  Others are extremely upset that voting does not count and recollecting the vote which overwhelmingly ditched a tunnel option previously.  The voters do not like to be ignored whatsoever.  As you recall I had said I would approve a teachers pay raise as per the voters even if no other state employee were to get a raise as per the voters electing this a few years ago.

Personally I still would like a retrofit of the Viaduct and then an accumulation of funds for the setting aside of funds for other more appropriate roadway construction in about 20 years or so.  I assume you would still like a Street Version of the Viaduct.  Both are incongruent with the Seattle Tunnel alternative and I would wish you to vote “NO” on any approval of a Seattle Tunnel version.

Thanking you in advance for your deep concern on this important roadway structure for the beautification of the Seattle Waterfront and the drivers of Seattle and the enjoyment of the beautiful vista which drivers are able to enjoy at the present time.  An enjoyable drive while in Seattle will remain if you agree to Vote against funding of a Seattle Tunnel project. 

Thanks

Keith Ljunghammar, EA


To buy a car or to wait to buy a car

March 13, 2009
To buy a car or to wait to buy a car

That definitely is the question.

This is concerning the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) as related to the Deduction of Sales Tax on the Purchase of New Vehicles. I am getting my basic information from an email from my employer Larry R. French and Associates which they received from UltraTax CS an income tax program developers which we use at the office who received the information from Thomson Reuters under user bulletin 4351.

To my friends from http://www.coldron.us and all of the other taxpayers who live in Washington State and other states which do have a sales tax and not an income tax your strategy for buying a car is explained here. To the other taxpayers in states where they only have an income tax like Oregon and no sales tax only part of this blog may be of importance to you. I will explain your situation first.

Below is the wording which I am looking at:

“Deduction for Sales Tax on Purchase of New Vehicle – ARRA allows state and local sales and excise taxes paid on the purchase of a qualified motor vehicle as a deduction. A qualified vehicle must meet the following conditions:

* Purchased after February 17, 2009, and before january 1, 2010

* New not used

* May be passenger car, minivan, light truck, motorcycle, motor home

The Motor Vehicle Tax deduction is limited to a purchase price of $49,500 and is phased out beginning with modified adjusted gross income of $125,000 ($250,000 jointly filed returns). The deduction is allowed as an additional standard deduction when not itemizing on Schedule A and when not electing to deduct state and local sales taxes in lieu of state and local income taxes. The new Tax Projection Worksheet – American Recovery Act (ARRA) includes a worksheet for the Motor Vehicle Tax Deduction and new Screen TPW-3 contains a data entry section for motor vehicle purchase information.”

Concerning those in Oregon and other income tax only states.

Since the buying of a new car is concerning an inclusion of a sales tax amount and your state and a few others only have an income tax this part of the ARRA deduction of sales tax on the purchase of a new vehicle will not affect your federal income tax return. Your choice of purchasing a vehicle would be left to: 1) a new car with no sales tax deduction advantage as with other states who have a sales tax; 2) Buy a used car where the law of being able to deduct the sales tax does not affect any of the states because a used automobile is not an option under the new law for 2009; 3) Buy a car which still has an alternative hybrid tax creditor alternative fuel credit and also tax double advantage if your state include an additional credit so your personal income tax on the federal and state level can be reduced; 4) Wait to buy past the 2010 year a more efficient vehicle due to the announcement of the ion battery discovery/invention by MIT researchers to be able to recharge car batteries in the time it takes to fill up your tank. Thus innovation will make the road quiet and the environment cleaner. You may even think about investing in sources of electric production. Maybe even a windmill from your backyard for the production of your personal vehicle and home usage for recharging and home usage.

Concerning those living in Washington and other states with a sales tax.

Since the buying of a new car may allow you to include the sales tax as an income tax deduction or as an increase to your standard deduction you may need to consider the following items.

1) If you itemize you will be able to use the sales tax as an itemized deduction. But if your state also has an income tax return they you will also have to consider using your income tax withheld or paid to the state as an itemized deduction or the amount paid for sales taxes as a deductible amount. Using the large of the two is usually a behind the scene calculation which appropriately calculated software will automatically determine for you. So including the proper sales tax amount for the sales tax amount on the new automobile purchase will be necessary. The checking of a box or some other feature in the software to indicate a new car purchase will have to be implemented in all software. This then should be a simple process.

2) If instead of itemizing you use the standard deduction there are additional amounts which will increase the standard amount.

a) if you are blind a box needs to be checked.

b) If you are 65 years of age or older you will be getting an additional amount added to your standard deduction. This information is usually picked up by the software based upon your birthday input. So definitely make sure your input of your birthday and your spouse’s birthday is correct.

c) For 2008 and 2009 you will get an extra amount if you are not itemizing and you own real estate and are paying real estate taxes on your domicile. The amount is $500 and for married filing jointly couples this amount is raised to $1000.

d) Finally the amount of the sales tax paid for the state portion and the local portion will be included as an additional amount to be included for the standard deduction increase. In Washington State we also pay in some areas an RTA tax or Regional Transit Tax. The IRS previously when calculating the sales tax does not include the additional RTA amount or the excise tax associated with the continuing tax of a automobile which is paid every year. Sorry but I guess Congress does not want to have everything as being deductible. I did not see specifically any wording to this affect except the wording only to include the state and local sales tax. In previous instruction the IRS does not explain exceptions but only what can be included. If previous instructions have explained that the other taxes beyond local sales tax are not included then I would be assuming the IRS will not be included other sales tax amounts beyond the state and local sales tax basic amount.

And again even if you are able to include the sales tax with the standard deduction I really do question the potential frequency of the use of this provision. Individual income tax preparers who are using the standard deduction quite frequently without doing any research are buying used cars instead of new cars. The individuals who are itemizing would have higher incomes and thus a higher disposable income base and a better capacity to increase their deductions when it comes to purchasing a vehicle.

Another consideration for these individuals able to claim an itemized deduction would be to wait another year a purchase a vehicle which might be green or able to use with a plug-in electric power grid for recharging. The new dynamics of innovation are exploding and current decisions will help in deciding what will be a viable consumer product in a short period of time as well. Five years out in vehicle purchase time is probably about a half-life.

Happy auto purchasing in any situation. New, used or wait your pursuit of happiness is what strengthens our economy.

Then again, what happens if the price of oil goes up again in a crazy fashion.

#####

 


Barack Obama’s address to Congress 02/24/09

February 26, 2009
Barack Obama’s address to Congress

While President Barack Obama was addressing Congress he was talking to three sets of different chambers of Congress. Not the House and the Senate but rather the Republicans and the Democrats and the American people.

If the wording of what he said does eventually come true, and I believe parts of it will come true, then the other parts will have profound implications for generations to come. However, if other parts do not come through and the continuation of political differences continue, then our economy will eventually stagnate back to its normal course and take its place in a continuing history of events.

President Nixon proposed an Earned Income Tax Credit in one of his State of the Union addresses. The proposed items had been adopted by Congress and signed into law. However, does anyone realize this was presented by President Nixon in an effort to diminish the disparity between the haves and the have not. Or really should I say to diminish the distance between the racial divide which plagued the nation at that time and going back to the Civil War and to the Declaration of Independence. Social issues still seem to be an overriding attribute of equalization which past presidents have tried to address. Some take a radical approach and some have taken a progressive approach.

Energy is one of the items on Obama’s list of needs. This list was first placed on our national agenda in the 1970’s with the oil embargo and President Nixon’s administration. Congress could not find an equilibrium and still has not been able to find an equilibrium which would bring our country out of economic disadvantage from the rest of the oil producing countries. President Obama puts this in another fashion: ”

“In other words, we have lived through an era where too often, short-term gains were prized over long-term prosperity; where we failed to look beyond the next payment, the next quarter, or the next election. A surplus became an excuse to transfer wealth to the wealthy instead of an opportunity to invest in our future. Regulations were gutted for the sake of a quick profit at the expense of a healthy market. People bought homes they knew they couldn’t afford from banks and lenders who pushed those bad loans anyway. And all the while, critical debates and difficult decisions were put off for some other time on some other day.”

The finding of new sources of energy should be of a paramount goal for other goals may lead to other less savory short-term goals which only can bring on lesser achievements and lower profits in the long-run. Short-term profits always will remain short-term profits unless the long-term profits are first met.

The Pilgrims suffered for the long-term profit of establishing a settlement where they could worship God as they wanted to. The short-term profit of going south for warmth was not achieved and numerous settler passed away. But yet today their long-term goals are still being strived for as our country continues to worship God in an independent and respectful fashion. The reasoning behind “In God We Trust” becomes stronger as each generation passes the torch. A strong energy independent economy will help in the worshipping of God. Sources of oil in the Gulf and in the upper northern states need to be explored and come to fruitfulness for our continuing independence and for the joy of worshipping God.

God is still in control. From the time China unites with the United States over a common enemy to the United States once again becoming the salt of the earth our energy independence and non-reliance upon other countries would help in transforming the world once again to a vision which would be a full respecter of God and His wishes.

I read in the paper today that North Korea will be testing a rocket which could reach the United States. I believe this will be a uniting factor between the United States and China. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. The small sayings can become true statements in the joining of forces.

“Now is the time to act boldly and wisely…”

When acting boldly and wisely the writers and signers of the Declaration knew that boldness and only boldness would unite the country. A single man helped in that endeavor, Thomas Payne, by writing a pamphlet called “Common Sense”. Is our country past common sense. I dare to say ‘No’. Do we need to act boldly now, ‘Yes’. But reacting wisely is also of importance. Thomas Jefferson was bold in his writing of the original draft of the Declaration of Independence. Others thought it not wise to include the freeing of slaves. The wisdom was thought we would not have a United States but a North and a South. The slave issue finally was arrested in the fighting of the Civil War. In times of unrest our Country has surrounded the independent spirit and the respect of everyone to worship God in their own way. A few people demanding that we respect the earth while not allowing others to respect the earth by drilling to uncovers its riches is a hindrance to our independence and of our founding father’s desire to worship God in their own fashion.

“As soon as I took office, I asked this Congress to send me a recovery plan by President’s Day that would put people back to work and put money in their pockets. Not because I believe in bigger government–I don’t.”

This is a revelation to both sides of the aisle. A democrat not wanting bigger government is like saying one is a Republican. Maybe the Republicans should listen and if this comes true they should adopt President Obama as a Republican. Not just yet though.

“Over the next two years, this plan will save or create 3.5 million jobs.

More than 90% of these jobs will be in the private sector — jobs rebuilding our roads and bridges; constructing wind turbines and solar panels; laying broadband and expanding mass transit.”

Mr. President, these may be from the private sector as in construction jobs but the money and the reasoning would be for the benefit of the government bureaucracy. Roads and bridges and mass transit are objectives of government. Turbines and solar panels would be the exception only to this. But some of this may become sources of ownership by big government. Please excuse my skepticism but this still sounds like big government. If the government would get out of the way then private citizens could build their own solar panels on their property and take the funds out of their IRA or ROTH/IRA and without a penalty or taxing the retirement fund then true individuals could build their own wealth by eliminating the need for government intervention. Government has a few roles but the creation of jobs can never be the result of government except when they get out of the way so the citizens can create.

“Because of this plan, there are teachers who can now keep their jobs and educate our kids.”

Building roads and bridges, constructing wind turbines and solar panels; laying broadband and expanding mass transit does not create jobs for teachers and educate our kids. Sorry but the logic does not flow.

“Because of this plan, 95% of the working households in America will receive a tax cut…” It would seem to me if our real estate taxes were cut to the level in which the value of the house is then a bigger tax cut would be coming to 100% of the working households in America. The smaller the government the bigger the tax cut.

Education has always been of concern to Thomas Jefferson. He even had one slave cook for him in a French Cooking style for five years and then let the slave go. I never have heard if the former slave opened up a restaurant in Washington, D.C. or not. Sometimes holding onto an asset is for the betterment of one. Letting it go could be for the benefit of many. Ditto with Oil. Ditto with letting the citizens develop their own source of energy independence. The collection of the many can be for the benefit of the whole and stronger than the whole also.

Government by mandate is not the solution to our economy woes but in reality the letting go of government will be the releasing of our independence. Government pressure and trying to be helpful is what got us into this mess in the first place. But placing this issue as a national project is what might save us. Stop right there. If government got us into this mess then government should get out of the way so the independent thinking can voice victory and victory should not be that of the government.

“I have appointed a proven and aggressive Inspector General to ferret out any and all cases of waste and fraud.” This is merely an endeavor to express your concern of resolving big government while really not proving your case. Only if waste and fraud are truly eliminated will anyone be able to respect this statement. Past Presidents have stood fast to this principle but only one has achieved this as a goal. Instead of cleaning up the government I say that not the yearly debt to be reduced in half by four years but rather the debt of the United States needs to be nullified in four years period of time. Being independent and the size of government being small can accomplish this feat. With $700 billion in oil imports costing us each year the multiplier of current money flow being 12X if independence of energy can be achieved then the complete budget deficit can be erased.

“…we clean up the credit crisis…”

If I see legislation which restricts the usage of credit card debt which must be paid within three months then I will believe this is a solution to the credit crisis. Forgiveness of all credit card debt longer than six months would greatly increase the capacity of independence and reduce high interest rates. The credit card industry has severely weakened our financial system and needs a reminder of constraint. Reducing the need for and access to credit card indebtedness is the only way to”…swiftly and aggressively to break this destructive cycle, restore confidence, and restart lending.”

If you are really trying to “reform our out-dated regulatory system” then you will indeed need to adopt a tough credit card policy which would bring a “…tough, new common-sense rules of the road so that our financial market rewards drive and innovation, and punishes shortcuts and abuse.”

“The only way this century will be another American century is if we confront at least the price of our dependence on oil and the high cost of health care: the schools that aren’t preparing our children and the mountain of debt they stand to inherit. That is our responsibility.” …. “I see it as a vision for America – as a blueprint for our future.”

“I reject the view that says our problems will simply take care of themselves; that says government has no role in laying the foundation for our common prosperity.”

But I would rather say that the problem is with government and the solution is really instructing the spirit of independence to squash the lack of enthusiasm and embrace the need for independence.

Again, government has laid the foundation for independence through the forming of IRA and ROTH/IRAs. Now is the time for government to allow the independent spirit of being able to use these funds for solar cells and wind power generation in ones own home. No tax penalty and no income tax upon withdrawal. Take the roadblocks to financial success out of the independent thinkers. The collection of IRAs and ROTH/IRAs is greater than the communistic collective governments of China’s government.

A recent wave power project for the Neah Bay Tribe in the Northwest corner of the State of Washington by a Canadian firm in Vancouver, B.C. was recently discontinued and another project picked up for construction in Ireland instead was started. Was this because big government was the solution or because the company did not know if they would be paid. Washington State is in financially dyre straight and the company also discontinued a like project in California in favor of Ireland. Noting that a 10 miles by 10 mile area in the ocean can produce a great amount of electric energy for the state. Also, on the Washington coast south of Neah Bay is where no human lives for 23 miles. Neah Bay project was projected to create electricity for 150 homes. A rather small project but a start for the state.

All sources of energy need to be explored. Did the Spanish explorers stop at the east coast.

Putting a “market-based cap on carbon pollution” will only drive our existing infrastructure into a tailspin. This is like saying to depression era unemployed citizens that they need to pay a higher tax so the workers can get jobs.

There are three things which economists say create economies.

1) Land

2) Labor

3) Capital

But I say there is a different method to economies. There are three things which can create a new economy.

1) Farming

2) Extracting Minerals

and the last one is

3) Innovation.

In no way is government in this mix. If government wants to be the one contributing capital then the solution is still there. But the locomotive was an innovation. The other five items were needed. Our country expanded. When the innovation of the auto assembly line was constructed by Henry Ford the others were used and increased. With President Eisenhower’s use of innovation and the highway system the other forces came in usage and created wealth. A more efficient farming system was one of the major benefactors.

But if the extracting of oil is not continued but rather punished then the objective of developing “our recovery plan, we will double this nation’s supply of renewable energy in the next three years” then in fact this could stall this three year plan as well. To decrease an existing innovation with a tax is essentially saying to the economy to slow-down.

Eisenhower did not eliminate all new or existing roads.

The train system did not replace the road.

The assembly line did not mandate all older systems to terminate.

If something is better than a prior technology then the prior technology will soon have a modified usage. Taxing it was not done in the past nor was it necessary or useful. The free market took over. Taxing a drill, baby, drill philosophy will not create the oppressors objectives of immediately depressing the older technology but will suppress the economy so the funds for the new segment will take longer and thus require the continuation of the older system.

If you are trying to not believe in “Big Government” but you “make clean, renewable energy the profitable kind of energy” then you are in-fact creating “Big-Government”. Big Government is the problem and not the solution.

Asking “Congress to send me legislation that places a market-based cap on carbon pollution and drives the production of more renewable energy in America.” If Congress tries to create a market-based cap then this is not a market-based cap. It is a government-based cap. The devil is in the interpretation. Market vs. Government. If government invests “fifteen billion dollars a year to develop technologies like wind power and solar power, advanced biofuels, clean coal, and more fuel-efficient cars and trucks built right here in America” then the government does not need to create a market-based cap. The innovation will create this and the market would be the solution. The auto industry will then by itself be required to be self “retooled, re-imagined auto industry that can compete and win. Millions of jobs depend on it.”

“…We must also address the crushing cost of health care.”

 

I am not seeing any new solutions for or from government here. Neither do I expect a real solution from government here. I think that only a natural solution is possible. The adherence to God’s principles can truly increase the need and longevity of life. The suppression via drugs which mask symptoms is at best artificial. Creative yes, but artificial.

“Promise of education in America.”

“Right now, three-quarters of the fastest-growing occupations require more than a high school diploma.” The definition of Labor from above needs to include education. If an adequate labor force is not available then the efficient usage of capital will not be needed. A competitive cradle to college objective has already been the prior government objective and a new system of education needs to be explored. Trying and throwing funds at the old style or old system will not improve the system. But if the system has been tried then by all means “expand our commitment to charter schools”.

I think about the innovation of the pencil when it comes to schools. The lead attachment was used and then a separate eraser was picked up and used if needed. Well, our education system does to have an eraser attached to it so the immediate extra steps of picking up the eraser do need to be exercised.

The education system needs to adopt the non-public system as an attachment to the public school system. With innovation some students parents could actually pay for the cost of the salary of a teacher. But in the non-public school system they can charge a higher price and get highly skilled professional teachers. To see a teacher without a doctoral degree in some private schools is rare. Only the exceptional masters degree teachers could apply. The eraser part of this would be the invitation of one or two students from the main school populace to be invited for one semester into the class of 8 or 10 students for a recognition of other accomplishments and achievements which the parents have voted in. This would instill a higher achievement level in the other students to achieve so they possibly could be selected as fellow high achiever students. Those parents willing to expend extra funds for the professor teacher would be rewarded with a higher capacity of learning available in a public school setting and the school system would get a better general student. The higher cost of private education would be mitigated modestly.

“And we must also begin a conversation on how to do the same for Social Security, while creating tax-free universal savings accounts for all Americans.” I thought this was tried in the Bush administration era. An immediate introduction of this and not even out of the batters box or the racing gate.

The military is still the backbone of all types and styles of economies. The foundation blocks of Land, Labor and Capital and the building blocks of Farming, Extracting Minerals and Innovation could not exist without any pre-existing strength from a well-qualified military force. The defending of the strength of these foundation blocks begins with the steady hand of the military.

A child who can utter the words of “we are not quitters” with conviction and steadfastness is showing off her strength as a David, as a Ruth as a Daniel or as a Mary. Her conviction should motivate the rest of us.

END


House Bill 1793 – alternative student transportation

February 17, 2009

House Bill 1793 – alternative student transportation

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2009-10/Pdf/Bills/House%20Bills/1793.pdf

from page 1, line 19 equal to one percent of all funds, both state andfederal, expended for the construction of state highways in such year

This amount is being increase from the previous bill from three-tenths of one percent to one percent. For an extremely negative amount showing in the budget perhaps to as much as $8 Billion this increase would show imprudence on the part of the legislators in the State of Washington.

Yes, I would agree that sound and safe pathways for school children should be a priority but these funds should be coming from the general budget and not from the vehicle tax imposed for improving our roads. Perhaps each city and county needs to pass a bond for this extra item. Later, if the budget is fixed, then and only then should extras be put in the capital construction budget. Once again, the left sided agenda is putting pressure on the infrastructure and making it want for a better purpose. Social programs should be reduced or eliminated in order to make programs such as this safety feature a reality.

END


Senate Bill 6900 – Vehicle Emission Fees

February 15, 2009

Senate Bill 6900 Washington Legislature

 I just read the bill.  The bill does not allow for adjustments to the fee for the end consumer modifiying the CO2 emissions of their engine’s discharge.  An example of this would be to use “Brown Gas” for burning in an engine.   Another would be using butanol instead of or also using ethanol.   What about mechanical improvements which are still on the back burner at the inventors office.  (Sorry about the pun but could not resist.  Actual a client of mine is researching something which will extend the burn of gasoline.  He is in the car testing stage of different car models.)  A bit of mechanical work is needed for the engine to be able to switch to using brown gas.  Brown gas is a mixture of gas and water put into the carburator.  The CO2 emission table does not include the usage of any type of non-fossil fuels for the granting of a reduction in the application of the additional fees from the manufacturers CO2 tables.  This table is punitive and short sighted for the end objective which the bill is trying to address.  Instead of reducing CO2 emissions the actual results will be to increase the amount of CO2 emissioon due to complacency on the part of the end consumer.  If a tax/fee is imposed and compliance for a reduction in CO2 emission is not rewarded then marginal environmentalist will not feel compelled to push their hard earned funds toward the CO2 reduction.

 This is a tax without the possibility of eliminating the tax by attempting to satisfy the objective of the bill. 

 The objective of mitigating the impact of vehicle loads on the state roads adn highways could better be addressed by levying fees for the usage of studs on tires.  However, this would radically change on eof the objectives of the Transportation department and the engineering factors in roads.  This would increase the road hazards of driving on winter ice.  A small fee in some cases can cost an immense amount of money and not just in the cost of monetary funds but in the happiness or enjoyment of the family unit and the greater family unit and of society.