Tax credit for new jobs

Ok, one of the president's points the other night was to create a tax credit for companies that create new jobs. They can't lay people off and then rehire them, they can't eliminate one high paying job and hire two lower paying people, they have to be real jobs that are created (based on what I've heard - still haven't read all the details).

This sounds good. Someone said that this was tried in the 1970's and it didn't work. I remember a lot of things were tried in the 1970's that didn't work. Not sure why. Someone also said that companies need more business before they hire people. That's true. This tax credit would encourage businesses to speculate and invest ahead of new business.

Here's my problem with this idea. What has the current administration done to companies that were offered a bail-out, then were successful? Well, for GM, it was nationalized and handed to the unions. For banks that were given TARP money (which should never have happened), they paid back the loans WITH INTEREST and now they are being threatened with new taxes. Executives who put their jobs on the line are being threatened with large fees (when most of their "income" is in the form of long term stock options - not cash).

So let's play this out. Say Mom & Pops, LLC hires 4 new people and gets a $20,000 tax credit. Their business does well and they keep expanding. In 2011, the administration sees that they are successful and hits them with a "windfall profits" tax. After all, they got a bail-out credit, didn't they? Isn't it time they paid back?

I'm sorry, this administration has shown that they are willing to back-date decisions, I'm not sure this tax credit is safe.

State of the Union and the Republican response

First, I have to admit I didn't watch the State of the Union or the Republican response. I haven't read either of them yet, I intend to read them both this weekend (while it's snowing outside). I heard about it on the radio some today and some on the news tonight.

I don't intend to comment on Pres. Obama's "dis" of the Supreme Court or Justice Alito's "Joe Wilson" moment. I don't intend to comment on anything the President said or Governor McDonnell's speech at all.

Instead I'll complain about the same thing I complained about last year. And the year before. Why must there be a "response"? It's written several days (or weeks) before the State of the Union, so it's not really a response. Instead it is just a way to complain about the president. This only serves to further polarize the general public,

My hat will be tipped for the first party that decides to raise the decorum by skipping the "response".

(For previous posts on this see here, here and here.)

The(se) United States of America

Recently, I read a book that asked the question is it 'THE' United States of America or "THESE" United States of America? On a lark, I asked the quetion on my Facebook page, with absolutely no introduction or explanation. An overwhelming majority of responders to my unscientific poll said "THE". One person picked up on the true meaning of the difference, while a couple debated semantics or grammar. (One person did question where the question was leading and guessed correctly in follow-up emails). One person waffled by saying it depends on who is saying it and one person simply said "these".

The statement hit me because I have been reading a lot about states' rights. Are we, as Americans, part of a larger nation - joined together over two centuries, or are we a collection of independent states, a loose confederation of individual geographies, brought together when it fits the current conversation? I've listened at Tea Parties as I tried to understand the movement (or group of movements). The movement reminds me of a feeling I had several years ago, a feeling that individual people count when it comes to the government, that we can make a difference.

As I mulled over this question, I looked at the Constitution. That document written by "We the people" is the foundation of our government and we should always refer to it when we have questions. That document clearly lays out what we should be doing. I discussed this with one person and reminded her that the Declaration of Independence was signed in 1776 and the Constitution wasn't written until 1786, ten years later. Now from my memory during the 10 year interim, Americans were governed by the Articles of Confederation. While it provided some unity, "each state retain(ed) its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right."

After ten years, a group of people decided that the loose confederacy of states wasn't working. A new constitution was written to "provide for the common defence, (sic)  promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty." The goal was simply to form a more perfect Union.

In a discussion with a self-proclaimed Liberal yesterday, she mentioned the 10th amendment in the same discussion as the tea parties. This amendment basically says that anything not covered in the Constitution is left up to the states. So what is a federal issue and what is a states' issue?

Well, it's clear that national defense is a federal issue. Supposed that after the attacks on the twin towers on 911, SC had decided not to send troops. After all, our state wasn't attacked. (I'm ignoring the issue that some people think we shouldn't have attacked Afghanistan or Iraq - if that bothers you think of Pearl Harbor and 12/7/1941). The problem comes in the general Welfare. Does that mean that some of us in SC have to prop up those on the left coast who may have made some silly laws?

I have to say that I come down on the side of states' rights and that the best thing the federal government can do is to stay out of the way. The current healthcare debate is one example. But I also believe that there are times where the federal government HAS to step in to help all of us.

What is most reassuring to me, is the knowledge that our generation is not the first to face this debate. Over 200 years ago, a group of very smart men gathered together and realized that they could not answer all of the questions in a way that would satisfy all people for all times. Maybe the smartest thing they did was to NOT try to solve all of the problems, to admit they didn't know it all.

Haiti relief effort and Pat Robertson

 

Most of you have heard by now the radical thing said by TV evangelist Pat Robertson. In speaking about the earthquake, he said that the Haitians had, long ago, made a pact with the devil. I was curious what he was talking about, so I did a little research.

It turns out that this "legend" has been around for a long time. The Haitians revolted against the French in 1791 and, as the story goes, made a deal with the devil to get out from under French rule. Now while. Rev. Robertson is relatively old, I don't think he was around during those times, so it seems he's just passing along stories he's heard (isn't that gossip?) What's really sad is that the rest of his comments were overshadowed by this statement. After this incindeary statement, Roberson went on to say that "we need to pray for them (always a good idea) a great turning to God (good for everyone) and out of this tragedy I'm optimistic something good may come. (Wait - did he say something good?) But right now we are helping the suffering people (he's helping?) and the suffering is unimaginable."

That's right, Robertson's people started helping immediately after the quake.

I can't say I have ever watched an episode of the 700 Club (Robertson's show). I've probably watched parts of it, but I just couldn't handle his type of evangelism. I think he's wrong on a lot of accounts. Mainly, I think he needs to study Romans 14:19 and focus on edifying people instead of saying things that come out as hateful. I have no idea of the leaders in Haiti in 1791 signed a deal with the devil and frankly I don't care. Neither should Rev. Robertson.

Now, I have a question about the relief effort. There have been reports that there are people upset with how long it is taking to get supplies and relief into Haiti. Some have even gone so far as to draw analogies to Katrina, the Indian Tsunami in 2004. Why doesn't someone in power (special nod and wink to Pres. Obama) draft and publish a guideline of what a relief effort looks like along with a timeline. Sure, ever situation is unique, but if we know it takes 6-9 days to provide food to 10,000 people, then we can properly judge the response or lack of response.

Comments?

VITA/TCE Certified

Ok, my long term readers are probably thinking, hey, I've read this post before. True, last year about this same time I did post an article with this same title (see here). They may remember that I volunteered (that's the "V") to provide Income Tax Assistance to low-middle income people as well as Tax Care for the Elderly (see how I snuck the acronym in there?). I reported last year (here) that I did taxes for about 100 people.

Well, I'm back at it this year. I passed the basic exam one day earlier this year (simple coincidence) and have decided to step up a notch and took the intermediate exam. I passed that one too, so I will be allowed to do slightly more complicated exams this year. We start doing taxes on January 30 and continue until that magic day in April (which my family knows the reason for the magic). I will do taxes on Friday and Saturday afternoons (assuming I get the slots I requested).

This year there are a few changes. There's a new $400 ($800 for joint taxpayers) credit called Making Work Pay. It requires a new form, but it's relatively simple. (Special note to my son - you don't get it because you're my dependent.) And of course there's the first time home-buyers credit, but few of my expected clients are likely to qualify for that (likewise the follow-up home-buyers credit). I'm prepared just in case as I helped out one tax payer after the tax crush last year with their form 5405 and I'm expecting to help another in May of this year.

As usual, one of the most complicated forms is for Earned Income Credit. Sadly, the people who need the credit the most are the least likely to understand. I never even try to explain Advanced EIC. And I spent a lot of time this year trying to make sure I understand the tuition tax credits. Did you know there are FOUR different ways to claim tuition credits? And the law has changed (for the positive) on what you can claim. This credit helps those who are in school (or paying for someone in school). I think it's great because in theory, this will result in a future big income and support for me when I'm collecting Social inSecurity.

I did my own taxes on paper for a number of years. For most people, it's not that hard. You don't have to go to some store-front tax location (that will be gone after 4/15) and pay a few hundred dollars to get your taxes done. If they are that complicated, it's worth paying a REAL professional to have it done. If you need help, look for a VITA site near you (search on VITA on the IRS website). Avoid those Refund Anticipation Loans (see here for another reason to avoid them).

I'll report back here in April with a final comment.

I'm baa.aa.aa.aack

I couldn't stay away too long. I needed a break from every day blogging. I also stopped reading (as many) blogs.

Over the last year, I've changed my blog reading habits. I read less political blogs (it's better for my blood pressure) and more financial blogs (picked a few good tips too). I also read more "personal" blogs, just regular people commenting on life.

As I restart my blog, I've banned anonymous comments. Seems I was getting a lot of these, so it just made sense. If you're being kept from posting, please email me. You can click on "view my profile" (scroll down, on the right, under "about me") and get my email address. I'd love to hear from you.

Real blogging starts tomorrow!

Hi-8-us

I'm going to take a short hi-8-us (break) from posting on this and other blogs for a while. Thanks to all my readers.

No time for long post - Shampoo

No time for a long post today. I got stuck in the shower. I'm trying a new shampoo and wanted to follow the instructions very clearly.


Lather. Rinse. Repeat. Later. Rinse. Repeat. Lather. Rinse Repeat.


Man, that shampoo only lasted one day, I won't try that brand again...

I'll put your Menorah beside my Christmas tree

A couple days ago, I posted an article about how Christmas trees should be allowed in the public square, because Christmas isn't really a Christian holiday. I must not have said something right, I figured I'd get tons of comments from both sides (I did receive one - thanks Thomas). If you want to read that original post, see here.

I heard something on the radio about a town that doesn't want to put up a Christmas tree because they would have to put up a Menorah and symbols of other religions. Personally, I think this is a good idea.

Let's put up a Christmas tree beside a Menorah. We'll also put up a symbol of Islam and a cross (a really good symbol of Christianity). For Agnosticism maybe we cut make a statue of a question mark and for Atheism an exclamation mark. We can even put a pentagram for Wicca believers.

As I thought of this, I thought that surely someone had done something like this before. With the aid of my favorite search engine, I was able to find the history of one previous display like this (you can read about it in 1 Kings 18:21-39).

Post dated papers

Yesterday I had someone ask me to fill out some papers and post date them so that it would appear I signed the papers in January. Of course the reason was that there was "so much" paperwork - I guess it would take me from now until next year - and we could get that stuff out of the way easily now.

So, let me get this straight, you want me to fill out the papers, swearing that everything is correct, then lie about the date? And then, since you encouraged me in the lie, you expect me to trust everything you say and everything you sign?

Somewhere there are people saying "it's only the date, what's the big deal?" To which I would reply, "it's only the price, what's the big deal?"

Let me give a warning to anyone who asks me to sign paperwork - if you ask me to "fudge" the date, you won't get the contract.

Christmas trees in public square

Last week, I posted an entry about Christmas music. The premise of the entry was to identify which Christmas songs should only be recorded by a single artist. My example was Burl Ives and Holly Jolly Christmas. Any other recording just isn't up to par. I had a few comments with other suggestions, you're welcome to go back and add your ideas here.

Later in the week, I was listening to some Christmas music and heard a song by Barry Manilow. Now, as much as it embarrasses me to admit this, I like Barry Manilow. But the thought hit me that he's Jewish. Why would a Jewish man sing songs celebrating the birth of the Messiah? The birth of the Christ child?

So I decided to do a little investigation. What other Jewish people sing Christmas songs? Well, the Internet is our friend, I found out I wasn't the first to ask this question (alas, there's nothing new under the sun). I found that Neil Diamond (who sings "Sweet Caroline") is Jewish as well as Barbra Streisand and both have Christmas albums.

Turns out there are a lot of Christmas songs written by those who are Jewish including "Chestnuts Roasting on an Open Fire", "Holly Jolly Christmas" (which I mentioned earlier) and "White Christmas" (reference).

I certainly have nothing against these people singing Christmas songs. In fact, a little more research told me that Ed Asner, who is a frequent speaker at ACLU meetings has played Santa Claus in the 2003 movie Elf (and if memory serves me right, also in the old Mary Tyler Moore series).

So with Christians, Jews and atheists alike, all celebrating & singing about Christmas, it appears that the holiday is no longer a Christian holiday. With that information, why do we prohibit Christmas trees in the public square? Why do we (in government) shy away from calling it a Christmas tree or the Christmas holiday?

So let's put up Christmas trees in the public square. After all, if it isn't a Christian holiday, the government shouldn't have any problems, right?

Ok, what's going on?

About four years ago (almost exactly), I posted an entry about Providence, the unseen hand of God. I don't really believe in coincidence, but as I wrote back then, it seems ostentatious to say God planned something. Providence seems like a good way to say it while not really saying it.

This week, Providence seems to be at work again. On two separate occasions, I had discussions with two different friends about two different religious matters. Then, I had three different religious discussions on three different blogs (again on different matters). I typically steer away from these things, but these three discussions just came out.

Then it hit me, Providence. There's something behind this. What's going on?

Count the cost - part 2

Yesterday I asked the question "when do you count the cost?" as it relates to you individually. More important is the question "when do you ignore the cost?" and do something. The example I gave was an emergency room visit.

Today I want to ask if the same logic applies to the U.S. as a country? Is there (or should there be) a time to do something without regard to the cost?

For example, we recently had the 68th anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor - a day which has lived in infamy since that day. We all (hopefully) know what happened and the result was the U.S. entry into WW II. The cost of that war was tremendous. But no one questioned the cost or has said that we shouldn't have gone to war. Just let the Japanese (and Germans) take what they wanted. Instead, we ignored the cost, figured we'd pay for it later.

The cost was paid in lives and in sacrifices of U.S. citizens. I've heard my parents talk about rationing, and the shortages. But no one questioned it.

I believe that 9/11 was another such time to ignore the cost. Whether you believe we took the right action or not, is not the discussion at this point. Should we have ignored the cost and gone after terrorism? We will pay for the decision for a long time. And we don't (yet) know what the total cost will be. But I believe it was the right decision.

How about the stimulus package from earlier this year? We were told we had to do something and it had to be done right then. There was no time to "count the cost". What else? Where else is it right for us as a country to ignore the cost and continue?

Count the cost

I started to name this post "How much is that doggy in the window," but decided that most people wouldn't get the point (that phrase is from a VERY old song - older than me).

One of my favorite Bible verses is Luke 14:28. Roughly it says you should "Count the Cost" before building a house. You need to know the cost of the house before you start, otherwise you'll run out of money partway through. Of course in today's world, you wouldn't run out, you'd just run down to the bank and take out a mortgage or you'd whip out your credit card.

It occurs to me that there are times when you don't count the cost. If you're in an accident, you don't shop around for the cheapest ambulance service, you call 911 and take the first one that gets there. After the bill comes, you figure out how to pay. If you have a heart attack, you don't ask the doctor ahead of time "How much is this going to cost?" or "do I have enough money in the bank?" If your roof is leaking, you may call around for the best price/service, but you will go ahead and get it fixed, regardless how much it costs (or at least you should).

Certainly you should have money saved up to cover these kinds of cost, but that's not the subject of this post (maybe a follow-up). My question is, what situations merit this type behavior? Maybe you need a new high-def TV, but not sure whether or not you can afford it. Ok, that's probably an extreme example, but suppose your car is failing. You need a car to get to work. And because of the kids, it has to be a safe car. Do you count the cost or just go out and buy a 2010 BMW. Those cars are safe and reliable.

So my question to you is, when do you count the cost and when do you just go out and do something? This could apply to items like cars, medical treatments, etc. and it could also apply to government.

It's beginning to sound a lot like Christmas

At our house, Christmas music started playing before Thanksgiving. The tree went up Thanksgiving day, was decorated and Christmas shopping is almost complete (no thanks to me). One thing I've noticed is that there is a limited number of Christmas songs, so you end up hearing the same ones over and over (and over).

It struck me the other day that there should be a law prohibiting anyone but Burl Ives recording "Have a Holly Jolly Christmas." No, I didn't hear another version (maybe the law already exists and I didn't know it), but as I listened and sang along, I decided that was the only version I wanted to hear. Somehow, I can't picture Taylor Swift singing that song.

Some songs - Jingle Bells for example, can be sung by anyone and sound good. But when anyone other than Bing Crosby (not to be confused with Bill Cosby) sings "White Christmas" it just doesn't come out right.

There are other songs which "belong" to a single artist - Elvis Presley's "Blue Christmas" is one that comes to mind (although the Porky Pig version is pretty good). What about you?

What songs would you limit to a single artist?

Moderation is for monks....

A few weeks ago, I received some comments on my blog for very old blog posts. I don't mind, but these were obviously spam. So I turned on moderation for old posts.

However, I didn't realize that I had to actively look for comments held in moderation. This morning I found I had 15 comments held, all but one were spam.

I look at this as a good news/bad news situation, I had 14 spam comments held and you, my loyal reader, won't have to bother with those. Unfortunately, one valid comment was held by my ignorance. My sincere apologies.

As it is, anyone (including anonymous readers) can comment on recent blog posts. If the post is over 14 days old, I will moderate. I will ONLY reject comments that seem to be spam - ads for medical sales or other sales. If you feel I have rejected your comment unfairly, either email me (my email address is in my profile) or comment on a more recent post.

I will not reject posts that simply disagree with me (that would get rid of most of my comments).

Thanks to all who comment.

P.S. Anyone know the rest of the quote in the subject line?

Another loss...

I've used this forum in the past to eulogize people close to me that have passed on. Today, I want to talk about another loss, this time our pet, Toby.

Toby was born on March 9, 1995 and turned 14 earlier this year. Based on my math, that made him over 100 in dog years. Back then, we went to visit his mother's owner's house and when the kids saw puppies, they had to have one. We picked one out and came back a few weeks later to take him home. On April 29, Toby moved to his new home - we had a pet.

Looking through some records, I found that Toby was 8.4 pounds on his first doctor visit a few weeks after we got him. I recall that he was so small we worried he would get stuck in a 4 inch drain pipe (I put a cover on the pipe to keep that from happening). He soon outgrew that risk all together.




Toby was a mix of breeds. Primarily Black Lab, he also had a lot of Border Collie in him and possibly some Chow. This made him a loving, fun dog. The Border Collie made his hair long as seen in these pictures. When we had him groomed the first time, his hair had gotten matted and it was past time. The only way they could groom him was to cut his hair in some places all the way to the skin. When we picked him up, they told us not to laugh at him, that it would embarrass him. I remember thinking "HE'S A DOG!".

But then he came out with his tail (literally) between his legs. He was indeed embarrassed. We praised him and told him how good he looked. After that, every time he was groomed, he walked around with his head held high, proud of his new look.


In 1998, Toby moved with the rest of us to Greenville, SC. He took the move well and made the deck his primary sleeping place. He would stand on the deck and survey HIS backyard.

Lately, Toby spent more time inside. When my grandson started crawling, he would crawl all over Toby. Toby just lay there, taking it all in. If it got too rough, Toby would simply get up and move outside.


In the last few years, Toby had developed arthritis. We treated this with some medicine from the vet. When he first began taking the medicine, he reacted very well. He seemed to even dance when we would roll up the pill in a slice of cheese. But unfortunately, the arthritis seemed to adapt to the medicine and he soon slowed down again and stopped dancing.

This past year, Toby had trouble standing up from a laying down position. He got around this by standing longer than he should. Of course, this made his legs hurt more. When we had him groomed, he lay in the floor for a couple days to recuperate.



In recent weeks, he had fallen 2 or 3 times and had trouble getting back up. He had lost a lot of muscle mass in his hips and body. The doctor said that this usually meant some form of cancer.

At his age, doing more diagnostics didn't make sense. If we found some cancer, it's unlikely he could stand the treatment.

Trips to the vet had become painful for Toby. Even getting up out of the floor was painful. After a lot of soul searching, I had to make a decision on what was easiest for him. So after 14+1/2 years, I decided it was time to end Toby's pain.

The hardest part of this was calling the kids and telling them. We had talked about it for a few weeks, so hopefully it wasn't a surprise. But I know it's hard on them to loose a pet that has been a part of the family for so long.


We will always remember Toby and the joy he brought us.

Tobias "Toby" Andrew Barnett
March 9, 1995 - December 2, 2009

The Blind Side - Movie Review

Sunday, after all the kids were gone and we had our empty nest to ourselves again, my wife and I did the logical thing - we went to a movie. With another couple. Yep, we finally had our house and our selves alone and we left and joined others.

The movie was my wife's choice - The Blind Side. My thought was that any movie with Sandra Bullock in it can't be all bad. As Warren (the male half of the other couple) put it - "She's hot!" And after a disappointing weekend of football, this movie promised a little good football. Sure it was going to be a "chick-flick", but hey, if the wife's happy, I'm happy.

Much to my surprise, I really liked The Blind Side. In the movie, Bullock's character adopts a boy from the streets and helps him out. We follow the young man through high school to college and the issues that go with him. Life wasn't simple. It wasn't handed to him on a silver platter or even on a KFC paper plate. But (no secret - Micheal Oher's in pro-football now) he makes it.

I won't give any spoilers here, but there were a lot of memorable lines. My favorite was when Bullock's character was asked about the gun she was carrying. Asked if it were a Saturday night special, she replied "Yep. And it works good the other days too." Man, she's a tough lady.

There were good "non-lines" too, places where the actions say more than words. As Bullock walks off the football field in a tight dress, all of the players (who had mothers her age), tilted their heads to watch her walk off the field. As Warren said, "she's hot!"

I had one more favorite line, I won't quote the line here - you'll have to see the movie to hear it. But it was a line every mother should tell her son as he heads off to college. She explained to her adopted son what her reaction would be if he got a girl pregnant.

There were a lot of loose ends in the movie. There were four minor parts that I felt like were brought in or taken out with little or no tie-in. Oher's brother was brought in one scene (and a few hazy flashbacks), but was never mentioned again. Another boy who Oher went to school with was never seen after school started. And late in the movie a boy was killed that had no previous tie-in (unless he was the boy that Oher started school with - if so, I missed it). And finally, Oher's real mother - no mention of her after her big scene. But life is full of loose ends, like the guy I went to school with - last I looked, he was still in trouble with the law.

All in all, a good movie. I give it a B+ (it didn't "wow" me enough for an A). Very little profanity, no sex scenes and very little violence. I checked IMDb and it's rated PG13, I'm surprised it wasn't PG. I strongly recommend the movie.

Complete Savings

Last night my wife discovered a charge on her account that shouldn't have been there. After a call to the 800# on the line item, I discovered it was a company named Complete Savings. Apparently, she had purchased something online (a few months ago) and somehow signed up for a Complete Savings membership. We're not sure how this happened, but let's assume this part is true.

"Maria", at Complete Savings, asked some basic information - last name and zip code - and then verified that information. She then verified the email address as some limited form of ID protection. At no time did she ask a credit card number or any other "sensitive" information. She explained the benefits to membership and offered me some solutions to the charge. She could cancel my (our) membership or I could log on to the website and explore the benefits more. I opted for canceling.

"Maria" explained that I still had 30 days to explore the website and that no future charges would occur. She was very polite about it. I said (not asked) that she could also reverse the charge. She said she could do that, and unfortunately it would cancel my membership immediately. I told her that was fine and she explained it would take 3-5 business days to see the credit on my account.

All in all, this was a reasonably pleasant exchange. How my wife's information got to this company, I don't know, but we plan to email the company we did purchase from to follow up. Before "Maria" answered the phone, there was a series of prompts that asked for Social Security number or charge card number, but I refused to enter it and just hit "0" for an operator. After a not-too-long wait, I got a real person who spoke at least decent English.

The worst part of the process was dealing with my bank. I wanted them to block the charge and they explained that they would have to block the card completely. This seems contrary to what I've heard that Visa Debit will do for you and I'll have to investigate some more.

Moral of the story is that you should follow up on things like this and quickly address the problem. It took less than 30 minutes total to resolve this problem.

Comments, comments

Recently, I've gotten some comments that are less than stellar. These have mostly been on old blog posts and I found out I can moderate posts older than 14 days. This seemed a reasonable compromise to me, as I really don't want to moderate. I spend too many hours away from the computer and wouldn't be able to moderate in a timely fashion.

Just today I got a post on a recent blog entry that seems a little racy. I can't guarantee that the link that was posted is to a porn site, but it sure sounds that way and I'm not going to test it.

So what to do? Do I turn on moderation and only allow legitimate posts? Or do I just accept this as part of the cost? It actually shows that my blog is hitting higher on some search engine somewhere, so I guess that's a good thing.

(Note, I posted this entry twice. In the process of some other clean up, I deleted the first entry).