Unnecessarily Complex:  Volume 1

Paul Ryan’s Road Map has a few extraneous loop-de-loops that need to be straightened out before it’s good enough for ME!     I advise my friends up here to read his plan very carefully.     As the devil IS in the details, and Ryan’s plan has its share of those pesky little beasties.

Let me begin by saying Ryan’s roadmap has many really great things in it.  (IMHO)   But…….    It’s those “buts” that will cause us some of those “unintended consequences” unless we proceed with caution. 

This is labeled “Unnecessarily Complex: Volume 1” because there are more loop-de-dos than can be chewed on at once.   And bring a lunch when you link to read Ryan’s roadmap, it is one long puppy.     But, go read it!   READ THAT BILL!  

http://www.roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/plan

We Tea Party folk need to provide DIRECTION for our representatives or they cannot satisfy our desires.    That means you have to read the plan the rep’s are endorsing, then engage in the public debate to bat the ideas around…  THEN we go back and tell them what to do.    

We no tell = they no do.

Based on Ryan’s plan, we’d best get started doing some “Telling” or the republicans are going to mire us in a bit more mud than we want on our boots.

Creating a plan.

When you create a plan you do not start with “what is”, or “who struck John”.  You first determine what it is you WANT TO ACHIEVE.   Then you determine where “Never-Never Land” is.   Those places we tell government they may not tread, the limits of their authority.  THEN you build outward from there.

So.  What DO we want to achieve?   My K.I.S.S summation would be à

We want a nation of self reliant, prosperous, and free communities of Americans, bound together by the rule of law, and common national interests, guided by the wisdom of our forefathers, and blessed by God.

What do we want to achieve on the personal, or family level?   (IMHO) We want every American to accumulate sufficient assets so they do not become a burden on charity.     Not all will even try, but that does not mean we don’t want them to have the opportunities to do so.

If our objective is for families to accumulate enough assets to care for themselves and support the charitable efforts of their communities as well, than the first “Never-Never” we lay upon our servants (we just elected) is: Assets accumulated by American citizens may not be taxed.   That restriction includes the transference of estates from one generation to another.

IF (asset accumulation = objective) THEN (no confiscatory taxes on assets) ELSE (you fail to achieve the objective).       IF – THEN – ELSE = LOGIC 

How stupid is it to take away from our neighbors what we WANT them to accumulate, so they shall not burden US in later years?    Pretty darn DUMB!

Just because it’s THERE, in someone’s account, does not mean we-the-people have the right to touch it.  The government must reflect our will, or it’s not ours.  If it IS ours then it’s we-the-people who make the rules.    Boil those rules down to the level of what you think YOU have the right to do to your neighbor and things become pretty clear, not complicated at all.    

We’d best be wise!   When we have more than we need we give stuff away.  But if someone tries to TAKE out stuff, then no matter how much we have to, we will fight like a dog over that bone.    Mine to give does not equal yours to take. 

 It’s not the “government” doing the taking… It’s US doing it to our neighbors.    Shall we continue to allow it?     I think not.

Ryan’s tax plan would take 25% of YOUR income once you get above the “poverty line” THEY define and finagle the rates annually.   Now, I ask you all, is there anything RIGHT about taking ¼ of everything a person earns FOR ANY REASON?????

Don’t forget, this does nothing about property tax, or state taxes, or all the other cutsie little taxes and fees they have scattered through our lives which can easily add up to over half your income.   Is it RIGHT for us to have to work half our lives to support a GREEDY bunch of bureaucrats with utopian delusions of grandeur? 

I think not.  

If our objective is to keep our elderly in their homes, and reduce general homelessness, then the next “Never-Never” would be: No branch of government is authorized to confiscate a persons home (private property/assets) without first having a civil or criminal trial by a jury of their peers.

Inability to pay taxes shall not justify the confiscation of a person’s home, ever.   Judges may not order the confiscation of property for offenses other than those so designated by specific legislation.    Only the courts can rule on confiscatory cases, no agency (IRS) or other branch of government.

Where is it RIGHT for us to allow government to seize a person’s home when they loose the ability to pay TAXES!!!!     I think NOT!

If our objective is to create self-reliant communities, then a big “Never-Never” is no higher branch of government shall interfere in the day-to-day management and planning of community affairs, nor may they dictate how their collective community assets shall be utilized without providing full external funding for any mandate that increases costs.

The higher levels of government’s role in community affairs should be that of an auditor to provide oversight to ensure all laws are being honored, and no one has their hand in the community cookie jar.   But, if a town’s citizens wants to ban Walmart types stores to preserve their community economy, then that is their RIGHT!   A right no county, state, or federal government has the authority to interfere with.

If our objective is to get government out of health care, then one “Never-Never” is Ryan’ Roadmap.  Oh, it cuts a FEW strings but leaves the hawser attached that keeps health care tied to government agencies.   I started thinking about duct tape after reading that section.

Stay tuned for another Unnecessarily Complex Volume for more on that.   It will take a bit of typing to do Health Care.     Contemplate on the nature of “communities” in the interim.    Make of list of what is needed for a self-reliant community to flourish.

The Kicker for Volume 1:  Social Security Reform

If our objective is to ensure the retirement security of the public, than what should be a “Never-Never” is actually a part of Ryan’s plan.    The statement below, from his plan, is what made me run for the duct tape, flex my fingers, and start this series.   They STILL don’t get it!

We STILL have work to do!

Ryan’s plan says: “Those who choose the personal account option will have the opportunity to begin investing a significant portion of their payroll taxes into a series of funds managed by the U.S. government.”

That’s one darn big loop-de-loop to ME!   I don’t know about you, but the government “managing” my funds certainly does not engender feelings of security.    This is one of those “Not only NO, but HELL NO!” issues IMHO.

The role of the government in personal retirement accounts (PRA’s) should be they “certify” an AMERICAN financial institution's fund portfolio of AMERICAN industries (only), for PRA accounts.   None of it goes overseas.   All of it stays to rattle around in the American economy.   The symbol of that certification is the institution earns FDIC status.    Government may also define the features and options to be made available.  (too detailed for this volume).

What government should never do (IMHO) is “manage” the funds.  Nor may they restrict American’s choices of institutions, be they certified FDIC.  Nor may they have any authority to TOUCH a private citizen’s PRA in any manner.  Nor should they be able to deny any citizen the right to "opt out" of all government intervention in their retirement planning.   Thank's Mom, but I CAN do it myself! 

They may only certify the PRA is covered by FDIC policies, to ensure the deposits of citizens, after appropriate due-diligence investigations, and continuous monitoring of an insured fund’s portfolio. 

Ryan’s plan says some citizens will receive a better rate of return on their PRA based upon their socioeconomic status, TBD by bureaucrats, of course.    So if you are poor you get a better “interest” rate than if you are middle class.    Something squiggly about that one.   Sounds like more “redistribution” to me.    Phony interest rates???   The FEDS investing my funds in what THEY want?   I think not!   We've been down that road once already.. to the cliff edge. 

Ryan’s plan also says Americans will only be allowed to save a small percentage of their income in PRA’s.    Why?    It says some folk will be ALLOWED to save more than others.    Huh???  Why should we ALL not be ALLOWED to put as much away as we can while we’re making good pay, so when we might not make any at all we have a buffer?

Why is it the government’s right to tell us how much we can choose to SAVE for retirement?   Oh.  I see.   It’s so they can TAX OUR INCOME more, not LET us put pretax dollars away!   So we have less TO save.   So we have less to take care of OURSELVES when we need it.   So we are more dependent on THEM?????     I think NOT!   Look where depending on them got us.   To the brink of destruction, teetering on the edge. 

CONCLUSION

My friends.   We must have this discussion about Social Security and define EXACTLY how we want it to work, or sure as God made little red applies THEY will SNAFU it one more time.    Politicians are experts at SNAFU creation.

We don’t HAVE one more time to TRY to get it right.   We MUST get it right THIS TIME.    That means y’all have to do your homework and go read Ryan’s plan.   Mark the things you like and the things you don’t.    But don't get bored three pages in and quit because those pesky little details are buried in the fine print. 

So.  Let’s make our list, and check it more than twice!    What do YOU think we need to do?    Let us thrash out our own future, here, together, and NOW!   Before our new kids in Congress go galloping down the wrong path with coltish enthusiasm.

Here is the beginning of Nora's Never-Never list, summarized from above;

1.Assets can't be taxed only income. 

2.Homes may not be confiscated by government, only via a trial by a jury of our peers. 

3.Community government's rights to Home Rule shall not be infringed. 

4.Government may not "manage" health care.  Oversight is their role.

5.Government may not "manage" retirement accounts.   Oversight is their role.   

That list of Never-Nevers is the roadmap WE need to develop for our freshman congress to follow.   We must draw the lines for them that government shall not cross.    Then a plan can be created within those boundaries.     Let's define Never-Never Land for our bouncing baby congress kids, least they stray, unintentionally and with honorable intent, on to the wrong road.  Again!

Sincerely,

Nora Craig

http://www.teapartynation.com/forum/topics/watch-out-for-ryans-road...