It seems that every couple of days New Orleans loses one of its treasured ENTREPRENEURS:

Lets get the players straight before we go on with this. Interpretation of data (not verified) but…

LARMONDO "FLAIR" ALLEN
His Companion: Kawanner Armstrong
His Sons : Christian Allen
Kwan Allen
Larmondo Allen, Jr.

His Daughters: Deidra Allen
Larmenshell Allen
Lamonshea Allen
Larmomdriel Allen
Larmerja Allen
Korevell Allen

AT AGE 25 – He had 9 Children.
(Could Kawanner Armstrong Possibly Be The Mother Of All Of His Kids?)

His Father: Burnell Thompson
His Mother: Esther Allen
His Stepfather: Bruce Gordy

His Brothers: Burnell Thompson
Edgar Thompson
Wil Willis
Danta Edwards
Reshe Edwards
Mattnell Allen
Burnell Allen
Lester Allen

His Sisters: Shannail Craig
Lekiksha Thompson
Gwendolyn Carter
Jessica Willis
Katina Gordy

Grandparents: Delors Allen
J.C. Allen
Anna Laura Thompson
Will Thompson

So, lets see now….

His Father, Burnell Thompson, fathered his brothers Burnell, Edgar and his sister Lekiksha.
His Stepfather, Bruce Gordy, fathered his Sister Katina.
His Mother, Esther Allen, must have been unwed when she gave birth to: Larmondo, Mattnell, Burnell and Lester.
We don’t know who fathered Wil Willis and Jessica Willis, or Dante and Reshe Edwards.
Lets hope sisters Shannail Craig and Gwendolyn Carter are married.

GOT THE ABOVE ALL STRAIGHT?

***********************************************

NOW, THE REST OF THE STORY

He was 25 and had 3 sons and 6 daughters.
NINE welfare recipients collecting $950 each…..
That equals $8,550 a month !!! Now add Food Stamps,
Free medical, Free school lunches, and on and on
Do the math… $102,000+ /year.
Anyone out there, sittin’ on their butt while reading this post, making A HUNDRED GRAND doing nothing?

Now that, to me, is a real Entrepreneur.

Also, because of their father’s death, all of the kids will collect social security until they are 18. Even better… if "Flair’s" thirteein brothers and sisters followd his entrepreneurial strategy — that’s an additional $1.3 million per year.

BUT WAIT…THERE’S MORE!

If all thirteen brothers and sisters can duplicate his feat of 9 welfare strategists that breeds 117 new recipients collecting $100,000 per year each !!!… or an additional $11,700,000 per year… And that’s just one family.

(To cover this requires 100% of the Taxes Paid by 1,000 avg. taxpayers)

And THAT is why America is BANKRUPT!!

ANY QUESTIONS?

Originally posted 2010-01-15 17:16:37. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

From a woman in Arizona  who writes
an open letter to our nation’s leadership: 

“I am a home grown American citizen, 53, registered Democrat all my life. Before the last presidential election I registered as a Republican because I no longer felt the Democratic Party represents my views or works to pursue issues important to me. Now I no longer feel the Republican Party represents my views or works to pursue issues important to me. The fact is I no longer feel  any political party or representative in Washington represents my views or works to pursue the issues important to me. Instead, we are burdened with Congressional Dukes and Duchesses who think they know better than the citizens they are supposed to represent. 

There must be someone. Please tell me who you are. Please stand up and tell me that you are there and that you’re  willing to fight for our Constitution as it was written . Please stand up now.
You might ask yourself what my views and issues are that I would feel so horribly disenfranchised by both major political parties. What kind of nut-job am I? Well, these briefly are the views and issues for which I seek representation: 

 One,  illegal immigration. I want you to stop coddling illegal immigrants and secure our borders. Close the underground tunnels.. Stop the violence and the trafficking in drugs and people. No amnesty, not again. Been there, done that, no resolution. 

P.S., I’m not a racist. This is not to be confused with  legal immigration. 

 Two, the STIMULUS bill. I want it  repealed and I want no further funding supplied to it. We told you No, but you did it anyway. I want the remaining unfunded 95% repealed. Freeze, repeal. 

 Three: Czars. I want the circumvention of our constitutional checks and balances stopped immediately.  Fire the czars. No more czars. Government officials answer to the process, not to the president. Stop trampling on our Constitution, and honor it. 

 Four, cap and trade. The debate on global warming is not over. There are many conflicting opinions and it is too soon for this radical legislation. Quit throwing our nation into politically-correct quicksand. 

 Five, universal healthcare. I will not be rushed into another expensive decision that will burden me, my children, and grandchildren.  Don’t you dare try to pass this in the middle of the night without even reading it. Slow down!  Fix only what is broken — we have the best health care system in the world — and test any new program in one or two states first. 

 Six, growing government control. I want states rights and sovereignty fully restored.  I want less government in my life, not more. More is not better! Shrink it down. Mind your own business.  You have enough to take care of with your real [Constitutional] obligations. Why don’t you start there. 

 Seven, ACORN. I do not want ACORN and its affiliates in charge of our 2010 census. I want them investigated. I also do not want mandatory escrow fees contributed to them every time on every real estate deal that closes — how did they pull that one off?   Stop the funding to ACORN and its affiliates pending impartial audits and investigations. I do not trust them with taking the census with our taxpayer money. I don’t trust them with any of our taxpayer money. Face up to the allegations against them and get it resolved before taxpayers get any more involved with them.  If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, hello. Stop protecting your political buddies. You work for us, the people. Investigate. 

 Eight, redistribution of wealth.  No, no, no . I work for my money. It is mine. I have always worked for people with more money than I have because they gave me jobs – and that is the only redistribution of wealth that I will support. I never got a job from a poor person! Why do you want me to hate my employers? And what do you have against shareholders making a profit? 

 Nine, charitable contributions. Although I never got a job from a poor person, I have helped many in need. Charity belongs in our local communities, where we know our needs best and can use our local talent and our local resources.  Butt out, please. We want to do it ourselves.. 

 Ten, corporate bailouts. Knock it off. Every company must sink or swim like the rest of us. If there are hard times ahead, we’ll be better off just getting into it and letting the strong survive. Quick and painful. (Have you ever ripped off a Band-Aid?) We will pull together. Great things happen in America under great hardship. Give us the chance to innovate. We cannot disappoint you more than you have disappointed us. 

 Eleven, transparency and accountability. How about it? No, really, how about it?  Let’s have it. Let’s say we give the buzzwords a rest and have some straight honest talk.. Please stop trying to manipulate and appease me with clever wording.. I am not the idiot you obviously take me for.. Stop sneaking around and meeting in back rooms making deals with your friends. It will only be a prelude to your criminal investigation. Stop hiding things from me. 

 Twelve, unprecedented quick spending.  Stop it now.
Take a breath.  Listen to the people. Slow down and get some input from nonpoliticians and experts on the subject. Stop making everything an emergency. Stop speed-reading our bills into law. I am not an activist.. I am not a community organizer. Nor am I a terrorist, a militant or a violent person. I am a parent and a grandparent.. I work. I’m busy.  I am busy, and I am tired. I thought we elected competent people to take care of the business of government so that we could work, raise our families, pay our bills, have a little recreation, complain about taxes, endure our hardships, pursue our personal goals, cut our lawn, wash our cars on the weekends and be responsible contributing members of society and teach our children to be the same all while living in the home of the free and land of the brave. 

 I entrusted you with upholding the Constitution. I believed in the checks and balances to keep from getting far off course. What happened? You are very far off course. Do you really think I find humor in the hiring of a speed reader to unintelligently ramble all through a bill that you signed into law without knowing what it contained? I do not.
It is a mockery of the responsibility I have entrusted to you. It is a slap in the face.  I am not laughing at your  arrogance. Why is it that I feel as if you would not trust me to make a single decision about my own life and how I would live it but you should expect that I should trust you with the debt that you have laid on all of us and our children. We did not want the TARP bill.. We said no. We would repeal it if we could. I am sure that we still cannot. There is needless urgency and recklessness in all of your recent spending of our tax dollars. 

From my perspective, it seems that all of you have gone insane. I also know that I am far from alone in these feelings. Do you honestly feel that your current pursuits have merit to patriotic Americans? We want it to stop. We want to put the brakes on everything that is being rushed by us and forced upon us. We want our voice back. You have forced us to put our lives on hold to straighten out the mess that you are making. We will have to give up our vacations, our time spent with our children, any relaxation time we may have had and money we cannot afford to spend on bringing our concerns to Washington . Our president often knows all the right buzzwords like unsustainable. Well, no kidding. How many tens of thousands of dollars did the focus group cost to come up with that word? We don’t want your overpriced words. Stop treating us like we’re morons. 

We want all of you to stop focusing on your reelection and do the job we want done, not the job you want done or the job your party wants done. You work for us and at this rate I guarantee you not for long because we are coming. We will be heard and we will be represented.. You think we’re so busy with our lives that we will never come for you? We are the formerly silent majority, all of us who quietly work, pay taxes, obey the law, vote, save money, keep our noses to the grindstone… and we are now looking at you.
You have awakened us, the patriotic freedom spirit so strong and so powerful that it had been sleeping too long. You have pushed us too far. Our numbers are great. They may surprise you. For every one of us who will be there, there will be hundreds more that could not come. Unlike you, we have their trust. We will represent them honestly, rest assured. They will be at the polls on voting day to usher you out of office.  

We have cancelled vacations. We will use our last few dollars saved. We will find the representation among us and a grassroots campaign will flourish. We didn’t ask for this fight. But the gloves are coming off. We do not come in violence, but we are angry. You will represent us or you will be replaced with someone who will. There are candidates among us who will rise like a Phoenix from the ashes that you have made of our constitution. 

Democrat, Republican, independent, libertarian. Understand this.. We don’t care. Political parties are meaningless to us Patriotic Americans are willing to do right by us and our Constitution, and that is all that matters to us now.. We are going to fire all of you who abuse power and seek more. It is not your power. It is ours and we want it back. We entrusted you with it and you abused it. You are dishonorable. You are dishonest. As Americans we are ashamed of you. You have brought shame to us. If you are not representing the wants and needs of your constituency loudly and consistently, in spite of the objections of your party, you will be fired. Did you hear? We no longer care about your political parties. You need to be loyal to us, not to them.. Because we will get you fired and they will not save you. 

If you do or can represent me, my issues, my views, please stand up. Make your identity known. You need to make some noise about it. Speak up. I need to know who you are. If you do not speak up, you will be herded out with the rest of the sheep and we will replace the whole damn congress if need be one by one. 

We are coming. Are we coming for you? Who do you represent? What do you represent? 

Listen. Because we are coming. We the people are coming.”

---

This letter is rapidly circulating around the country. Americans everywhere identify with this 53-year-old woman. She has given us a voice. Once you read this, you will want to forward it to all of your friends…

Select this link or the icon below
to forward this article by email

Originally posted 2009-06-29 20:46:54. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

It was a beautiful day on Long Island today, as my daughter fussed over her cap and gown, getting ready for her high school graduation. The rite of passage that is the graduation ceremony was to be the highlight of our day, the last ritual before going away to college and beginning her new academic and social life away from home and the heretofore familiar surroundings. As most fathers are at this stage, I am very proud of her and her achievements to date and am confident she will do great in college.

As we arrived at the school athletic fields where the ceremony was to take place for the over 600 graduating seniors, the school principal and various dignitaries from the board of education were all lined up to fulfill their respective roles in the process. Among them the familiar face of Charles (Chuck) Schumer, the senior senator from New York was to give the commencement speech.

Opening the ceremony, the senator started with his speech, and I was surprised to hear the exact same one I heard 2 years ago at my older daughter’s graduation. Thinking this to be a bit odd and frankly somewhat lazy, I paid little attention to the drone of “how I became a senator” until the speech’s concluding remarks. The culminating point of the speech was Schumer’s self-aggrandizing statement of having successfully sponsored a new $2,500 tax credit program for middle-class families. Under the program, which will run for 2 years, families will be entitled to claim a $2,500 tax credit per each student enrolled in college, provided that their income meets certain maximum threshold provisions, which he stated would be capped at $200,000.

“For each of you earning less than $200,000, you will now be able to afford to send your children to college,” said the senator. “For those of you making $200,000 and above – well, God bless you.” The audience reacted with an energetic applause to this not so subtle example of class warfare rhetoric.

Setting aside the inaccuracy of the qualifying income limit (according to our research, when combined with the HOPE credit and other tax laws, the qualifying income limit may in fact be $60K for single and $120K for families), the principle notion of government sponsorship of college education based on financial need as opposed to merit should be of some concern.

By targeting the nation’s financial resources on programs which aid less affluent prospective students, we have fundamentally abandoned any notions of meritocracy and replaced them with a need-based social construct. While clearly a popular position among most Americans since it is portrayed as a caring gesture of the government (who would object to receiving a seemingly free gift or in this case benefit, i.e. the proverbial something for nothing?), we should examine its consequences, as in most cases many of them end up being unintended and in the greater context, undesirable.

Should the affluence level of the student’s family be the driving measure in the allocation of government subsidies for the student to attend college?

We are conditioned to answer this question in the affirmative, since in our politically correct dialect the less affluent are part of an affirmative action class. It is therefore our societal obligation, we are taught, to provide access to our nation’s financial resources on a preferred basis to those who are most in need of them, without regard to their individual contribution or their ability to make best use of such resources.

To what degree do we value fairness in the distribution of government financial aid for college education, or does the principle of equality trump all others?

As modern day Americans we don’t seem to place much value on fairness in the manner in which government serves its people. I’ve written on the distinction between equality and fairness in the June 13, 2000 article “Let’s not Confuse Equality and Fairness”. The article exposes our progressively degenerating definition of equality from what was our Founding Fathers’ original intent (equality of opportunity and not that of outcome) to the present socio-marxist interpretation of “… to each according to his needs.” In the long run, the dogmatic adherence to equality according to one’s need necessarily must lead to a polarization of the society and, instead of creating the intended harmony between income classes, it creates an increasingly greater rift between them. Meritocracy has to be, to a dominant extent, interwoven into the decision process in order for a society to survive and thrive.

Since we are now competing for minds in a global economy, how do we rank in their midst?

Since we’ve conceded that the optimal distribution of resources to produce the most effective outcome (only achievable through a merit based allocation) is not the goal, we therefore accept mediocrity as a satisfactory outcome. This, beyond any other force, is likely to have the most far reaching impact on the quality of citizens our education system produces over the long run. Comparing our policies with those of China, India and most European countries, where college entry is earned primarily through exceptional performance, the divergence in the intellectual quality of their college graduates as compared with those coming out of US schools is already becoming more apparent.

Many who would not consider themselves to be affluent, have historically not been able to qualify for any meaningful financial aid precisely because of their tax dollars being dispersed according to an equality formula that has very little, if anything to do with the benefit that the dollars spent will produce. In the case of my daughter, who graduated high school in the top 5% of her class of over 600, her acceptance into a number of very good schools was not matched with any meaningful financial contribution from the government. We ended up making a reasonable compromise, but I have not yet come up with a good way of explaining to her why her excellent performance and exceptional efforts were not recognized by the government of a country of which she will once be a leader.

* * * * *

Quotation of the Day:

“Let us think of education as the means of developing our greatest abilities, because in each of us there is a private hope and dream which, fulfilled, can be translated into benefit for everyone and greater strength for our nation.”

John F. Kennedy (1917 – 1963)

* * * * *

We welcome your comments and suggestions, either directly inline, or via email to editor@nakedliberty.com. If you would like to have your article published in Naked Liberty, please contact the editor at the above email address.

Click Here to Subscribe to Naked Liberty Articles by Email

 

Originally posted 2009-06-05 23:12:14. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

Two Personalities

* There is bliss in knowing that we are provided for, that our needs are met. When we are provided for, we are left to a state of intense fulfillment and a rich sense of enjoyment of our life. Engulfing oneself in such a state leaves all matters of duty, responsibility and obligation outside of our cocoon. Outside of this bubble, others clamor to fill the void in control which we’ve left behind.

* We strive to impose our will onto situations and manipulate conditions to our will. By so doing, we carve our own path through life, meticulously building our lives in the image we had set out at the onset. Leaving things to chance is avoided at all cost. Careful planning is the mantra, behind which controlled execution leads to advancement toward our stated goals.

These descriptions, while sounding harshly opposite and incompatible, in fact describe the two conditions of the modern man. Indeed, they might even describe the same man at different stages of his maturation within the society.

We are all born into different circumstances and our upbringing materially influences our perception of the importance of maintaining control over our lives – something we call empowerment and self determination.

The material conditions in which a child is raised – weather in poverty, in middle class comfort or within a high level of affluence – affect the later adult differently insofar as the way in which the individual perceives their need to self determine his destiny. Of these three classes, the poor and the wealthy, particularly when in their extreme, tend to gravitate toward placing little importance, or outright dismissing of such need. On the other hand, the middle class individual tends to cherish this right and value its importance in defining his life’s course.

Both Poverty and Wealth Influence Liberal Thinking

An individual born into poverty, by the time he becomes an adult member of society, has likely developed a sense of hopelessness. In all likelihood, he and his immediate surrounding have drawn on the society’s support resources for much of their life and known little opportunity to witness the results of their own contributions. Self-determination is not a practical objective when survival and subsistence absorb the focus of daily activities. Dependence on support systems becomes complete with diminishing opportunity to divorce oneself from their perpetual grasp. There are few if any support systems which aid in the building of the individual’s self esteem, or to teach him to creatively engage in activities that yield the betterment of his condition.

An affluent individual that has achieved a high measure of wealth and comfort progressively becomes more and more withdrawn from the productive part of society. Once a predictably affluent lifestyle is achieved, the individual no longer feels the need to control many aspects of his life, and is willing to relinquish such control to the support system that his wealth has produced. Self determination is no longer a principle goal as wealth has dampened the individuals desire to further contribute to his surrounding and society at large.

In either case – poverty or affluence – a desire to absolve oneself from the societal expectations arising from empowerment, succumbs the individual into accepting a system which will provide for him and relieve him of the high expectations which self determination would otherwise impose on him. In one case, the support system is structured around government social programs; in the other, it is built by the individual to support his own needs. In either case, the individual is inexorably drawn toward promoting a liberal attitude which, because it defines his life and is necessary for his existence, he both accepts and actively cultivates.

The liberal thus created considers his condition to be permanent and has little desire to change it.

Conservatism – The Middle Class Ideology Alternative

This is contrasted with the mindset of a person cultivated in the traditions and upbringing of the middle class. To the middle class, affluence is an attainable goal. It is within reach, provided that one exercises control in a prudent and well thought out way. Any support systems created by the government, even though they may cushion an unintended fall, act as a repelling force which, when approached, remind the individual of the consequences of the loss of control over their own destiny. Becoming caught in their web is typically a source of embarrassment, but not resignation.

The middle class individual considers his position in society as transient; not as a destiny but rather as a path toward his fulfillment of attainable goals. He gazes up toward examples of success and models his behavior so as to maximize his chances of fleeing his current state. He is not angry with those who have excelled beyond his own levels of success. Instead, he learns from observing them and adjusts his actions to improve his own measures. He detests acquiescence and is infuriated by his own failures and others acceptance of failure. His attitude is strongly shaped by the Constitution’s founding principles, which act as both a guiding light and also provide the boundaries within which his actions are contained.

Most importantly, the middle class conservative is not willing to relinquish (or delegate) the controls necessary for him to craft his own path toward fulfillment.

Call To Action

While conservative principals of self determination are natural to the spirit of every human being, people need to be cultivated into accepting of dependence as a way of life. Liberalism is not an equilibrium to which all forces draw, but rather an unnatural state which needs to be constantly built up and reinforced, lest it collapses of its own artificial weight. Certainly history gives many examples of such implosions.

Yet in our society, the marketing of socialism and extreme liberalism has been masterfully crafted and is being executed before our eyes. Conservatives should make particular note of the dominance of liberal ideology among the poor and the affluent.

The affluent, as compared to the poor, are considerably more resistant to change and, while they represent a relatively small part of the population, their influence is multiplied by virtue of their wealth and notoriety. Fortunately, they represent a culture of followers more so then leaders, and will be heavily influenced by the outcome of the attitude change in the masses. As a result, to affect a change in their behavior and philosophy requires no specific actions other than those applied to the other, more important social group – the poor.

The poor represent a considerably larger pool of the population, into which intelligently designed and strategically injected conservative programs can create a magnified effect of positive influence and potential derivative results. Such programs should promote small business development opportunities and should target individuals who have demonstrated socially responsible behavior and a desire to disentangle themselves from the bounds of their social support systems.

At the same time conservatives must be on constant lookout for opposing programs introduced by proponents of socialization and government control, programs which aim to remove the social lifelines that still exist which aspiring poor could otherwise use to improve their condition.

* * * * *

We welcome your comments and suggestions, either directly inline, or via email to editor@nakedliberty.com. If you would like to have your article published in Naked Liberty, please contact the editor at the above email address.

Subscribe to Naked Liberty by Email

Next week: “Equality and Fairness – they are not the same” addresses what impact attempts to achieve both equality and fairness have on society.

Originally posted 2009-06-21 23:59:11. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

In the immortal words of Laurel and Hardy: “Here’s another fine mess you’ve got me into.”

And there’s probably no better way to describe the situation that California, this once prosperous state, which from the days of the gold rush has attracted millions to its Pacific shores has found itself in. Its golden image, once a magnet for the ambitious, talented or simply enchanted by the beauty of its land and people, is now tarnished by years of fiscal mismanagement and irresponsible government spending.

It is wondrous indeed to note how a state with such riches in natural resources and richness in the diversity of its people can find itself in such financial ruin. The state of California (which if it were a country would be the 8^th largest economy in world) has found itself unable to fund its current fiscal deficit exceeding $24 billion and service its debt of over $72 billion to its bond holders. By any standard definition of insolubility, the state of California is bankrupt. And while teetering on the brink of being in default of its obligations, interestingly the state’s constitution explicitly does not allow it to declare bankruptcy – a curious dilemma.

The reasons which have brought California to this sad financial state are well known and documented. Summarized, it could be captured in the simple premise of having made too many promises without the wherewithal to deliver on them. These include promises made to government employees, such as in cases of retirees ending up with multiple pensions, some in the six figures. They include overly generous social programs, extending across citizens and non-citizens alike; lax enforcement of state entitlements; increasingly hostile tax burden on businesses including a state sales tax approaching double digits. Also most would target the ineffective state constitution which mandates a 60% majority in the state senate to enact major financial reform. By all practical terms such majority has been virtually impossible to achieve, resulting in stalemate on any attempts to curb the state’s insatiable spending appetite.

Whereas the causes of the states virtual collapse can (and will be) studied by many social economist and political analysts, the practical matter of how to address the dilemma and provide a sustainable solution to the California crisis remains. Prior attempts by its governor Schwartzenegger to seek a federal bailout have fallen on deaf ears of President Obama, and rightfully so as the precedent set by such action would be dangerous and ridden with consequences beyond our ability to predict. Furthermore, no constitutional authority has either originally or through any amendments been granted to the federal government to provide for such a bailout.

So what options exist for California? The ones most commonly discussed include:

1. Providing government credit guarantees of California’s debt have been floated (CBS News Story) but generally discounted as too temporary and not addressing the core of the state’s fiscal crisis. Furthermore, guarantees of such an amount could negatively impact on the credit rating of the US government, which itself is struggling with mounting debt and looming inflation. As traditional with the democratic liberal wing, its chief democratic rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts, chairman of the House Committee on Financial Services is in support of such measures.

2. Allowing the state to default on its obligations has also been floated, but appears to have the support of only the most extreme faction of constitutionalists. Opponents argue that this would undoubtedly create a dangerous ripple effect throughout the US economy, the cost of which would potentially exceed any bailout which would be offered to the state.

3. Aggressive tax increases (primarily in the form of sales taxes) to compensate for the precipitous fall in tax revenues have the support of many of the liberal democrats in the state senate. However, under the terms of the state’s Proposition 13, their enactment has become a virtual impossibility due to the 60% majority provision. Furthermore, California residents have over the last years become increasingly more vocal against that state’s excessive tax rates, further diminishing the possibility of any such actions.

What is discouraging is that no significant momentum exists behind a movement to address what is the root cause of the state’s troubles – state government inaction and excessive tax burdens. In order, first the state needs to procedurally address the ineffective provisions of its state constitution, including Proposition 13. Armed with new powers to reduce the tax burden on its citizens and enterprises, a well targeted reduction in state business taxes, and either personal income taxes or sales taxes would restore vibrancy to the California economy and begin to again attract new investments and spur an influx of productive sectors of the population back to the state.

While in 2005 the US Census was projecting California as one of the states with highest growth rates, in the recent years of financial turmoil the opposite has begun to occur, with residence relocating to less tax onerous states, among them Florida, Nevada or Texas, each with no state income tax.

Tax incentives (instead of tax penalties) have time and again shown that the empowered individual and the entrepreneurial nature which he harnesses are the most effective tools to bring about economic growth and financial health. California would do well by heeding to one of its greatest son’s prolific advice:

“I don’t believe in a government that protects us from ourselves.”
“The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would hire them away.”

 Ronald Reagan (1911 – 2004)

 

It would be wise for the California governor and state senators to read their state motto (“Eureka”) and in it recognize that the solution to their state’s woes has already been found, tried and proven. All they need to do is act on it.

* * * * *

We welcome your comments and suggestions, either directly inline, or via email to editor@nakedliberty.com. If you would like to have your article published in Naked Liberty, please contact the editor at the above email address.

Subscribe to Naked Liberty by Email