Barack Obama Wants to Abolish Your Suburb!

Published: Fri, 08/10/12

Home | About Dick Young |

In This Issue:

Barack Obama Wants to Abolish Your Suburb! By Richard C. Young
Bubble after Bubble after Bubble By E.J. Smith
President Obama Weakens Welfare Reform The Editors
Faulty Mechanics By Steve Schneider
Harry Reid’s Sneaky Middle Class Tax Increase The Editors

Young Investments Client Letter: Sign up to get the letter mailed directly to you by clicking here.

New July Client Letter Now Available: Retirement Compounders
In the spring of 2003, we launched a managed portfolio called the Retirement Compounders (RCs). The RCs is a globally diversified portfolio of 32 dividend-paying securities. Securities in the portfolio still include bellwether stocks from the Dow but also include other names we believe to be solid, blue-chip-type companies. With a yield today of 4.7%, the RCs pumps out a lot more cash than the Dow, the S&P 500 and, of course, the NASDAQ. Investing in the RCs still allows for the potential of capital appreciation. But during down or flat markets the RCs generate a predictable stream of cash that is especially important for retired and soon-to-be-retired investors.— Read more at Younginvestments.com.

Are you having trouble viewing or printing this email? Click here.

Barack Obama Wants to Abolish Your Suburb!

Barack Obama is now plotting to fold your suburb into the city, merging schools and housing as well as taxation in the process. In effect, the Obama plan is to abolish your suburb. His goal: “Income equalization via a massive redistribution of suburban tax money to the cities.”

My links introduce you to the players and the broadening scheme. As Stanley Kurtz writes, “Obama’s little-known plans are to undermine the political and economic autonomy of America’s suburbs.” Do you know about Michael Kruglik? The Gamaliel Foundation? Building One America or the Sustainable Communities Initiative? A central theme of the Obama equalization initiative, according to Mr. Katz, is “to move the poor out of cities by imposing low-income-housing quotas on development in middle-class suburbs.” The end game here is to totally abolish suburbs.

Read up on Saul Alinsky and his Rules For Radicals . Look for the mobilization of left-wing church groups. The basis for all this equalization and massive re-distribution is clearly outlined for you in Karl Marx’s The Communist Manifesto, where the goal is to form the proletariat into a class and overthrow the bourgeois supremacy. Capital is viewed as not a personal but a social power. Marxism is also about the abolition of the family. Dogma is built on a 10-point foundation, the first six of which are: abolition of property, a heavy progressive or graduated income tax, abolition of all right of inheritance, confiscation of the property of rebels, centralization of credit in the hands of the State, centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State. I hope you are getting the picture here. Given the above, can you be surprised that Barack Obama creepily proclaimed, “If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made it happen.” Barack Obama should not have been elected president for one term and, for the preservation of our federal republic form of government, darn well better not be back for a second.

What are you doing to prevent such a travesty? We all must do our part. For starters, check out what the most dangerous person running for senate in America is up to. Elizabeth Warren is lockstep with the Obama team of community organizers. As an independent, I am doing my part to support a thoroughly credible Senator Scott Brown in Massachusetts, a state in which I neither live nor vote. Scott needs help from us all.

Independent thinking Americans all over the country are banning together against the entrenched self-severing political crowd on both sides of the aisle. Momentum is building, as seen most recently by the crushing defeat Texan Senate candidate Ted Cruz just dealt his party line supported Texas foe. Grass roots organizations like Oath Keepers are moving powerfully to the forefront supported by masses of Americans who are fed up with Washington from the top down. As the great Al Kooper has written in verse, it’s “A Brand New Day.”

>> read more

Bubble after Bubble after Bubble

California’s mismanaged state pensions and budgets are wreaking havoc on the state as Kevin D. Williamson’s writes at National Review in Penniless in Paradise:

“In 1999, at the peak of the dot-com stock-market bubble, California reformulated its pensions and other public-employee-compensation practices, making them much, much more liberal than they had been. The state’s Democrat-run legislature did this on the theory that pension investments would keep offering double-digit returns more or less forever, which led elected officials to make big promises and set aside approximately zilch to make good on them. If borrowing money to acquire an asset based on the theory that the appreciation of that asset will more than offset the cost of financing the borrowing sounds to you like the woeful tale of a million subprime mortgages, then they really could have used you in the California legislature a decade or so ago, or at Fannie Mae. In bubble after bubble after bubble, the country keeps repeating the practice that everybody swore off after the great market crash of 1929 and the Great Depression: investing on margin. California took out something very much like an adjustable-rate mortgage, financing present political consumption by in effect borrowing against future returns on the assets in its pension system — but the returns didn’t materialize. CalPERS, the gigantic statewide pension system, was until a few weeks ago projecting 7.5 percent returns on its investments. Real returns: just over 1 percent. The entirety of the state’s finances are from top to bottom exactly what one San Bernardino resident called his city’s fiscal charade: a shell game.”

>> read more

President Obama Weakens Welfare Reform

In mid-July the Obama administration was once again ruling the country by legislative fiat. The Health and Human Services Department bypassed Congress and informed states that they need no longer require recipients to work-for-welfare.

Arthur Brooks writes that the work-for-welfare reform implemented in 1996 “was arguably the most successful policy change to help low-income Americans in the past 60 years. Welfare policies of the 1960s led generations of families to languish on the government dole at subsistence levels, never gaining the skills to work and with little hope to rise. It took more than a decade to get Congress to reverse course. But it was worth the effort.”

The reform was implemented in the late 1990s, when research found that welfare paid better than work in many states. This was obviously unsustainable. Cato Institute scholars Michael Tanner, Stephen Moore and CEO of Hartland Bank David Hartman, wrote a report in September of 1995 titled The Work Versus Welfare Trade-Off. Some of the key findings are summarized below.

In 40 states welfare pays more than an $8.00 an hour job. In 17 states the welfare package is more generous than a $10.00 an hour job.
In Hawaii, Alaska, Massachusetts, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, New York, and Rhode Island welfare pays more than a $12.00 an hour job–or two and a half times the minimum wage.
In nine states welfare pays more than the average first-year salary for a teacher. In 29 states it pays more than the average starting salary for a secretary. And in the six most generous states it pays more than the entry-level salary for a computer programmer.
Welfare benefits are especially generous in large cities. Welfare provides the equivalent of an hourly pretax wage of $14.75 in New York City, $12.45 in Philadelphia, $11.35 in Baltimore, and $10.90 in Detroit. For the hard-core welfare recipient, the value of the full range of welfare benefits substantially exceeds the amount the recipient could earn in an entry-level job. As a result, recipients are likely to choose welfare over work, thus increasing long-term dependence.

A bipartisan government put welfare abuses and inefficiencies behind the country. Now president Obama is bringing them back. He must not be reelected in November.

>> read more

Faulty Mechanics

In a recent piece in the Wall Street Journal, Stephen Moore explains that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has attempted to quietly pass a tax increase on 28.8 million middle-class families. Even scarier for middle-class Americans is that the Obama administration is supporting Reid’s attempt, in direct conflict with the president’s promise not to raise taxes on families earning less than $250,000 a year (which he has already broken numerous times). Below is an excerpt from Moore’s Over the Cliff We Go. (Our emphasis added).

The Democrats’ official position is to allow the tax cuts for the middle class but not for upper-income individuals. But as the Senate Finance Committee pointed out on Tuesday, the tax plan that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has offered would actually retain the alternative minimum tax provision to raise taxes on the non-rich, which would hammer the middle class. The Reid proposal—which is supported by the White House and passed yesterday in the Senate, 51-48, but is not expected to be considered in the House—”represents an almost $3,400 tax hike on 28.8 million middle-class families,” the committee’s analysis shows.

“They almost have to raise taxes on the middle class,” says House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp, “Where else could the money come from?” Good question.

So it’s not just the rich who will get flattened if Congress jumps off the tax cliff, but tens of millions of middle-class families as well. The tax-the-rich plan reduces the deficit only by about 5 percent (if it raises any money at all), and Democrats don’t want to cut spending. This means they have to go after the wallets of those in the middle if they want to reduce the $1.2 trillion deficit. At some point the tab for Obamanomics has to be paid, and there aren’t enough millionaires and billionaires to pick it up.