SEVEN TRIBES

October 21, 2018


I read a fascinating article written by Mr. David Brooks regarding the “typology” of the American electorate.  In the study were several very interesting comments, one being: “American politics is no longer about what health care plan you support its’ about identity, psychology, moral foundations and the dynamics of tribal resentment”.  The report he references is entitled “HIDDEN TRIBES”.  This report breaks down the American electorate into seven (7) distinct groups from left to right.  Let’s take a look at these groups:

  • PROGRESSIVE ACTIVISTS: 8%–Younger, highly engaged, secular, cosmopolitan, and very angry.
  • TRADITIONAL LIBERALS: 11%–Older, retired, open to compromise, rational, cautious.
  • PASSIVE LIBERALS: 15%– Unhappy, insecure, distrustful, disillusioned.
  • POLITICALLY DISENGAGED: 26%–Young, low income, distrustful, detached, patriotic, conspiratorial.
  • MODERATES: 15%– Engaged, civic-minded, middle-of-the road, pessimistic, Protestant
  • TRADITIONAL CONSERVATIVES: 19%–Religious, middle class, patriotic, moralistic.
  • DEVOTED CONSERVATIVES: 6%–White, retired, highly engaged, uncompromising, patriotic.

Progressive Activists and Devoted Conservatives are the two groups that are the most-wealthy and the most-white.  Their members have among the highest education levels, and report the highest levels of personal security.  (I find this fascinating.)   If we consider “civil war” we would probably find that civil war between privileged progressives and privileged conservatives.   The study has indicated that tribalism is the fruit of privilege and that people with more stress in their lives generally pay less or much less attention to politics. Another takeaway from the study is “ideas really do drive history”.  Several very interesting conclusions are stated in that report as follows:

  • Ninety (90%) percent of Devoted Conservatives think immigration is bad.
  • Ninety-nine (99%) percent of Progressive Activists think immigration is good.
  • Seventy-six (76%) percent of Devoted Conservatives think Islam is more violent than any other religion whereas only three (3%) percent of Progressive Activists agree.
  • Eighty-six (86%) percent of Devoted Conservatives think It is more important for children to be well behaved than creative where as thirteen (13%) percent of Progressive Activists agree.
  • Ninety-one (91%) percent of Progressive Activists say sexual harassment in common, whereas only twelve (12%) percent of Devoted Conservatives agree.
  • Ninety-two (92%) percent of Progressive Activists say people do not take racism seriously enough compared to six (6%) of Devoted Conservatives.
  • Eighty-six (86%) of Progressive Activists say life’s outcomes are outside people’s control whereas two (2%) of Devoted Conservatives believe this is the case.
  • Progressive Activists are nearly three times as likely to say they are ashamed to be an American as compared to the average voter.

Now the good news, once you get outside those two somewhat elite groups you find much more independent thinking and flexibility.  This is definitely NOT a 50-50 nation.  It only appears that way when disenchanted voters are forced to choose between the two extreme “cults”.

Roughly two-thirds of Americans across four political types fall into what the authors of this study call “the exhausted majority”.  Sixty-one (61%) percent say people they tend to agree with need to listen and compromise more.  Eighty (80%) percent say political correctness is a real problem and eighty-two (82%) percent say the very same about hate speech. Unfortunately, people in the exhausted majority have no narrative.  They have no coherent philosophic worldview to organize their thinking thus compelling action.

CONCLUSIONS:  We do not know what the next political paradigm will look like, but one would possibly assume it will be based upon abundance, not deficits: gifts, not fear; and hope not hatred.

 

Advertisements

HAPPY BIRTHDAY NASA

October 17, 2018


Some information for this post is taken from NASA Tech Briefs, Vol 42, No.10

On October 4, 1957, the Soviet Union launched Sputnik 1, the world’s first artificial satellite.  I remember the announcement just as though it was yesterday.  Walter Cronkite announced the “event” on the CBS evening news.  That single event was a game-changer and sent the United States into action. That’s when we realized we were definitely behind the curve.  The launch provided the impetus for increased spending for aerospace endeavors, technical and scientific educational programs, and the chartering of a new federal agency to manage air and space research and development. The United States and Russia were engaged in a Cold War, and during this period of time, space exploration emerged as a major area of concern.  In short, they beat us to the punch and caught us with our pants down.

As a result, President Dwight David Eisenhower created the National Aeronautics and Space Administration or NASA.  NASA opened for business on October 1, 1958, with T. Keith Glenman, president of the Case Institute of Technology, as its first administrator.  NASA’s primary goal was to “provide research into the problems of flight within and outside the Earth’s atmosphere, and other purposes. “(Not too sure the “other purposes” was fully explained but that’s no real problem.  The “spooks” had input into the overall mission of NASA due to the Cold War.)

NASA absorbed NACA (National Advisory Committee on Aeronautics) including three major research laboratories: 1.) Langley Aeronautical Laboratory, 2.) Ames Aeronautical Laboratory, and 3.) the Lewis Flight Propulsion Laboratory.  There were two smaller laboratories included with the new Federal branch also.  NASA quickly incorporated other organizations into its new agency, notably the space science group of the Naval Research Laboratory in Maryland, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory managed by Caltech for the Army and the Army Ballistic Missile Agency in Huntsville, Alabama. As you recall, Dr. Werner von Braun’s team of engineers were at that time engaged in the development of very large rockets.

The very first launch for NASA was from Cape Canaveral, Florida.  It was the Pioneer I, which launched on October 11, 1958. In May of 1959, Pioneer 4 was launched to the Moon, successfully making the first U.S. lunar flyby.

NASA’s first high-profile program involving human spaceflight was Project Mercury, an effort to learn if humans could survive the rigors of spaceflight.  On May 5, 1961, Alan B. Shepard Jr. became the first American to fly into space.  He rode his Mercury capsule on a fifteen (15) minute suborbital mission.

On May 25, 1961, President John F. Kennedy announced the goal of sending astronauts to the moon and back before the end of the decade.  To facilitate this goal, NASA expanded the existing manned spaceflight program in December 1961 to include the development of a two-man spacecraft. The program was officially designated Gemini and represented a necessary intermediate step in sending men to the moon on what became known as the Apollo Missions.  I had the great pleasure of being in the Air Force at that period of history and worked on the Titan II Missile.  The Titan II shot the Mercury astronauts into orbit.  Every launch was a specular success for our team at the Ogden Air Material Area located at Hill Air Force Base in Ogden, Utah.  The missile has since been made obsolete by other larger and more powerful rockets but it was the “ride” back in those days.

One thing I greatly regret is the cessation of maned-flight by our government.  All of the efforts expended during the days of Mercury, Gemini and Apollo have not been totally lost but we definitely have relinquished our dominance in manned space travel.  Once again, you can thank your “local politicians” for that great lack of vision.

THE RUSSIANS ARE COMING

August 18, 2018


Are we as Americans a little paranoid—or maybe a lot paranoid when it comes to trusting the Russians?  In light of the stories involving Russian collusion during the recent presidential election, maybe we should put trust on the shelf in all areas of involvement with Putin and the “mother-land”.  Do recent news releases through “pop” media muddy the waters or really do justice to a very interesting occurrence noted just this week? Let’s take a look.

The following is taken from a UPI News release on 16 August 2018:

“Aug. 16 (UPI) — Just days after the Trump administration proposed a Space Force as a new branch of the military, U.S. officials say they’re concerned about “very abnormal behavior” involving a Russian satellite.  The satellite, launched in October, is displaying behavior “inconsistent” with the kind of satellite Russia says it is, said Yleem D.S. Poblete, assistant secretary of state for the Bureau of Arms Control, Verification and Compliance . “Poblete suggested the satellite could be a weapon. “We don’t know for certain what it is, and there is no way to verify it,” he said Wednesday at a disarmament conference in Switzerland.

An artist’s rendition of that satellite is given below:

“Our Russian colleagues will deny that its systems are meant to be hostile,” Poblete continued. “But it is difficult to determine an object’s true purpose simply by observing it on orbit. “So that leads to the question: is this, again, enough information to verify and assess whether a weapon has or has not been tested in orbit? The United States does not believe it is.”

This release is basically saying that if we do not know what the Russian satellite is supposed to do, then it must be a weapon.  One of my favorite online publications is SPACE.com.  This group does a commendable job at assessing breaking stories and giving us the straight “poop” relative to all things in the cosmos.  Let’s take a look at what they say.

SPACE.com:

“This gets a bit confusing, so bear with me: Russia launched the Cosmos 2519 satellite in June 2017. This spacecraft popped out a subsatellite known as Cosmos 2521 in August of that year. On Oct. 30, a second subsat, Cosmos 2523, deployed from one of these two other craft.

“I can’t tell from the data whether the parent [of 2523] was 2519 or 2521, and indeed, I can’t be sure that U.S. tracking didn’t swap the IDs of 2519 and 2521 at some point,” McDowell said.  (NOTE: Jonathan McDowell, an astronomer at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics who monitors many of the spacecraft circling our planet using publicly available U.S. tracking data.)

These three spacecraft performed a variety of maneuvers over the ensuing months, according to McDowell and Brian Weeden, director of program planning at the nonprofit Secure World Foundation. For example, Cosmos 2521 conducted some “proximity operations” around 2519 and may have docked with the mothership in October, Weeden said via Twitter today (Aug. 16).

Cosmos 2521 adjusted its orbit slightly in February 2018, then performed two big engine burns in April to significantly lower its slightly elliptical path around Earth, from about 400 miles (650 kilometers) to roughly 220 miles (360 km), McDowell said. The satellite fired its engines again on July 20, reshaping its orbit to a more elliptical path with a perigee (close-approach point) of 181 miles (292 km) and an apogee (most-distant point) of 216 miles (348 km).

And Cosmos 2519 conducted a series of small burns between late June and mid-July of this year, shifting its orbit from a nearly circular one (again, with an altitude of about 400 miles) to a highly elliptical path with a perigee of 197 miles (317 km) and an apogee of 413 miles (664 km), McDowell calculated.

These big maneuvers are consistent with a technology demonstration of some kind, he said.

Perhaps the Russians “are checking out the [spacecraft] bus and its capability to deliver multiple subsatellites to different orbits — something like that,” McDowell said. “From the information that’s available in the public domain, that would be an entirely plausible interpretation.”

“What are they complaining about?” McDowell said, referring to American officials. Weeden voiced similar sentiments. Cosmos 2523’s “deployment was unusual, but hard to see at this point why the US is making it a big deal,” he said via Twitter today. “There are a lot of facts and not a lot of pattern,” McDowell said. “So, partly I take the U.S. statement as saying, ‘Russia, how dare you do something confusing?'” It’s possible, of course, that American satellites or sensors have spotted Cosmos 2523 (or Cosmos 2519, or Cosmos 2521) doing something suspicious — some activity that can’t be detected just by analyzing publicly available tracking data. “But they need to say a little more for us to take that seriously,” McDowell said.

CONCLUSIONS:

We just do not know and we do not trust the Russians to let us know the purpose behind their newest satellite.  Then again, why should they?    We live in a world where our own media tells us “the public has the right to know”.  That’s really garbage.  The public and others have a right to know what we choose to tell them.  No more—no less.

DISCRIMINATION

June 20, 2018


When I think of discrimination I automatically think of whites discriminating against blacks. I’m sure that’s because I’m from the southeastern part of the United States although there is ample evidence that discrimination occurs in all states of the United States.   There are other manners in which discrimination can occur.

From the New York Times we read the following:

“A group that is suing Harvard University is demanding that it publicly release admissions data on hundreds of thousands of applicants, saying the records show a pattern of discrimination against Asian-Americans going back decades.

The group was able to view the documents through its lawsuit, which was filed in 2014 and challenges Harvard’s admissions policies. The plaintiffs said in a letter to the court last week that the documents were so compelling that there was no need for a trial, and that they would ask the judge to rule summarily in their favor based on the documents alone.

The plaintiffs also say that the public — which provides more than half a billion dollars a year in federal funding to Harvard — has a right to see the evidence that the judge will consider in her decision.

Harvard counters that the documents are tantamount to trade secrets, and that even in the unlikely event that the judge agrees to decide the case without a trial, she is likely to use only a fraction of the evidence in her decision. Only that portion, the university says, should be released.”

There is no doubt that Harvard University makes considerable efforts to be “all-inclusive”.  They discriminate against whites and Asian-Americans in favor of African-Americans, Hispanics and the LGBT community.  That is a fact and a form of discrimination.

The EEOC tells us the following are methods of discrimination:

I recently read a horrible story about a young man in the country of India.  This guy had completed a course of study at the prestigious Indian Institute of Technology in Delhi with a Masters Degree in computer science.  He came to know a fellow classmate.  They fell in love.  He asked her father for her hand in marriage.  He said absolutely not.  “My daughter will not marry an untouchable, a Dalit.”  Now, Article 17 of the Indian Constitution abolishes untouchability and makes it punishable by law, and the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act of 1989 spells out the safeguards against caste discrimination and violence. His daughter honored her father and they did not get married.  The young man moved to the United States and now is a citizen working for an aerospace company in New England. He is happily married with three children—all citizens.

The term caste was first used by Portuguese travelers who came to India in the 16th century. Caste comes from the Spanish and Portuguese word “casta” which means “race”, “breed”, or “lineage”. Many Indians use the term “jati”. There are 3,000 castes and 25,000 sub-castes in India, each related to a specific occupation. A caste system is a class structure determined by birth. Loosely, it means that in some societies, if your parents are poor, you’re going to be poor, also. Same goes for being rich, if you’re parents were rich, you would be rich.   According to one long-held theory about the origins of South Asia’s caste system, Aryans from central Asia invaded South Asia and introduced the caste system as a means of controlling the local populations. The Aryans defined key roles in society, then assigned groups of people to them.

If a Hindu were asked to explain the nature of the caste system, he or she might tell the story of Brahma — the four-headed, four-handed deity worshipped as the creator of the universe. According to an ancient text known as the Rigveda, the division of Indian society was based on Brahma’s divine manifestation of four groups. Priests and teachers were cast from his mouth, rulers and warriors from his arms, merchants and traders from his thighs, and workers and peasants from his feet.  Others might present a biological explanation of India’s stratification system, based on the notion that all living things inherit a particular set of qualities. Some inherit wisdom and intelligence, some get pride and passion, and others are stuck with less fortunate traits. Proponents of this theory attribute all aspects of one’s lifestyle — social status, occupation, and even diet — to these inherent qualities and thus use them to explain the foundation of the caste system.

The caste structure may be seen by the digital below.

India’s caste system has four main classes (also called varnas) based originally on personality, profession, and birth. In descending order, the classes are as follows:

  • Brahmana (now more commonly spelled Brahmin): Consist of those engaged in scriptural education and teaching, essential for the continuation of knowledge.
  • Kshatriya: Take on all forms of public service, including administration, maintenance of law and order, and defense.
  • Vaishya: Engage in commercial activity as businessmen.
  • Shudra: Work as semi-skilled and unskilled laborers.

You will notice the “untouchables” and not even considered as a class of Indian society. Traditionally, the groups characterized as untouchable were those whose occupations and habits of life involved ritually polluting activities, of which the most important were (1) taking life for a living, a category that included, for example, fishermen, (2) killing or disposing of dead cattle or working with their hides for a living, (3) pursuing activities that brought the participant into contact with emissions of the human body, such as feces, urine, sweat, and spittle, a category that included such occupational groups as sweepers and washermen, and (4) eating the flesh of cattle or of domestic pigs and chickens, a category into which most of the indigenous tribes of India fell.

As mentioned earlier, Article 17 of the Indian Constitution was introduced to eliminate the caste system.  Do you really think that happened?  Of course not.  Indians of the Dalit classification, and there are thousands, still face rejection and discrimination on a daily basis.  Maybe we here in “los estados unidos” have it better than we think.


Several of the following comments were taken from the Washington Free Beacon.

If you have been reading my posts you know that just about all involve the STEM professions, travel, salary levels for engineers, book reviews, restaurant reviews, etc etc.  In other words—I usually do NOT do political.  Politicians are fascinating people because ALL people are fascinating.  We all have a story to tell.  OK, with that being the case, I could not resist this time. Take a look.

Senate increases budget by forty-eight ($48) million, salaries by twelve ($12) million. That was the sub-title to the Washington Free Beacon article relative to the Omnibus Spending Bill just signed by President Trump. How much is $1.3 trillion dollars?  ANSWER:  It’s a million million. It’s a thousand billion. It’s a one followed by 12 zeros. 1,000,000,000,000.  The following digital photograph represents one billion dollars.

The next digital represents a trillion dollars.

Please notice the little guy, at the left of the stack.

You ready for this?

The Senate increased its total salaries of officers and employees by $12.6 million in the 2,232-page bill that lawmakers had fewer than forty-eight (48) hours to read and vote on. The bill avoids a government shutdown that would take place at midnight on Friday.

Aside from giving their own institutions a bonus, the omnibus bill also gives away millions to prevent “elderly falls,” promote breastfeeding, and fight “excessive alcohol use.”

The legislation increases the Senate budget to $919.9 million, up $48.8 million from fiscal year 2017, according to the congressional summary of the bill.

  • “The increase provides funding necessary for critical modernization and upgrades of the Senate financial management system and investments in IT security,” the summary states.
  • Salaries of staffers in the Senate are also set for an increase. Division Iof the legislation breaks down the total salaries of officers and employees, which are being raised from $182 million in 2017 to $194.8 million in the final bill, an increase of $12.58 million.
  • The Senate also increased its expense account, as expense allowances are going from $177,000 to $192,000, an increase of $15,000.
  • Committee offices got an increase of $22.9 million in salaries, from $181.5 million in 2017 to $204.4 million in the final bill.
  • Another $15 million goes to study “high obesity counties” and an increase of $5 million for the CDC program that seeks to “address obesity in counties” by leveraging “the community extension services provided by land grant universities who are mandated to translate science into practical action and promote healthy lifestyles.”
  • The bill also spends $2.05 million to prevent “elderly falls” and $8 million in the form of “breastfeeding grants.”
  • The legislation also mandatesthe Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau to improve “wine label accuracy.”

I’m sure the bill does some very good things one being added money for our armed forces.  We have experienced in 2017 a terrible statistic—the number of casualties resulting from training our men and women in uniform exceeded the number of casualties in combat.  This is largely due to lack of funding for equipment maintenance and training.

I know or at least suspect, there is a great deal of behind-the-scenes activity on the part of each congressman and senator required for preparation prior to each legislative session.  Let’s take a look at the number of scheduled sessions over the past few years. Here are the number of legislative days for the House and Senate each year in recent history:

  • 2016: 131 in the House, 165 in the Senate.
  • 2015: 157 in the House, 168 in the Senate.
  • 2014: 135 in the House, 136 in the Senate.
  • 2013: 159 in the House, 156 in the Senate.
  • 2012: 153 in the House, 153 in the Senate.
  • 2011: 175 in the House, 170 in the Senate.
  • 2010: 127 in the House, 158 in the Senate.
  • 2009: 159 in the House, 191 in the Senate.
  • 2008: 119 in the House, 184 in the Senate.
  • 2007: 164 in the House, 190 in the Senate.
  • 2006: 101 in the House, 138 in the Senate.
  • 2005: 120 in the House, 159 in the Senate.
  • 2004: 110 in the House, 133 in the Senate.
  • 2003: 133 in the House, 167 in the Senate.
  • 2002: 123 in the House, 149 in the Senate.
  • 2001: 143 in the House, 173 in the Senate.

An “unhappy” President Donald Trump signed the $1.3 trillion spending bill into law Friday, his second about-face in twenty-four (24) hours on the measure to keep the government open.

The president said he approved the legislation to fund the government through September for national security reasons, as it authorizes a major increase in military spending that he supports. But he stressed that he did so reluctantly.

Trump slammed the rushed process to pass the more than 2,200-page bill released only Wednesday. Standing near the pile of documents, the president said he was “disappointed” in the legislation and would “never sign another bill like this again.”

So much for draining the swamp. We are good through September of this year and then we start all over again.  ALL OVER AGAIN!

POLITICAL CARTOONS

July 31, 2017


If you read my post on a regular basis you know I don’t concentrate on politics.  I try to stick to subjects involving the STEM professions—in other words, subjects I know something about and have an interest in.  There is nothing wrong with being a Democrat, Republican, Independent, Libertarian, etc.—there is everything wrong when our elected officials refuse to “throw together” to solve our most-pressing problems.  That is exactly where we are today and I’m probably not the one to solve that problem.

On a daily basis, our “state-of-the-nation” is displayed with remarkably creative and compelling political cartoons.  These guys and gals are truly good at what they do and provide a pictorial summary of where we are as a country.  A picture is truly worth a thousand words. Let’s take a very quick look.

As you well know, the Republican party is having, or has had, remarkable difficulty in fixing or repealing the Affordable Healthcare Act—or Obamacare as it has come to be known as.  I suspect, but do not know, it may be because there is no suitable replacement.

The cartoon above provides a glimpse into a terrible situation existing in our country today. Opioid-related deaths have reached an all-time high in the United States. More than 47,000 people died in 2014, and the numbers are rising. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention this month released prescribing guidelines to help primary care physicians safely treat chronic pain while reducing opioid dependency and abuse.  That’s where we are in this country.

Senator John McCain cast the deciding vote that killed Congressional efforts to repeal the HCA.  It was dramatic and certainly made the point.  The JPEG below tells the story also.

Our new Director of Communications for the Fed is Anthony Scaramucci and boy does he know how to make a first impression.  I’m probably one of an ever-growing few who remember my mama telling me she was going to wash my mouth out with soap if I did not mind my peas and ques.   Maybe Anthony needs to listen to my mama.  Do we really need another trash-talker in la Casa Blanca?

Washington D.C. leaks like a fifteen-year-old garden hose.  I would definitely hate trying to keep a secret within the beltway.  Imagine you’re a somewhat senior government official — one who doesn’t get a lot of face time with the president, but who has access to pretty important information — and you need to send a message to President Donald Trump. You can try to write him a memo, or get the message into a briefing paper his staff is preparing. But the staff is trying to squeeze a ton of information into the incredibly narrow aperture of “what the president is actually going to read.  Your message had better be less than a page (ideally a lot less, so that it can fit on a page with all the other messages all the other officials like you are trying to send). It had better include a visual aid — a map is good.  Or you can go the easier route: You can just leak the information to someone so that it ends up on Fox & Friends.

The picture above is one of my favorite.  Senator Jeff Sessions was the very first to indorse Donald John Trump for the Presidency.  Apparently, loyalty does not work both ways. If I were Sessions, I would be cleaning out my desk right now.

As always, I welcome your comments.

 

JOBS JOBS JOBS

April 5, 2017


I think we all hope meaningful employment for everyone wishing to work and physically able to work.

According to CNBC, we have the following statement:

“Companies added 263,000 jobs for the month, ADP and Moody’s Analytics said. That was well above the 185,000 expected from economists surveyed by Reuters and also better than the 245,000 reported for February.

The February number was revised significantly lower, however, from the originally reported 298,000.

In addition to the big gain on the headline number, the month also continued a trend away from services-oriented positions dominating job creation. Goods-producing firms contributed 82,000 to the total, as construction led the way with 49,000 new jobs.

Professional and business services was the leading sector, with 57,000, while leisure and hospitality added 55,000 and health care was up 46,000. Manufacturing payrolls grew by 30,000 and trade, transportation and utilities rose by 34,000.

In terms of company size, fewer than 50 employees represented the greatest growth area, with 118,000. Firms that employ 50 to 499 workers added 100,000.”

“The report comes amid hopes that President Donald Trump can deliver on his pro-growth agenda of lower taxes, less regulation and more infrastructure spending. Economic data points have been mixed lately, with sentiment surveys outpacing actual hard data of activity.”

The bar graph below indicates private sector job growth, or lack thereof for the last several months.  I do not think anyone would argue with the statement we are facing a growing economy but that growth is not robust by any stretch of the imagination.

Another very good sign our economy just might be on the mend:

“The U.S. trade deficit shrank by nearly 10 percent in February, hinting that the economy may be growing at a faster pace than many economists expect.

The deficit fell to a seasonally adjusted $43.6 billion, lower than the $44.6 billion economists surveyed by the Wall Street Journal had expected. Exports rose 0.2 percent to $192.9 billion in February while imports declined 1.8 percent to $236.4 billion, the Department of Commerce said Tuesday.”

 

The chart below indicates that drop.  We still are running a trade deficit but with the push for more “on-shoring” that deficit may continue to shrink.  This will undoubtedly improve the job market “state-side” and provide added employment.

The bar charts below will show Annual GDP growth rates, corporate profits, and single family home process.   I think each chart indicates recovery is still very incremental and some would say sluggish.  Our politicians in Washington indicate the following:

  • The repeal and replacement of the Affordable Healthcare Act will greatly reduce healthcare costs for the individual consumer.
  • The reduction of “red tape” and regulations for business owners will provide incentives for investment in companies and individual businesses.
  • Rework of the Federal Tax Code and subsequent reduction in corporate and individual tax rates will provide for much greater growth in GDP and corporate profits.
  • Increased trade with other nations will reduce the trade deficit and promote job growth
  • Significant increases in infrastructure spending will definitely improve job growth and job outlook.
  • “Leveling the playing field” relative to NAFTA and other global trade agreements can greatly improve job growth in the United States.

CONCLUSIONS:

All of these things can and possibly will improve job growth and aid our economy.  The big questions is—can Congress get together and pass legislation to get things moving again and in the proper fashion?  This week Congress is going home for Ester vacation.  Another vacation.   What if they remained in Washington, worked through Easter, stayed on the job, and provided their constituents with value-added?

%d bloggers like this: