No Mo Spending!

Holy crap. Someone in Washington (well, more than one someone) has actually come up with a list of proposed cuts to cut Federal spending. It actually happened. I'm stunned. Now, there's no guarantee that any of these things are going to actually get cut. But as I read the list, I was wondering how in the world we ended up spending a freaking DIME on some of these things! Seriously. Did you know that annually, the Federal government shells out $1 million in (wait for it) mohair subsidies?! Subsidies for the hair of a mo! I've never even seen a mo! How much hair do they have? How much do they need? Why do the mos and their hair require my money?! Ah, so many questions, so few answers. Let's look at some other proposed cuts that I can't believe we're already spending money on. (For the record, while I am a proponent of almost any sort of cut in spending, I am against any cuts to any sort of non-wasteful, effective spending on our military and for our veterans. Listen, you take a job knowing that you could end up stationed in one of the crazy, crazy Sand Lands for a few years, the least I can do is help you out a little bit when you get back.)

Get this: Did you know that there is a "death gratuity" for members of Congress? There is. Do you know what that means? I didn't, but when I looked it up, I was appalled. If you're a member of Congress and you die, your family gets a payment (that is paid for by the taxpayers) that is equal to one year's salary. According to something called The Daily Caller, when crooked ol' John Murtha croaked it "his family got a $174,000 payment". When the overly ancient Sen. Robert Byrd died, "...his family received $193,400." When Sen. Ted Kennedy died, "...taxpayers footed the bill for $174,000 in payments to his family." Do you think that ol' Ted Kennedy's family needed almost $200k? I can't possibly imagine that they did. Apparently, this thing "...was at one time meant to act as a form of life insurance for the families of Members who met an untimely demise". But now that almost every single Senator is a millionaire, I'm hardly thinking that this is necessary. (By the way, when my dad died, do you know how much the Social Security payout was to my mom? $252. Not $252 thousand. $252. I was so insulted I almost told them to keep it. Oh, and this was in 2005, not the fifties or anything. And I know that it's sort of apples and oranges, but they're both fruits, so there's some parallel here. Man, I like fruit.)

What else? Oh, they want to eliminate the Davis-Bacon Act (which has been screwing taxpayers since 1931) to save more than $1 billion annually. This Act basically made it so that government contracts must pay a prevailing wage. According to Wikipedia (take it for what it's worth), "All federal government construction contracts, and most contracts for federally assisted construction over $2,000, must include provisions for paying workers on-site no less than the locally prevailing wages and benefits paid on similar projects." So, there's no getting anything done cheaper if you can. Nope. No sense in even bidding low. Nope. That it costs over a billion dollars a year makes me insane. That it has been in effect since 1931 (even though it has been suspended from time to time), makes me even crazier. Wouldn't you think that someone would realize that if it is being suspended (for reasons such as faster recovery from hurricanes) on occasion and things are just fine without it, shouldn't it pretty much be deemed unnecessary? Oh, wait. It's a government program. Never mind.

Did you know that we provide economic assistance to Egypt? We do. Do you know how much assistance we provide Egypt? $250 million per year. Do you know WHY we assist Egypt? Neither do I. Their economy ranks 27th in the world. That's not too shabby. Their unemployment rate in 2009 was 9.37%. Um, that's kind of about the same as the unemployment here in the US. You don't think that we could have used that $250 million to economically assist our own citizens? Unbelievable. By the way, we're also giving $17 million dollars each year to Ireland. No answer for that one, either.

And this little recap wouldn't be complete if I didn't mention that we spent $76 million annually on something called the Appalachian Regional Commission. According to their website, "The Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) is a regional economic development agency that represents a partnership of federal, state, and local government." Why just in the Appalachian region? Let's see...well, it was established in 1965 by an act of Congress. OK. I'm noticing that it seems to encompass all of West Virginia, so I'm going to have to assume that a Senator from West Virginia was heavily involved in this getting started. Hmm...I'm also reading that it has something to do with the War on Poverty in the mountains. OK, that's it. What a bunch of crap. $76 million? Really? For 40 years? Unbelievable.

Below is the entire list of cuts that are proposed by my new heroes (well, for today), the Republican Study Committee (courtesy of The Huffington Post). Their study claims that "The plan would reduce federal spending by $2.5 trillion over a decade". So when you hear some softhead say something to the effect of "it's just a drop in the bucket", please remind their dense, non-functioning selves that if you don't start putting drops of water IN the bucket, you're never going to fill up the bucket! You have to start somewhere! What part of that don't people understand?! Stop spending my money on the hair of the mo!

➢ Corporation for Public Broadcasting Subsidy. $445 million annual savings.

➢ Save America's Treasures Program. $25 million annual savings.
➢ International Fund for Ireland. $17 million annual savings.
➢ Legal Services Corporation. $420 million annual savings.
➢ National Endowment for the Arts. $167.5 million annual savings.
➢ National Endowment for the Humanities. $167.5 million annual savings.
➢ Hope VI Program. $250 million annual savings.
➢ Amtrak Subsidies. $1.565 billion annual savings.
➢ Eliminate duplicative education programs. H.R. 2274 (in last Congress), authored by Rep. McKeon, eliminates 68 at a savings of $1.3 billion annually.
➢ U.S. Trade Development Agency. $55 million annual savings.
➢ Woodrow Wilson Center Subsidy. $20 million annual savings.
➢ Cut in half funding for congressional printing and binding. $47 million annual savings.
➢ John C. Stennis Center Subsidy. $430,000 annual savings.
➢ Community Development Fund. $4.5 billion annual savings.
➢ Heritage Area Grants and Statutory Aid. $24 million annual savings.
➢ Cut Federal Travel Budget in Half. $7.5 billion annual savings.
➢ Trim Federal Vehicle Budget by 20%. $600 million annual savings.
➢ Essential Air Service. $150 million annual savings.

➢ Technology Innovation Program. $70 million annual savings.
➢ Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) Program. $125 million annual savings.
➢ Department of Energy Grants to States for Weatherization. $530 million annual savings.
➢ Beach Replenishment. $95 million annual savings.
➢ New Starts Transit. $2 billion annual savings.
➢ Exchange Programs for Alaska, Natives Native Hawaiians, and Their Historical Trading Partners in Massachusetts. $9 million annual savings.
➢ Intercity and High Speed Rail Grants. $2.5 billion annual savings.
➢ Title X Family Planning. $318 million annual savings.
➢ Appalachian Regional Commission. $76 million annual savings.
➢ Economic Development Administration. $293 million annual savings.
➢ Programs under the National and Community Services Act. $1.15 billion annual savings.
➢ Applied Research at Department of Energy. $1.27 billion annual savings.
➢ FreedomCAR and Fuel Partnership. $200 million annual savings.
➢ Energy Star Program. $52 million annual savings.
➢ Economic Assistance to Egypt. $250 million annually.
➢ U.S. Agency for International Development. $1.39 billion annual savings.
➢ General Assistance to District of Columbia. $210 million annual savings.
➢ Subsidy for Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. $150 million annual savings.

➢ Presidential Campaign Fund. $775 million savings over ten years.
➢ No funding for federal office space acquisition. $864 million annual savings.
➢ End prohibitions on competitive sourcing of government services.
➢ Repeal the Davis-Bacon Act. More than $1 billion annually.
➢ IRS Direct Deposit: Require the IRS to deposit fees for some services it offers (such as processing payment plans for taxpayers) to the Treasury, instead of allowing it to remain as part of its budget. $1.8 billion savings over ten years.
➢ Require collection of unpaid taxes by federal employees. $1 billion total savings.
➢ Prohibit taxpayer funded union activities by federal employees. $1.2 billion savings over ten years.
➢ Sell excess federal properties the government does not make use of. $15 billion total savings.
➢ Eliminate death gratuity for Members of Congress.
➢ Eliminate Mohair Subsidies. $1 million annual savings.
➢ Eliminate taxpayer subsidies to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. $12.5 million annual savings.
➢ Eliminate Market Access Program. $200 million annual savings.
➢ USDA Sugar Program. $14 million annual savings.
➢ Subsidy to Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). $93 million annual savings.
➢ Eliminate the National Organic Certification Cost-Share Program. $56.2 million annual savings.
➢ Eliminate fund for Obamacare administrative costs. $900 million savings.
➢ Ready to Learn TV Program. $27 million savings.

Stop Spending My Money On Stupid Crap

When people get all angry and uppity when talk of raising taxes comes around, it's not like there isn't a reason. There are plenty of reasons why so many people are sick of a buttload of wasteful spending and then having politicians tell us that we need higher taxes because there isn't enough revenue. Can't those morons figure this stuff out before they waste a gazillion of our tax dollars? The answer is no and I'm here to give you another example of an insane amount of money that was wasted on a bunch of crap. And by the way, it was pretty much crap from the get-go.

Have you heard of the "virtual fence"? In essence, it was supposed to be a technology based approach that would help secure our borders. No one ever really explained how it would work exactly and when they did try to explain how it would (hypothetically) work, they were still never sure if it would actually work. Even the freaking government knew how far-fetched it was. But do you think that stopped them from going full speed ahead with their project and your money? Of course not.

For the last five years, this unicorn project has been underway. Now, I don't know everything that they have been doing for the last five years, but I do know that they managed to spend ONE BILLION dollars while they were doing it. And if you're thinking that one billion dollars seems like a lot of money, you're damned straight that it is. It's going to seem like an awful lot after I tell you that after five years, this project has finally been deemed un-doable and has been canceled. Finally. One billion dollars later and someone finally pulled their head out of their arse. Great. It would have been a little bit nicer if someone could have pulled their head out of their arse before the one billion dollars had been spent. Perhaps, just maybe, someone could have paid attention to any one of a number of scathing reports that had been put together by the Government Accountability Office and then we wouldn't be in this position. But no. It took a billion dollars to induce said head pulling. Idiots.

And if you're wondering if we got anything at all for that one billion dollars, the answer is yes. Granted, it's not much, but it's something. Is it a billion dollars worth of something? Hell no. According to the New York Times, "In a pilot program in Arizona, it cost about $1 billion to build the system across 53 miles of the state’s border." A billion dollars? For fifty three miles of border? Yes. And mind you that in the "new approach" to border security, "...using mobile surveillance systems and unmanned drones already in the Border Patrol’s arsenal, would cost less than $750 million to cover the remaining 323 miles of Arizona’s border." Uh-huh. I see. Sooooo...if I do the math here, let's see...carry the two...divide into the...bring down the zero...all right then! ONE mile of "border security" cost approximately $18,867,925. That comes out to approximately $3,573 per foot. If you weren't angry before, you should be now.

While I enjoy the thought of unmanned drones whizzing along the border, I have a question. And I'm guessing that I must be missing something because I never even hear this brought up during discussions of border security. What in the world would be wrong with a big ass G-D fence? Have it go about ten stories below ground and about five stories above ground. Make it ten feet thick. Put some barbed wire at the top. Voila! What's wrong with that? I don't understand why it has to be all high-tech. Sure, high-tech is cool as can be, but all I want is for people to be kept out. I don't care if we don't use laser beams or teleporters to keep them out, just keep them out. And stop spending my money on stupid crap that isn't going to work! Spend my money to build a freaking fence and be done with it! At the very least, explain to me why a fence like I've described wouldn't work. But whatever you do, stop spending my money on stupid crap!

Your Tax Dollars Hard At Waste

Today I learned about ExpectMore.gov. (It's actually called www.whitehouse.gov/omb/expectmore, but ExpectMore.gov will get you there.) It is a website, the purpose of such is apparently to make me very angry. It definitely sucked out most of my WTL (Will To Live) and kind of filled me with an HFOH (Heart Full Of Hate). Let's see if it makes you angry as well!

The purpose of the site (which is run by the Federal government) is to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of all Federal programs and then rate whether the program is Effective, Moderately Effective, Adequate, Ineffective or Results Not Demonstrated. According to the page which explains what each rating actually means, Results Not Demonstrated means "...that a program has not been able to develop acceptable performance goals or collect data to determine whether it is performing." In other words, they're just screwing around. An Ineffective rating means that "Programs receiving this rating are not using your tax dollars effectively. Ineffective programs have been unable to achieve results due to a lack of clarity regarding the program's purpose or goals, poor management, or some other significant weakness." Well, that doesn't sound good. I guess the rating "Piece of S**t" didn't sound very official and that's why they went with Ineffective.

They have so far evaluated about 98% of the Federal programs and that amounts to 1,015 of them. Do you want to know how many are below Adequate? (And let me just tell you that the definition of Adequate isn't anything to throw a party over. It is indicative of a "...program that needs to set more ambitious goals, achieve better results, improve accountability or strengthen its management practices." Seriously, do you feel good about that? I don't.) Ready? 199 out of 1,015 are a complete waste of money. 19.6%. And that's not even ALL of the programs yet! More to come! Stay stuned!

Twenty percent of the governments programs have been deemed by the government to be doing nothing other than pissing away your money! That's astounding. Take a look at your next pay stub. Look at what you paid in Federal taxes. Take twenty percent of that and realize that, not only did you work to earn it and you can't have it, it isn't doing a damn thing and is being wasted. And when you hear what some of these programs are, you're going to be wondering why they were ever given money in the first place.

There's the Food Stamp Nutrition Education Program. It's goal is "To improve the likelihood that persons eligible for the Food Stamp Program (FSP) will make healthy food choices within a limited budget and choose physically active lifestyles consistent with the current Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGAs) and My Pyramid". Uh-huh. Like that's going to happen. Of course, they really have no way that they're doing this. And that's why their budget has gone from $600,000 in 1992 to (brace yourself) $147 million in 1992 and THAT was eight years ago! So in ten years, their budget grew to 245 times what it started out at! And if I'm reading the chart correctly (it's a little hard to follow and I know that's completely shocking to you) their funding for 2008 was $312 million. That means that it's doubled and then some in two years. And it's not doing anything! I wish I could have a budget for some worthless piece of crap double in the span of only two years. Good Lord. Got your axe handles at the ready? Torches? Pitchforks? I'm just getting started.

There's the National Writing Project which is "...to promote K-16 teacher training and professional development in the area of writing. The Project consists of one national office and a network of local sites through which teachers have access to training, professional development, and current research about the teaching of writing." HOW MANY teachers does that scope actually make up? Is it enough to make it worthy of $22 million in funding in 2008? Since when do our grades go from kindergarten to Grade Sixteen?! Isn't that a senior in college? Shouldn't they know how to write by then? Why do they still need to be taught how to write?

There is the Black Lung Clinics Program (BLCP) which received $6 million in 2008 and is "...to establish and operate clinics that identify, diagnose, treat, and rehabilitate active and retired coal miners with occupational exposure to airborne particles resulting in respiratory and pulmonary ailments." I'm sure that you'll be comforted and satisfied to learn that "Since implementation of the Black Lung Clinics Program in 1979, only one independent assessment of the program has been conducted. This assessment did not provide an evaluation of the program's effectiveness and was limited in the range of issues addressed." Oh, good. So, in thirty-one years there has been ONE assessment. Sure. That seems easily explainable. Not by me, of course.

Let's not forget the Workforce Investment Act - Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers which got $83 million in 2008 for the purpose of providing "...competitive grants to fund training, employment, and other services to help economically disadvantaged farmworkers and their families. Through these services, the program seeks to help them achieve economic self-sufficiency by strengthening their ability to gain stable employment." What the what?! You'll also want to know that "Each year, more than 60 percent of the program's approximately 30,000 participants receive only supportive services, like emergency cash assistance." Wait a minute.

30,000 participants and they get $83 million dollars?! For the guys that pick the strawberries that are frequently permanently visiting here from foreign lands?! Emergency cash assistance?! I know some folks who could use some emergency cash assistance. Oh, but they're citizens and they don't pick strawberries. Why is this sounding more and more backwards the more I go on. (And by the way, do you want to or should I tell the Federal government that it's not "farmworkers", it's "farm workers"? Two words. We're doomed.)

And these few that I have listed were merely some of the Ineffective programs. There are plenty of programs with ridiculous sounding names that were rated Results Not Demonstrated. Programs like the $49 million Mentoring Program (I swear to you that's what it's called), the $120 million Teaching American History program, the $20 million Packers and Stockyards program and the $4.783 billion Universal Service Fund E-Rate program which is supposed to "...help ensure that the educational benefits of telecommunications services are provided to schools and libraries. The program provides discounts on these services in varying amounts based on demonstrated economic need." (What, exactly, do they mean by "telecommunications"? A PHONE?!)

Now, maybe some of those or the other 169 programs whose results cannot be demonstrated are actually doing some good. Since they results can't be demonstrated, I'm sure that some jackass congressperson will make that argument. Hard to imagine that if they were actually doing some good that they wouldn't be able to prove it, though. Hard to imagine. It's also hard to imagine that 20% of these Federal programs don't do squat. And they wonder why we're having budgetary issues. They wonder why the consumer isn't spending more. It's because the country is being run by a bunch of folks who keep spending our money on crap like this. That's why.

The Condescending President

You know what I can't stand? Wait. Let me narrow that down a little bit, lest we be here all the live long day. You know what I can't stand about politicians? Wait. Hmm. There's no way of phrasing this without generating an incredibly long list of possibilities. I'll just cut to the chase. I can't stand a condescending politician. And I really can't stand a condescending President. I'm talking to you, President Barry.

The huffy folks over there at The Huffington Post tell us that President Barry was at some town hall meeting that CNBC broadcast live on Monday. And I guess that the question or the issue was simple enough. Apparently, an audience member pressed President Barry to chime in on what it is that makes the Tea Party movement do its thing. For some reason, President Barry seems to think that there are no specific goals that these folks have. I'm not sure why he thinks that. But whatever the reason is, he came across sounding like a condescending jackass.

Here's part of what he replied (and it's the part that really ticked me off): "So the challenge, I think, for the Tea Party movement is to identify, specifically, what would you do?....It's not enough just to say get control of spending. I think it's important for you to say, I'm willing to cut veterans' benefits or I'm willing to cut Medicare or Social Security benefits or I'm willing to see these taxes go up. What you can't do, which is what I've been hearing a lot from the other side, is we're going to control government spending, we're going to propose $4 trillion of additional tax cuts, and that magically somehow things are going to work. Now, some of these are very difficult choices." Oh, for cryin' out loud.

There are two basic goals of the Tea Party movement. The second one can be almost automatic if the first goal is met. It's all about smaller government. Yes, it's also about lower taxes, but it's largely about smaller government. The government is huge and bloated. You don't think that there could be some cut backs in government there, President Barry? Really? Because you seem to think that we're all a bunch of idiots who would believe you that the only things that could be cut would be services that are essential.

This is what politicians do. Arnold Schwarzenegger pulls it at least once a year in California when they can't agree on a budget for this fiscally doomed state. They tell folks that, in order to stay within a budget, they're going to have to cut services like firefighters and policemen and school teachers. You don't want that, do you? No, of course not! That's when they justify raising taxes. But hold on a minute! Aren't there things within the governmental bureaucracy that could be cut other than firefighters, policemen and teachers? I'm 100% positive that there are.

President Barry, are you trying to tell me that every single government agency and department and job is absolutely, completely necessary? I don't think that it is. Are you going to tell me that every single government pension plan isn't overly generous? I don't think that you can tell me that and not have your nose grow at least six inches. You're trying to tell me that none of these governmental departments overlap and do the same work that other agencies do? And I'm supposed to believe you? Really?

How about, before you go suggesting cuts to Medicare and to veteran's benefits, you cut all services to those who are in this country illegally. How much money would that save? And that's just one area where money could be saved and where government could be shrunk. Don't go around threatening us by minimizing our obligation to our soldiers by suggesting that we should cut their services. How dare you. Seriously.

Smaller government. Lower taxes. Reduce the size of the government and spending will go down some. Reduce the size of the government to what it really needs to be reduced by and watch spending go down a great deal. Watch spending go down and watch the need to taxes to raise diminish. Remember, over fifty percent of Americans want fewer services and smaller government according to two different polls, one done in April of this year and the other conducted in September of this year. Over fifty percent want smaller government. Is that specific enough for you, President Barry? How else do we need to spell it out for you?

Tea Party Photo Goodness

Yesterday was tax day here in the US. And as one could expect, there were Tea Party protests/rallies/demonstrations across the country. They were entertaining, but not as entertaining as the health care protests last summer were. Now those were something. One of the main differences that I've noticed is that the Tea Party folks, for the most part, can spell. That doesn't mean they know what they're talking about, but it is concerting that they have a grasp of the basics. That being said, let's take a look at some signs and scenes from yesterday, shall we?

Here we have a child being made to hold a sign that is supposed to represent her feelings. The sign reads "Obama took my toof fairy money!" He apparently also took the forward facing Fs, Rs and Es, as well as the TH sound.

That wasn't the only sign wielding child out yesterday. Here's another one. Um, honey? I'm not so sure that you want to be part of a "tea bagger family". Tea party family, perhaps. But I think that being a "tea bagger family" is probably illegal. Definitely off-putting.

I appreciated the originality of the Tea Party Mobile or whatever you want to call it below. I like how there's just a little bit of everything thrown in there. Jesus. Truth. Insanity. Disaster. Lies. Taxes. Pork. Health care. Right. Wrong. Repent. Perverts. Wait. Perverts? Yep. Over there on the left. Next to Pork. Perverts. OK. I'm against perverts. Nice. Thanks.

This was one of the very few misspelled signs that were out there. The sign to the left of it was one of the most all inclusive signs out there.

It wouldn't be a protest in America without some nutjob questioning President Barry's citizenship. What is wrong with you people?

Where's the birth certificate? It's on the Internet, nutjob. And yes, it's real. For cryin' out loud.

And along those same lines, it just wouldn't be a protest without someone making the Obama-Osama comparison. Yes, we know. They sound a lot alike. Adolf and Rudolph sound a lot alike as well, but you don't hear folks comparing that little reindeer fellow to Hitler, now, do you?

Ahh. Go back to Kenya. Lovely. You're not doing a lot to add credibility to your cause, but you do make me laugh, so that's something. By the way, HE'S NOT FROM KENYA! Morons.

And here we have a little birther action combined with a little "In Living Color" action. Interesting combo to say the least.

Why bother with multiple signs when you can just cram it all onto one piece of poster board. The problem with it is that they're really only taking a stand against two of those things. They don't want the fascism or the socialism and they seem to think that the Obamacare sucks. Other than that, they're just sort of stating issues. Oh, how I only wish they had stated what "ALIAN CARE" was exactly and why it is illegal.

I've got feathers and a pitchfork. I also have torches and axe handles if you need some of those as well, sir.

And finally, we have these folks. The one, dressed like a priest (I think) is proclaiming that God hates taxes. I don't know why God would care about taxes. God doesn't pay taxes. But that's not really what I'm focused on here. I'm focused on what in the hell that is over to the right of that dude! It's like one of those guys from the cantina in Star Wars wearing some sort of mossy coat and trousers. It's odd and I have no idea what it has to do with tax protests. And I'm dying to know what brochure he's holding.

Taxing And Re-Taxing

It's come to my attention (via FOX News correspondent Anita Vogel on something called Fox and Friends yesterday morning) that states are so damned broke lately that they've taken to the notion that it's a good idea to find new things to tax. Never mind silly ideas like taking a look at what programs could be cut back on. No, the correct thing to do is to continue spending the same amount of money that we are now, even though there isn't enough tax revenue coming in to support that sort of spending, and just find new ways to suck more money out of folks. What a novel thought. And here are some of the novel things that are being taxed across this great (but kinda dim-witted) land of ours.

According to something called Don't Mess With Taxes, in the state of Maine they are taxing blueberries because they need to "...conserve and promote the prosperity and welfare of this State and of the wild blueberry industry of this State by fostering research and extension programs, by supporting the development of promotional opportunities and other activities related to the wild blueberry industry." Uh-huh. That almost sounds believable until you learn that Maine "...produces the most wild blueberries of any state in the U.S. or province in Canada. In fact, the state produces 99 percent of the wild blueberries in the United States." Hmm. Sounds to me like the blueberry industry is doing just fine on its own. It doesn't sound like it needs a whole lot of fostering. It sounds like it has a stranglehold on the North American blueberry industry. But Maine needs cash, so they've slapped a 3/4-cent tax on every pound of blueberries.

Now, over in West Virginia, we're getting really silly. Over there, according to taxfoundation.org, they are taxing Fourth of July staples such as sparklers. And not just sparklers! No, they've added a tax to sparklers, glow worms, snakes (the pyrotechnic, not the reptile), and noisemakers "...which produce a small report designed to surprise the user." What's a "small report" supposed to mean? Like the Penske file or something? Apparently, fireworks are illegal in West Virginia, so they've come up with what they call the "Sparkler and Novelty Registration Fee" for all other items. I don't know who it is that decides what is "novel" or not, nor am I aware of the defining parameters of a "novelty". It's unclear as to what this fee goes to pay for. Other states impose taxes on fireworks and then the proceeds are allotted to firefighters. I don't know that you can do that when you're taxing noisemakers. Maybe the proceeds go toward programs for the deaf. I don't really know.

According to Reuters, the brainless lawmakers who are trying to turn California into some sort of slap-happy utopia are proposing a tax on soda. The tax would be one cent per every teaspoon of sugar that is in the beverage. They claim that this would amount to tax revenue of $1.5 billion dollars a year. So, wait. One cent per teaspoon would equal 150,000,000,000 (that's billion, folks) teaspoons of sugar? That's a lot. Now, never mind that studies have been done that show that when you significantly raise the price of soda that the consumption of soda goes down. And while that's a good thing for health, that's not exactly what your state's economy needs. See, that's the part that all of these lawmakers miss when they're enacting this crap. They figure on the revenue from extra taxes being the same as if people won't be impacted by the tax at all. They don't think that people might cut their consumption of something if it costs more. They don't think that by deliberately increasing the price of something through taxation that it might cause their revenue to actually drop! But for cryin' out loud, keep doing it! God forbid if we cut spending for once. Holy crap. That would be insane.

In the new Health Care Reform Bill which was signed into Health Care Reform Law a week or so ago, there is a tax on tanning salon services. That's right. If you go to a tanning salon, there will now be a 10% tax on whatever it is that you're paying to lie underneath some fluorescent light bulbs so that you can have an unnatural orange-y glow about you. Now, some jackass named Doc Thompson was filling in for Glenn Beck a little while ago and he surmised that he "...would guess that most tanning sessions are from light-skinned Americans." Thus, he claimed that the tax made him "...as a white person, "feel the pain of racism." Hard to say which is more asinine, the tax or Doc Thompson.

And finally, let's go over to Illinois where they appear to have really taken the "tax things in weird ways" concept to a whole new level. Let's say you're looking at ingesting either a delicious Snickers bar (because Snickers satisfies, you know) or a delicious Twix bar (because you can chew it over with Twix). Which one of those choices is not going to be taxed? Yes, they both have chocolate. Yes, they both have caramel. Yes, they're both candy bars. So, the reasonable answer would be that they are both taxed. Not so fast. See, the Illinois tax defines candy as candy if it does "not include items that contain flour or require refrigeration." Soooo....what now? So, because of that completely reasonable line of thinking, a Twix, which does not contain flour, does not get taxed. Neither does a Nestle Crunch, a Kit Kat or the movie theater treat, Twizzlers. But if you're reaching for a Snickers, a Milky Way or some Starburst fruit chews, you're taxed. Starburst have flour? Really? I don't know for sure. I'm just going by what I found over on something called Openline Blog and they seem to know their stuff over there, so I'm going to trust 'em.

See? We're doomed. Doomed.

Filing For Taxes

Now is the perfect time to get your filing cabinet ready for your next round of tax returns. You want to have a systematized method for organizing.
Personally, I have a file drawer in my desk and that is where I keep our current year's receipts, statements, etc. At the end of the year, I transfer all of these file folders to a file cabinet in our study so that it's accessible for tax time and anything else that comes along. At the end of the 2nd year, I will box these records up and store them in the attic. It's best to keep the last 10 yrs of financial records stored. Then you can get rid of them.

In my file drawer I have several sections: Credit Cards, Utilities, Stan's Business, Medical, Insurance/Property Taxes, Dogs, Vehicles, House.

Credit Cards - I have a folder for each credit card and I keep the receipts and statements in their respective folders. If a credit card was used to purchase something for Stan's business, or pay a medical bill, etc then I make a copy of it to put in the respective folders. That way I have the original receipt in the credit card folder but I have a copy in Stan's business folder, or medical folder, etc.

Utilities - I keep a folder for all utility bills and payments (I use our bank's bill pay and I print out the transaction and keep it for the confirmation or transaction #'s).

Stan's Business - I have a folder for Accts Receivables (invoices, income that comes in and deposit slips) and Accts Payables (anything he purchases for business use).

Medical - I have a folder for all doctor's bills and medicine purchases.

Insurance/Property Taxes - Two folders, one for property insurance and one for property taxes. I keep receipts and statements.

Dogs - I keep a folder on each dog with all their papers in them including vet bills, microchip information, etc.

Vehicles - I keep a folder on each vehicle and I keep all titles, purchase agreements, repairs, purchases in that folder. If I have a vehicle loan, then I keep a separate folder for that where all the loan papers go along with statements and payment records.

House - Our mortgage statements go in one folder and all receipts for expenses in remodeling/yard/additions/maintenance go in the second folder.

I keep a large binder on my desk where I put all my general receipts (by month) and bank statements.

I have a file drawer that contains all our manuals and warranties. Whenever I buy something that has a warranty, then I always take the original receipt and staple it to the manual. Then I jot down the purchase date, where purchased, warranty time, serial numbers and model numbers on the outside of the manual and then file in this drawer. I have this drawer in sections too. I have computer equipment (desktop, laptop, printers and their driver software and setup software), cameras, watches, kitchen appliances, laundry appliances, furniture, guns, audio/video (includes TVs, DVD players, stereo, mp3 players, etc).

As I said, this is how I do it personally.












But you might just use an accordion file or a binder with pockets. Maybe you don't want to keep all the statements, bills, etc after you've reconciled your accounts. Maybe you don't keep receipts that aren't for tax deductible items. This is just the way I do it and it's worked for me over the years. For instance, we bought a TV one time and had to have it serviced immediately. The company didn't stand behind it's warranty and we ended up having to pay for it's repair despite following all their recommendations. Eight years later, there was a class action lawsuit and we were notified that if we had had a problem with the TV and could prove our cost of repairs we would be eligible for reimbursement. I went up to the attic, picked the box of stored financial documents that were marked for that year, flipped through the file folders until I found that credit card and there was the receipt. I mailed it in and we finally got reimbursed for that repair. It didn't take me 5 minutes to find that receipt and it was worth $150.

Just throwing every little scrap of paper into a shoebox or a plastic bag doesn't exactly help you when it comes to tax time. Because I assure you, you will procrastinate when January comes. It's too big of a job and you will keep putting it off. Procrastination creates it's own stress, then the stress of having to sort through it all, and, finally, you get to actually filling out your return. So avoid all that stress, by keeping organized throughout the year.

When I'm ready on my end, then I print out transaction reports and income statements for that year and put them in a binder. Then, when February 1st comes, I'm ready to do my return. I have all my stuff filed, I have my reports in my binder and it's just a matter of starting the tax software and answering the questions. It's really no hassle. When I'm through, I make sure to print me a copy to put in my binder and I keep all 10 yrs worth of tax returns and supporting reports in those binders on a shelf in my study. If I'm every audited I can pick the binder and go. If I need more supporting documents, I can go up in the attic, pick the marked box of financial documents and go.

These are my tips for today!

For more on organizing your home office check out these posts: http://sharonscrapbook.blogspot.com/2010/03/filing-system-for-home-offices.html
and
http://sharonscrapbook.blogspot.com/2010/03/filing-for-taxes.html
and
http://sharonscrapbook.blogspot.com/2008/02/tax-time.html
and
http://sharonscrapbook.blogspot.com/2010/02/receipt-clutter.html
and
http://sharonscrapbook.blogspot.com/2010/01/home-office.html