How is it a bad thing you ask? Easy, credit counseling, not credit interest rate cuts are needed. One thing I do agree with Sen Elizabeth Warren on is banks and credit companies take advantage of some of the most downtrodden and down on their luck individuals. They also prey on folks who should not even have a card to begin with.
Folk’s it may sound anti-business, but I do not think it’s right for a credit card company to be on a college campus hawking its products. Students, by and large, do not have an income, this is purely designed as a trap. Give them a card with $500 or so limit, get them to charge a bunch of fast food and booze, then tell them the minimum payment is all that’s required. Then when they hit the limit, either raise it, or charge over the limit fees. Then the higher interest kicks in and the minimum payment doesn’t even touch the principal. Countless lives have been ruined by these cards. Adults, families, and college age people by the way, credit cards do not discriminate.
One Year ago
So why is it bad to lower interest rates? It’s temporary relief, not the answer to the question. We are, in essence, rewarding bad behavior. I know some folks will be able to pay these cards off, but many more should also be closing them out. Pay in full and close them out? HA. This feels like an excuse to keep people spending once paid off, due to low interest rates compared to what they were paying. Not everyone needs to go to college and not everyone needs a credit card.
What do people need?
Seven Years ago
Credit counseling. Its not allowed in school as part of a budget class because it was deemed racist by the older generation. Not sure how budgeting is racist, but that maneuver has created a massive issue with the younger and some older generations. Credit cards, especially store cards, are far too easy to come by. While I do not think the interest rate should be allowed to touch 35%, I am not sure what the maximum should be.
On cards, I stick to what Dave Ramsey says; in essence you do not and should not need one. If you get one or more, like I have, be sure to pay them off in full each month, never spending more than you should. Differentiate between a need and a want. Sure, the points or miles are cool, but no one has gotten rich of credit card points… no one. Sure, it’s nice to earn a couple few hundred a year, but I do not have credit cards for that reason. Yes, its true people who get credit cards often overspend to earn extra “points” just remember folks 5% in rewards is $.05 per dollar spent, it’s not like you are coming out ahead.
My bigger issue is Donald Trump cannot do what he wants to do legally. Sure, he can sign an Executive Order, but will it stand the test of time? It appears to me to be blatantly unconstitutional. Time will tell, I guess.
My final thoughts are why do we no longer teach people about credit? Dave Ramsey is spot on when it comes to this. It’s the same with pay day lenders, pawn shops, and hard money lenders. Folks need to know what they are getting into, in the form of a class, via the internet or in person. Folks need to know how these financial vehicles work and what they could end up paying, not in the form of legal mumbo jumbo on their bill.
Bloggers note: No way was this going to be posted the day I sent it to William due to an earlier blog submission. Any changes after today will create a retraction to this story.
The day didn’t start well as a woman was killed by ICE Agents in Minneapolis, Minnesota. I will state I am never happy to hear anyone getting killed by authorities. There is more to this story, I am sure. If the ICE agent was in the wrong throw the book at him; however, I have a sneaky suspicion the person no longer with us was no saint in the matter.
On to the good parts.
First Trump is going to ban defense corporations from using government funds to buy back stock and pay dividends unless they make serious changes to manufacturing capacity and research. Here is some info below….
President Donald Trump said he would move to block U.S. defense contractors from paying dividends or repurchasing shares unless they significantly increase spending on manufacturing capacity and research, remarks that sent shares of major arms makers lower.
In a social media post Wednesday, Trump also called for sharp limits on executive compensation at defense companies, saying pay should be capped at $5 million until firms construct what he described as “NEW and MODERN Production Plants.” He argued that contractors are failing to produce and maintain military equipment quickly enough.
Defense companies “are currently issuing massive Dividends to their Shareholders and massive Stock Buybacks, at the expense and detriment of investing in Plants and Equipment,” Trump wrote. “This situation will no longer be allowed or tolerated!”
Folks to put it lightly, this needs to happen, and I hope it does. By no means am I insinuating that we should be stockpiling for war, we do need increased capacity to build war machines faster and more efficiently. The bottom line is that times are far different from fifteen years ago. We must be vigilant that war could break out in the not-too-distant future. Folks, the 90-day people amongst us will be angry but why should our taxpayer dollars go towards bloated executive compensation, stock buybacks, and dividends? That tells me we are being grossly overcharged. Why is it that everything to the older generation must be based on the almighty dollar and how big my bank account is? To be clear, I am not saying, and neither is Trump, they shouldn’t be allowed to make money, but look at the profits these companies are churning out.
More from Hegseth…
The criticism fits a broader theme of the Trump administration’s approach to the defense industry. In November, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth criticized what he described as a slow and inefficient procurement system, arguing that weapons programs are often over budget, delivered years late and sometimes outdated by the time they reach the field.
Over budget, years late, and obsolete is not going to win too many wars.
The second thing is he wants to ban private equity/institutional investors from buying homes.
President Donald Trump said he would ban Wall Street investors from buying single-family homes in an effort to ease the affordability crisis that’s plaguing the housing market.
“For a very long time, buying and owning a home was considered the pinnacle of the American Dream,” Trump said in a Jan. 7 post on the social media site Truth Social. “I am immediately taking steps to ban large institutional investors from buying more single-family homes, and I will be calling on Congress to codify it. People live in homes, not corporations.”
Institutional investors, such as Blackstone, have been reliably buying and renting out single-family homes since the 2008 financial crisis locked many Americans out of the mortgage market.
First-time homebuyers are suffering as housing has remained scarce and increasingly expensive. They made up a record-low share of all buyers in the most recent year, and the average age of a first-time buyer jumped to 40, according to an industry analysis.
Folks, I just turned 40. I have owned my home for over 10 years. I cannot fathom not being a homeowner until this age … but … the older generation has made it their mission to make it so my generation and the ones below it will never own a home. They started allowing these large corporations to buy homes with the only intention being to rent them out. In some places, like near Atlanta, entire communities are owned by these firms. They rent them out at top market rate, and when they are able, the rent is “raised to current market standards” regardless of their relationship with the tenant. Wouldn’t it make more sense to keep the rent increases manageable for a tenant you like, that will maybe take care of the property or at least not let it get run down? I would think so. As a result, it’s a “turn and burn” scenario for the renter. One of these outfits, Invitation Homes, bought a home about 5 doors down from me. The tenant has turned over 3 times in a 26-month period, and it currently sits unoccupied. The tenants also left a lot to be desired; the first was three generations of a Filipino family that moved in. Nothing against any race, but wouldn’t you consider it a bad sign 3 families are required to make rent each month? They quasi converted the garage into living quarters for the youngest family of 3. They lasted the longest. Next was a young Hispanic family, that lasted about 8 months. The last was a young black couple, they lasted about 2 months. In regard to the black couple, it sounded like the marriage was on ice and that was likely the reason for the short stay. As I note, it has sat vacant for about 5 months now. I predict it will sit for a while. The corporation can likely use the vacancy as some kind of write off, and they likely have the attitude of the 90-day guy and say “why take less than what we think its worth?”
The other big problem, first time and even not first-time homebuyers normally have a liquidity issue., They need to get the money together for the downpayment and sometimes have other contingencies … Selling their current home (if not a first-time home buyer). These corporations have none, their only ask is “where do we wire the money.”
These are both very good policies, with the second being probably my favorite of his term so far. Keep it up!
Chief
Oh, wait until I tell you about the healthcare issue in this country. BTW it ain’t Obamacare.
The 90-Day Guy lied. I have irrefutable evidence of his lie. Mental health is not a sympathy card and f**k you if you are using it as one.
How do I know he is lying? An aunt of mine who worked as a primary care doctor, and a surgeon, was over for Christmas. I asked for her expertise on this subject.
I told her what he had told me, that he told his doctor he was suicidal and had even picked out the knife to kill himself. She said the doctor is obligated at that point to make a call to the health and human service or related county/state department. She added that her medical malpractice insurance would not pay out if he had killed himself and she didn’t notify the correct channels. She went on to say he would be required to see a specialist for an evaluation. I told her he went once or twice then quit going, for money reasons. It’s always money with him, all the time. She told me that’s a lie also, as the appropriate channel/group would have forced him to attend, again being suicidal is a big deal this day and age with all the mass shootings done by them.
I further prodded, William will tell you it’s what I do, and her further responses crystalized his lying. She said mental health is a huge thing right now and most insurance covers it 100%. This is due to different laws passed as result of these shootings/killings. She said she had a feeling about what he did, I let her speak freely. Full disclosure, she is from Illinois, but I feel the laws/regulations on the books are likely similar or the same to California, where I am based. She said I can guarantee he went to an urgent care doctor, someone who is not his primary care doctor, he went in wanting to be diagnosed with a mental condition, and he won. Her words and I quote “he squealed to a doctor who is not his own and got put on a pill that will not fix his issue, it’s a here you go drug.” It’s a cover your butt, here you go, I guess you have a condition because you say you do. He went to an urgent care doctor because the doctor has plausible deniability, he can claim he sees a ton of patients each day, insured or uninsured he doesn’t know. It’s a free pass. That doctor was done with him after payment was processed that day, he got what he wanted.
He claims its anxiety when my phone’s alert for a call is coming in or a text is incoming bothers him; however, the sounds at the local casino do not. He gets off on things like this; it’s a sympathy card to him. It’s wild. When things do not go his way, it’s a mental health thing, yet he seeks no treatment. He is a liar.
There you have it folks, it’s been proven, truth always wins out. If you claim mental health and are lying about it, you are the lowest of the low. Actually, I’ll use a term the young people use: SYBAU … it’s an acronym for shut your bitch ass up. People with mental health issues need our help, not people who want to fake it.
So, the Federal Reserve Board of Governors agreed to lower interest rates yesterday for the third time this year. If you are wondering what this is about or how it affects you, congrats you are in the right place.
In cliff note terms what this means is the following: Banks borrow money from the Federal Reserve; they pay the rate the “fed” sets as interest. Then the bank turns around and loans it to “you” in the form of a car loan, home loan, line of credit etc. You pay higher terms then the bank and they make money on the “spread.” So, for example, when rates were zero about 10 years ago, I got a home loan (mortgage) my interest rate is 4%. So, the bank borrowed the money for zero from the government and loaned it to me for 4% so they make 4% on the money I borrowed.
As a result, mortgage rates will drop as will vehicle loans etc.
Why is this stupid?
Fed Chair Jerome Powell didn’t do this on his own volition, President Trump has been saying he will fire and replace him with someone who will lower interest rates all year. The fed is independent of the presidency, but this president doesn’t adhere to that. Simply put, Trump wants what he wants and will stop at nothing to get there. He wants interest rates to go back to zero, basically where they were during his first term. The fed controls interest rates as a check to keep inflation in order, most would agree inflation is still very high. We also have economic uncertainty, layoffs are up, and consumer spending (credit cards) is at never-before-seen levels.
Again, why is this stupid?
It helps out very few people actually. Sure, if you have a mortgage that started about 7 years ago or less, you likely can refinance to a lower rate, that’s a good thing. Ditto for auto loans and home equity credit lines. If you are a saver, you get whacked as your bank will lower interest rates paid on your savings account. To be fair no big bank pays much as far as savings, but my online bank has gone from 4% to 3.3% in the span of 3 months. Don’t cry for me, listen to my point in the following paragraph.
Trump wants corporations and the government to refinance their debt, not pay it off. Trump’s corporation has billions in debt. Look it up, as it comes due corporations do not pay it off; instead, they simply “recast” it and refinance at the going rate at the time. For the last 7 years or so, it meant much higher interest rates. Lowering interest expense means more to borrow, more to expand that hotel, or build that casino, or buy a competitor. It benefits corporations, not you the individual. Large corporations have popped up in the last 10 years buying up single-family homes and renting them out. Avalon Bay, and Invitation Homes are two of them. Very low-cost debt allows them to pay over asking price, and there are no contingencies. It’s hard for a person to buy a starter house when these corporations exist largely to buy up entire communities of homes. Sure, you could get approved for a lower interest rate to try to buy a home, but good luck.
If you are a saver, aka you follow the Dave Ramsey, Caleb Hammer, FIRE etc. movements, you lose purchasing power as the interest you earn in the bank will be a rate far lower than inflation. The destruction of the savings rate is exactly what Donald Trump wants. It’s a way to discourage this behavior. There is no benefit to the economy of me having $85,000 in the bank earning what will eventually be about 1% a year.
So, what is my point here?
Trump’s big thing is the stock market. He, like many others who are addicted to the TV, thinks the stock market is the economy. When it goes up, its great, when it goes down bad. 90-day guy believes stocks only go up, and Republican administrations are the best for the stock market. Think again, it’s the opposite. You’re better off in a Democrat presidency, Republican congress time. The problem is the only place to get a return of any kind when interest rates are that low is the stock market. This is dangerous because in most circles, folks believe the market has major external forces that dictate returns for those in the know. Why do you think people like Marjorie Taylor Greene go to congress flat broke and emerge as millionaires several times over? If you think they have good luck, God bless you! Just to add, for every Marjorie Taylor Greene or Nancy Pelosi, there are quite a few big losers in the market. Buyer beware… pun intended. I strongly oppose investing every dollar into the market, always keep money in a savings account, but to each is own.
In closing, please consider this word of warning. What about Donald John Trump screams he has your best interests in mind when it comes to money and budgeting? Think about it, I’ve mentioned his corporate debt, how about the spending while he was/is president? Doesn’t inspire much confidence huh? He loves debt, and cheap debt at that. You do not have as much money as he or his family does, rates will eventually go up again. Ask Rite Aid or any other corporation that went bankrupt. Nothing is forever and you don’t have the knowledge or insider status to compete in the stock market with these folks. Look at the number of billionaires in Trump’s cabinet, or any cabinet of past presidents for that matter. They know more than you and have more connections than me and you. In the long run this “great bull market” will run out of gas.
Beware of the prophet seeking profits. Also, know that a fool and his money are soon parted, don’t risk more than you can afford to lose.
PS. Anyone think it’s odd that folks you don’t know to be financially literate are now speaking about investing in crypto and other whacky things like meme coins? These are folks who never spoke about investing in the past. There are several in my circle. It has me worried. I understand the 90-day types being happy. They consume so much TV they live in a self-induced echo chamber. But what worries me is the folks who are not investor types starting to get into the game, especially some of the folks I know who are not exactly smart.
Lyric above were used to introduce the gossip segment of the old TV show Hee Haw. They seem appropriate when introducing a post about getting into someone else’s business.
Sadness. Anger. Pathetic. These are words I won’t use to call out the losers who are criticizing William and his dating situation. It’s a symptom of something else going on in their lives that they act like that. It’s disgusting. Actually, I’ll quote Don Corleone “act like a man!”
However, I would ask William to describe the folks who are treating him this way. I can say without much risk of being wrong. They are, and I quote my Filipino friend, “Pale, Stale, and likely male.” I would expand that universe to females as well. It’s the older generation. Oh, and they are all likely married to boot.
There is a biblical passage “He who is without sin cast the first stone.” The way I interpret it, a group of sinners (we are all sinners) standing around the rock pile and no one tosses a rock. Unfortunately, the way it is now is a group of older folks grabbing multiple rocks and chucking them because they can (since they went to church Sunday.)
Many people use the term ______ is the greatest invention since sliced bread. Well, that generation actually invented something better than sliced bread; they put wheels on a goal post!
The point of this blog is “what is grief?” And how does one grieve?
I have an uncle in my life, he lost his wife to cancer as did William. He had 2 very young girls. He spiraled and became a full-on alcoholic, lost custody of said kids. He claimed he was “grieving.” I guess that would be an acceptable outcome for William? Not the Wiliam I know.
Truth is William has been grieving his wife, it’s been ongoing. I made an effort to call him weekly on Thursdays while his wife was undergoing treatment. It’s what a friend does. I am not married; I have no kids. I have no idea what the loss of a spouse is like. I simply called to give Wiliam a reprieve for a few minutes, a friend should do that. Just because someone has passed doesn’t mean the grieving didn’t start sooner. There were a lot of LASTS. Now William is having a lot of firsts, as in first ______ without said wife. I cannot imagine it’s easy.
To those who are shooting their arrows at William, allow me to ask, what is proper grieving? A customer of mine who lost his wife started frequenting strip clubs right after, is that ok? Is it one life one wife? Someone I went to college with is on wife #3, is that ok? Why is it not ok to chart your own course in life? Doesn’t everyone deserve to be happy?
When did we start comparing ourselves to everyone? Why is it that the nuclear family has to be husband and wife plus two kids of opposite gender? It’s an easy answer; we are now a Hallmark country. Better be married post college, better have a couple kids. The commercials on the TV put it right out there, gotta be a family during this season, single people be damned. Valentine’s Day is worse. The ads are basically saying it’s time to f**k and make babies and if you are not doing that you are worthless.
The bottom line is William is doing what makes him happy. He has a way in life and the path he is on is his. I am happy for him and everyone else should be too. He loved his wife, full stop; no one is happy she is gone, or how she was gone. Some may say war is hell, cancer is hell.
Let William live his life. Live and let live is a motto I live by. I am happy for everyone and everybody, do your thing, do what you do. I don’t care if you’re banging some bleach blonde bimbo or some brunette. I do care if you are banging Jennifer Aniston as that’s Troll’s piece of ass!
My biggest concern is when did it become a thing to “punch down” rather than up. Sure, you may have a wife, kids etc. Why can you not respect folks who do not? Maybe it’s a personal choice, but why? They do this because it makes them feel better about themselves. Jealousy is another factor. The 90-day guy loves to remind me of this every Thanksgiving and Christmas season. He isn’t religious but he always says I am missing something. It’s a shot at me being single. It’s his way of trying to push a narrative. Trust me, he is bitter. He has told me he watches porn. The jokes he tells about having sex with sheep and goats tells me what I need to know. He views his wife as a child maker who is past her prime.
The fifty-year mortgage idea was floated by the Trump administration as a way to make home buying more affordable for the younger generations. While this may sound good on paper, it’s yet another way the older generation wants to saddle the younger ones with insurmountable debt. This is called “financial engineering” it’s the latest go to from the Baby Boomer generation that is entering the later stages of life… I mean power on this earthly plane.
You see, as things are currently, you have two options for a mortgage on a home, 15- and 30-year terms. Folks like Dave Ramsey and others rail against a 30-year loan, and he isn’t totally wrong. The problem is, we have a massive affordability crisis, as far as buying “your first home” is concerned. I say buy the place, if you can afford it, and you can always make extra payments toward your mortgage to build equity and own it quicker. Case in point, 10 years ago, I bought my first home, for $325,000. As of today, Zillow has it valued at $600,000. As you can see, starter homes are very expensive.
Enter the older generation. Having learned nothing from the financial crisis circa 2008, they now are floating a 50-year mortgage. This is the same group that floated and sold; interest only mortgages, negative amortization mortgages, NINJA (no income, no job, no asset) mortgages, and no down payment loans. This sunk the financial and credit markets so badly that banks needed federal government bailouts to stay in business. Foreclosures ran rampant and destroyed neighborhoods and cities. 15-17 years later we are not students of history, we just look for a new means to get to an end.
To be fair, this generation has been at it for a while now in regard to affordability. One thing William will tell you, I railed on the new 84-month car loan that replaced the 60-month car loan. This also had nothing to do with affordability. It was just a financial tool to get “you into that car you love so much.” It became not can you afford it, but how much can you pay monthly? We will adjust the dials in the finance department and make the numbers work. I do not know too many people who think it’s a smart idea to finance a vehicle for 7 years. Oh, check out what interest rate you will be paying, news flash it won’t be 0%.
Back to the 50-year mortgage, I ran some numbers, and it amounts to about a $300-400 savings per month in terms of a lower payment. This is based on a 30-year mortgage running about $2,600 which is common now. As you can see, the savings might help, but it comes with drawbacks. First, the interest rate will not be cheap as the bank will be holding the note for 50 years. Also, the age of the house will come into play. Buying that home built in 1960, it’ll be over 100 years old before the mortgage is 2/3 paid off! This carries significant risk for the bank as the asset could be falling into a state of disrepair. Also, you do not and will not build much equity over the life of that mortgage, so when you are looking to buy your bigger house, you won’t have much for a down payment. Just look at the amortization schedule. You will see the first 7-8 years is virtually all interest, not much toward principal.
The last thing to remember, the man pushing these mortgage ideas is none other than President Donald John Trump, a man who loves debt. Look it up, his corporation owes billions in loans. This is no shot at him, he made a ton of money in real estate, but he did it with the corporation holding the paper not himself. In this case, he is making you hold the debt personally. He has made zero attempts to cut the debt or deficit as President (this term or last), and a budget will never be a thing under him. He see’s things through the eyes of “as long as you can make the payment you are fine.” It’s the way his generation feels.
In closing, please think long and hard before you fall for these shenanigans put out by the older generation. The only thing they care about is wealth generation. The 90-day calendar types love it because this means home builders can sell more homes, banks can write more loans, and profits will go higher. They could care less about affordability; they prefer you locked into loan terms that won’t seem like a good move in a decade. This will not end well. I am happy there has been push-back on these mortgages. The truth is that some people will not be able to afford a home. You may not be able to afford that sports car, getting another credit card will not solve your problem. A class/seminar on budgeting/credit should be required.
Stop fleecing the younger generations. Be a student of history. We are entering a rough cycle in terms of affordability. Adding more years to the term is pointless. It’s time we grow-up as a country.
As an opening note, remember I am a Libertarian who votes with the Republicans, think of me as the opposite of Bernie Sanders who is a Socialist but votes Democrat.
Under the Constitution, we conduct a census every 10 years, meaning we count everyone in every; state, county, city etc. For the sake of this blog, I am not going to touch the “illegals were counted” argument. I am simply making a point about the lines drawn. Yes, I am aware and agree that certain states play “creative accounting” with the numbers. After the states finish the count, they send their figures to the feds. The total population then gets divided by 435 (the number of congressmembers) and a number of representatives for each state is determined. Let’s say 800,000 people. Then they take each state’s population and divide by that number and that is how many “districts” they get awarded. States that grow in population may/will gain seats, those who lose population or do not grow fast enough may/will lose seats. Each state is guaranteed 1 congressmember. Obviously for states that lose/gain, they must re-draw their district lines. This occurs once a decade. Some states have the state legislature draw them, others like California have an independent commission. These maps, when approved, go into place, typically for the election in years ending in “2,” for the next decade. Sometimes these maps are delayed by courts, or the voting rights act. Typically, this is due to racially altered districts, I’ll explain more below.
So, the Republicans in Texas, via Trump, decided to re-draw their lines for the upcoming election. While this is not specifically forbidden, they do not gain or lose seats, they just redraw the lines. They drew the new lines in such a way as to try to “gain” 5 Republican seats. The 90-day guy needed a new pair of man panties upon hearing this, it was the best news ever! They then moved on to Missouri redrawing the lines to obliterate the Democrat representing Kansas City. Ditto in North Carolina with a Democrat representing a “swing seat.” This is like shooting fish in a barrel, right? Then Comrade Newsom in California decided he would get in on the fun, and the voters passed an initiative to adopt new Democrat drawn lines, and suddenly it wasn’t so fun for Republicans. I will give Newsom credit, we have an “independent” commission, and he went to the voters and the voters approved a measure to override the commission and adopt new maps. I am not saying Its right, but it was the correct process. From what the interwebs are saying, Virginia, Maryland, and Illinois are kicking around the idea of re-doing their maps. Those would benefit the blue team. As a side note, Ohio was forced by the courts to re-draw their map, it appears the red team will gain a couple, Utah was required to re-draw theirs, blue team will gain one.
So, as you can see, we have bedlam.
The red team is angry that the blue team is doing it, the blue team is saying the red team started it. Truth is both couldn’t be more wrong. What the Founders had in mind were districts drawn so that regions/areas/cities/towns with the same needs get a representative who serves their interests. Think of it like this; if the Geater Sacramento area was in one district, the representatives could focus on; infrastructure, public transit, redevelopment funds, things bigger that more developed cities need. On the other hand, places way up north of Sacramento like Chico, Red Bluff, and the rural cities nearby have completely different needs; timber industry, farming, rural internet etc. My point is, what these maps did, was put the rural areas in with parts of the large cities, (both sides did this) to create districts the other side cannot win. For example, what do Santa Rosa and Sonoma have in common with Alturas and Chico? Outside of smoking weed, I’d say very little, but it now has 45% Democrat registration making it unwinnable for a Republican. This is a common theme both parties used, it’s been going on for years, but the pedal was pushed to the floor this go round. Also, both parties “shored up incumbents,” meaning they took members who may lose their seats and put people/areas containing large amounts of voters from the other team into a neighboring district. Think of it like this, as far as Northern California is concerned, if you remove some rural parts of Kevin Kiley’s district, and replace with a city like Rancho Cordova it could suddenly become unwinnable.
The other issue I have is that this sets a dangerous precedent going forward. How often will we be redrawing these seats? Let’s use this example. A congressperson from a former safe seat wins by only 4% due to shifting demographics. Do you re-draw the lines shifting parts of the closest “big city” out or draw in more of the “rural area or military base” in? To be clear, I am targeting both parties here. This would mean we become a banana republic, and sadly we are getting very close to being one.
What is my solution? Well, nothing is perfect, but I would start by saying cities should not be split up. For example, the City of Nashville should have representation from 1 person, not be “cut up” into four pieces and spread out making it impossible for a Democrat to win. Likewise in California, there should be 2 Republicans representing rural northern seats, not 2 Democrats representing Bay Area/Norcal hybrid seats. This actually gives representation. The idea here is the rep from a city will argue for certain things and against others, also bringing perspective from city life, the rural rep will do the opposite. This is healthy. By carving up Nashville or putting Bay Area cities in with northern rural areas, they do not get a voice. Frankly there is no point in even visiting there.
As far as competitiveness goes, I doubt many seats will be competitive but at least the maps would create actual representation. The other point here is states would likely be sending a coalition of representatives that looks like their states voting demographics. I mean shouldn’t CA be sending about 38% of its representation as Republicans? Ditto in Texas for Democrats? The way the lines are currently being drawn creates an out of whack representation demographic. Does anyone think North Carolina, a literal toss up state in presidential elections should send 11 Republicans in a 14 seat delegation?
With all the talk of rigged elections, doesn’t this actually seem like rigging an election? Creating a district your guy cannot lose? Or even being remotely challenged?
During the government shutdown you heard a lot about SNAP/EBT/CAL Fresh benefits. I will explain the propaganda both sides were using. 90% of it is not true, 100% of it was deplorable. I will explain the program and the amount of “fraud” taking place. If you are reasonable, you will learn something, if you are far right or left, you will not; feel free to quite reading if you fit into the latter categories.
Understanding what SNAP is. It is a supplement. People on SNAP are what I refer to as the “working poor.” They are folks working 12-15 hour days, possibly even 7 days a week, because the jobs they have pay minimum wage. They do this because their primary job doesn’t give them 8 hours a day or 30 hours a week to be eligible for benefits. These folks have their money run out around the 20th or so of each month. Sure, there are disabled folks on here to who cannot work.
What you can use SNAP on. It’s essentially groceries and fast food. It will not work on alcohol and some prepared foods.As a result, you see the person in line having to swipe the card numerous times, and likely remove items that aren’t eligible for SNAP from their cart because the system will not take payment.
How much is the benefit? It’s about $188 a month. Again, the point of this program is a “supplement” not a living benefit, think of it as “something extra.” Look at that figure again. Folks, it’s $188. Recipients getting this aren’t going out to dinner at Ruth’s Chris Steakhouse. If you live in the real world, the folks on SNAP, as Dave Ramsey says “are only seeing the inside of a restaurant if they are working there.”
As you can see above, this program isn’t one that folks are getting rich off of, it’s just a way to put food on the table during the latter part of the month. No one is living high on the hog here.
I will now refute the criticisms the uninformed on both sides of the aisle spew about this program.
It’s rampant with fraud. This is flat-out, not true. First the benefit is so small that it’s barely worth the time to apply if you are doing it for nefarious reasons. I am sure your household income is verified, either via the IRS or State Tax Board so it would be pretty easy to catch the liars. If someone is working for cash or under the table, I am not sure how to catch those types, but it’s a small number. Now in regard to the folks selling their benefit card for cash to purchase drugs or alcohol, I am not sure how you stop that, but again that isn’t a large part of the program. Again, I just do not see a lot of people fraudulently being on this government program.
These people did it to themselves. In some cases, yes, I will concede that point, having a felony on your record severely limits the jobs you can have. Not finishing high school also will limit you, as is the case with having children out of wedlock. However those people are the exception, the rule is what I am talking about. Most of these recipients are working multiple jobs and are barely able to tread water. This is due to C-suite types not wanting to pay a living wage to folks and cutting hours to not allow benefits to be offered.
All they buy is junk food with it. This is mostly true unfortunately. Again, what we are dealing with here are folks with very little work skills, working for very little pay. Also, due to their schedule, they may not be able to cook or know how to cook. In that case buying, chips, cookies, cereal, frozen dinners, and soda is what they do. They can stretch these items out, I guess. Yes, this food is bad for you healthwise, but it does no one any good giving people who can’t cook; beans, rice and flour. It’s a deeply systemic problem that has been allowed to grow out of control.
Illegals are getting benefits in large numbers. This isn’t true. Why would you sign up for a program and call attention to yourself, especially with the current group in the White House. Let’s all agree on something, it isn’t illegals pulling off the fraud.
Not paying them during the shutdown will teach them a lesson. I heard this from a couple Republicans. Anyone else need proof that taking God out of our lives was a bad thing? Starving people to teach them a lesson? What is the matter with you. This is actually worse because the true “hunter/gatherer” mentality comes out and folks start doing drastic things to feed their families.
Can’t food banks take care of it? Nope. The truth is they can barely handle their current caseload; this just made the issue worse.
As you can see from the above, I am making light of the fraud, and what these folks buy. The questions being asked and statements made are a problem. We should be asking how are 42 million Americans on this program? That’s a ton! How DID this happen? We can talk about fixing this but I feel we are too far gone. Where do you start when 42 million people are on it? RFK Jr., for all his faults, is onto something about limiting the types of foods folks can buy with these benefit cards. I do not think they should be accepted at fast food places either but again the bulk of these folks can’t cook, or their schedule doesn’t allow them the time. It’s a chicken or the egg type argument.
If we want to be real about the program, I think those of us that are reasonable would agree, 7/10 of these folks do have a need to be on the program and receive the benefits. They as stated work multiple jobs, weird hours, and just cannot get ahead. 1/10 are likely fraudsters, but how do you catch them? As detailed above, it’s pretty hard to catch the person selling their card for cash at the local park/street corner. This is also likely a number higher than is reality. The remaining 2/10 are where the real problem lies. These are folks who are clueless as opposed to the 7/10 who are helpless. These people put themselves into this situation by having a deserved criminal record, having kids when they cannot afford them, and other poor choices. These are the folks we need to stop assisting. They likely spend countless hours watching the tv on the couch and intentionally not picking up more hours at their job because they are lazy. Frankly put, we help out way too many clueless folks in this country, we are bankrupting ourselves as a result. This is the group DOGE should have targeted.
Chief
PS now back to your regularly scheduled programming of tossing out far right and left ideas about this issue.
Editor’s Note: One issue that is not refuted in the above is stolen identities and organized crime. I suspect the bulk of fraud is via this mechanism. In my experience, government is ill equipped to deal with fraud as the presumption of any government program is that the applicant is eligible.
Folks, two Republican woman had pretty bad incidents this past 10 days. Embarrassing actually, and no I’m not talking about wardrobe malfunctions or scandalous meltdowns.
Blogger note: It will be interesting to see if William believes the same as me on these two pieces of work. To set the scene for the blog I am a religious person who does not watch porn, nor frequent strip clubs, or take part in other vices such as gambling.
Number 1 Republican gone wild: Nancy Mace had a meltdown as TSA officers escorted her to the gate at an airport.
The profane incident at the Charleston International Airport threatens to derail her run as she said she would sue the airport authority for defamation and false reporting.
An initial incident report from the Charleston county aviation authority police department first obtained by Wired describes Mace cursing at airport staff, saying that this was no way to treat a “f—ing US representative”. She invoked the name of South Carolina senator Tim Scott, saying that the Republican lawmaker would not be treated as she was, according to the report.
Mace had this to say: “I’m not going to be the next person shot and killed in cold blood,” Mace said. “Last Thursday morning, I absolutely, 100% confronted the airport employees who put my safety at risk. Did I drop an F-bomb? I hope I did. Did I call them incompetent? If I didn’t, they absolutely earned it.” Mace claimed that she “personally had more than two dozen security breaches” at the airport.
TSA agents right now and during the incident in question are working without pay. Sure, they will get backpay when the shutdown ends, but contrast that with Mace who IS being paid during the shutdown. Mace is running for governor, and this will likely be beginning of the end for her hopefully.
Mace also brought us this viral moment earlier.
“When I woke up this morning at 7 — I was getting picked up at 7:45 — Patrick, my fiancé, tried to pull me by my waist over this morning in bed,” Mace recounted Wednesday with a smile at the breakfast hosted by GOP presidential candidate Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) in the Palmetto State.
“And I was like, ‘No, baby, we don’t got time for that this morning,’” Mace said she told her future spouse, Patrick Bryant. The pair got engaged last year.
“I gotta get to the prayer breakfast,” Mace told the crowd. “And I gotta be on time,” the 45-year-old lawmaker said, before adding, “A little TMI.”
“He can wait. I’ll see him later tonight.”
Yeah, she shared that at the prayer breakfast.
Oh, and that fiancé she passed on sex with? She later accused him of sexual assault. He is countersuing saying it was made up. Who do you believe?
The ex-fiancé of Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., filed a lawsuit this week claiming that she fabricated sexual assault allegations against him in a scheme she allegedly manufactured with a friend’s estranged wife, reports said.
The lawsuit filed by Patrick Bryant on Thursday claims allegations made against him in a May lawsuit from a “Jane Doe” were false, according to WCSC. The outlet reported that the original lawsuit claimed Doe was assaulted in 2018 at the home of Eric Bowman by another man and that he and Bryant filmed it — an alleged incident that Mace referenced during a speech on the House floor in Washington, D.C., earlier this year.
Republican gone wild number 2: Lauren Boebert
Rep. Lauren Boebert and her boyfriend Kyle Pearcy, a real estate broker from Windsor, Colo., attended a Halloween party in Loveland, Colo., on Friday night, in costumes portraying a Mexican woman and an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent, photos obtained by ABC News show.
The congresswoman was dressed in a traditional Mexican dress and wore a sombrero while Pearcy wore an ICE vest over fatigues.
A chalkboard sign that appeared in other photos from a separate public event the couple attended the same night which are widely circulating online was slung on the back of a chair and is out of the frame in the pictures, according to a party guest who spoke to ABC News.
The text on the sign, which appears to be joke mocking the pronunciation of “you see” said “Mexican Word of the day: JUICY. Tell me if Juicy ICE coming.”
Blogger note: The Mexican word of the day is an internet meme that went viral for a while, its offensive making fun of Mexican speech, but it was a copycat move here. Not original writing.
Ok, I have a real problem with this. It was a Halloween party of what seemed like a community gathering. As in a public type of setting. This is the thing about Boebert, she doesn’t know how to read the room or understand that sometimes going viral is stupid and dumb. The costume is a great display of someone not having an IQ higher than the temperature of the room. There were obviously quite a few that found this offensive, she was photographed and it went viral online for the wrong reasons. Wearing a traditional Mexican dress and having an ICE agent escort you as your date is plain tone deaf as a member of Congress. This would likely get my approval if it was a party of staff and other employees, maybe even fellow Republicans, but not a public event. Let’s just be honest, the costumes are offensive to at least half the country, it’s a bad look.
Of course, the 90-day guy laughed like a hyena and said come on she is expressing herself. “She is showing her ass, not literally, but figuratively” I responded. His laughter makes perfect sense; he is a man who views TV as the real world. He lives in fantasy, not reality. I guarantee he would not be laughing or approving if in front of other people. He tells jokes of men having sex with sheep, goats and donkeys so it’s clear what he finds normal.
Oh, Boebert is also famous for her other excursions such as the documented “date” at the movie theatre where she was giving her date a hand job and allowing him to fondle her breast. Behavior that was caught on security cameras. Oh, said “date” was a well-known Democrat handler.
In closing, the point of this blog is not to attack Republicans, it is to call out bad behavior by electeds. We would be doing the same if they were Democrats. The reason we spotlight this behavior is they, like professional athletes, are supposed to be role models. These two are anything but. In the case of Boebert, it’s time to grow up. You are blessed with being very attractive, but that isn’t a pass. She plays to the hard right, “podcast bros” and the whack jobs. There are lots of illegally here; Mexican laborers and workers who work jobs we do not want to do. Bottom line, it’s offensive and a very bad look. In the case of Mace, it’s time for her to go as well. She made the crude comments about her fiancé and wanting to have sex prior to a prayer breakfast, then accused him of sexual assault. She seems to have fallen into “Law and Order SVU culture” as I call it, cry rape or sexual assault and you are guilty until proven innocent. Its conduct unbecoming. My father used to tell me Republicans do not do things like that. It’s time to return to that philosophy, as this is not a winning or good look.
Chief
PS Mace had another meltdown after I finished this blog, seems like the sexual assault is now rape. She looks like a soon to be former elected official.
“What kind of guy sues his own rape victim and sues women he filmed without their knowledge, permission or consent for YEARS? Who does that?” Mace posted Friday morning. “Can’t wait for a court hearing on this!!! Put me in coach—I’m ready to testify, under oath—this guy should be rotting in a jail cell—not suing his victims!!!
There is another election on Tuesday, next week or this week pending the publishment of this blog. The editor is on sabbatical out of the country; we pray his Visa or Passport paperwork is in order.
CA is voting on a Proposition 50, which they labeled Stop the Trump Gerrymander or something like that. It’s funny, the ballot is quite literally 2/3 of a page. We out here, on the Left Coast, are used to ballots being about 5 pages. Simply put, this measure will re-draw our congressional maps and basically elect 5 more Democrats to Congress in November of NEXT year.
So why do I blame the GOP you ask? Simple, I’ll lay it out in bullet point form with my thoughts.
Trump is the anti-Christ in California. Anything he does, we hate it; or at least a very large majority hate it. Clever on Newsom and Bonta for drawing the legal language as an “anti-Trump” move.
Using very bad surrogates on the campaign. Kevin McCarthy and former Governor Arnold Schwarzengger, two very unpopular ex-politicians, who rank low in respectability among GOP Voters, are somehow the voice of reason? Worse, these guys lack any credibility with the voting majority in California. Seriously folks, who thought putting up a Governor who essentially became a Democrat and a very, very moderate former Speaker as the face of the opposition would be a smart thing? If the CAGOP and CRA hate them (to their credit btw), what do you think the rest of the voters think?
Voter apathy never happened. Elections, especially special ones, have a very, very muted turnout. Typically, it’s just hyper-partisan voters. The hyper-partisan ones on the Right come nowhere near the level of the ones on the Left.
Trump cannot and will not get out of his own way. First, I do not understand the need to redistrict Texas, but I digress. This thing would have died out (Prop 50) had he just moved on, instead they moved on to North Carolina, Missouri, and now Indiana, and possibly Florida are going to redraw. Keeping this issue in the news just further enrages the anti-Trump voter.
Touching on the point above, the opposition has centered on “its illegal.” While that may be true in California, it’s also unconstitutional in the other states where the GOP did it. The argument sounds like one child taunting another, “I can do it, but you can’t.” Its poor messaging and actually energizes the other side more wanting to vote.
CA GOP Leader, James Gallagher, is another problem. He proposed a 2-state solution. I heard and read about this and thought “is this Jimmy Carter in disguise?” Really, he is comparing California to Israel and Gaza? When they were in the midst of an actual war? No way would that ever work.
The shutdown isn’t helping. It doesn’t matter whose fault the shutdown in Washington DC is blamed on. Again, Trump is not popular here. The proposition is framed to voters as a way to stop Trump. See my point?
So, in closing, I’m thinking a result of around 58-42 or so in favor. There are just way too many Democrats and anti-Trump folks out here. Things may have been different if the above were not true, but I doubt it. I do not understand why any of this is actually necessary. President Trump has used Congress for only the “Big Beautiful Bill” as far as I know. It seems weird to go all in on this when he doesn’t actually seem to need anything to get passed by Congress.
Chief.
Full disclosure, I had a different blog written on this, but I thought it was a “little too inside baseball” and will publish it later. It deals more with the nuts and bolts of redistricting than this post.
