William Thien

Posts Tagged ‘“William Thien”

One of the primary focuses of my writing at this venue is how the tax code affects me as an individual and I for one as an individual who owns no property or that has no dependent write-offs am waiting to hear about the new tax plan.

During the campaign promises of increases in deductions were made to families with dependents and to property owners as well but little if anything was mentioned about single tax payers with no dependents or property, what I have called “the indentures” to the US tax code.

Even if the only change for single tax payers is a decrease in the tax rate, I will find that quite satisfying as someone making the same as I do and that has dependents or that owns their home receives a substantial tax refund compared to my taxes and pays less throughout the year as well on their paychecks. The government has in effect given them a raise, a raise with my tax dollars.

As I’ve stated before I do not begrudge the other tax payers. They should take the tax write-offs. I would do the same. But that is blatantly unfair tax policy and if the tax code should be one thing and one thing only, the tax code should be fair.

Copyright © William Thien 2017

Sign up to receive updates. It’s easy and safe. Just go to the upper right hand corner of this page and add your email address. We will never sell your contact information to anyone.

 

Advertisements

The last couple of days there have been numerous articles at online news sites and in the mainstream television news talking about The Trump administration’s belief that they are being treated unfairly by the media. After reading the news online and watching the television news this morning I would have to agree. But why are the media treating Trump so unfairly.

Is it because the media had hoped that Hillary Clinton had won the presidency? No, I believe the media could care less if Clinton had won.

Are the media treating Trump unfairly because women are upset Clinton lost the election? Doubtful. Though the media like all of the hullabaloo and the marching going on because it makes for an interesting story, that’s not why the media are treating Trump unfairly.

Is it because the mainstream media is liberal? Perhaps, but that plays only a marginal part in this matter.

Then why, why treat The Trump administration differently than other administrations?

It is quite simple. All of the other candidates spent hundreds of millions of dollars on campaign advertising while Trump on the other hand won the presidency using a free social media account on Twitter.

Trump spent a small fraction of money on advertising dollars compared to all of his Republican rivals during the primary and then a relatively small fraction of advertising dollars defeating Hillary. The media makes money selling advertising space. Trump bought hardly any media time in comparison to his rivals and now the media feels it must make an example of Trump.

Instead of spending all of his money on campaign advertising, Trump had the media reporting about his use of a free social media account. The media spent half of its time trying to suggest that Trump’s tweets were inappropriate. Why? Because the media realized that Trump’s free Twitter account represents incredible competition to their own system of message control. The media want to control the message and it is through control of the message that they can force you to buy airtime to run your campaign ads.

The media are treating The Trump administration unfairly because they have lost control of the message. There is a new kid in town in mediaville and it is social media.

In treating The Trump administration unfairly the traditional media are committing a great disservice to the public by not allowing The Trump administration the same latitude provided to other administrations.

Keep that in mind when you switch on the television next time.

Copyright © William Thien 2017

Sign up to receive updates. It’s easy and safe. Just go to the upper right hand corner of this page and add your email address. We will never sell your contact information to anyone.

 

 

 

In 2013 I published this observation on illegal immigration and what can be done about it. It is interesting to see how things have transpired since. Instead of opting for one of my suggestions, that of a North American Union, something similar to a European Union with NAFTA as the economic framework, the country is proceeding towards the other option, an emplacement of what amounts to a fortification. I don’t want to say I predicted the recent events, but…

from June 1, 2013

A co-worker of mine asked me rather indirectly to address the matter of illegal immigration in the United States. I’ve been putting it off.

So I’ll get right to the point. We only have two choices really. Either seal off the border and do it right…or we will have to implement a European Union type solution.

Already with NAFTA (North American Free Tree Agreement) we are trading amongst North American countries for all practical purposes tariff free. Because of NAFTA, which of course devastated the job market in The United States, the framework is already there for a North American Union of some type. Our industry profits from the close proximity of foreign countries but the citizenry pays thoroughly in the form of taxes for benefits obtained by illegal immigrants while industry covers none of those costs, AND at the same time our citizenry endures loss of employment as jobs leave for both our southern and northern borders yet the citizen still pays in the form of taxes for the benefits obtained by illegals. Again, industry gets off scott-free.

Let me say right now I see no reason why industry should benefit from such an arrangement while the citizenry should suffer so drastically, not only in terms of high taxes to cover the cost of benefits for illegals or a loss of jobs, adding also the massive cost to man the border.

Therefor I believe there are really only two solutions. Either seal off the border completely, do it right, and leave it at that. Or, create a North American multi-country government much like The European Union. Perhaps all of the countries who are governed or chartered within NAFTA could be members of The North American Union. The one sticking point with that is that the dollar is worth so much more than all of the other currencies and backs so much more in terms of value, capital, and liquidity, that in order to have a North American Union, you would have to have a North American currency. You could call it “The Americana” instead of the dollar, or something to that effect. But I don’t know if that is advisable.

England joined the EU but kept its currency, which has turned out to be a wise choice as it has not seen such a devaluation as the Euro nor has it suffered continual, repeated and spasmodic economic crises.

So there you have it. That’s the way I see it. To date estimates to man the border range from $100 Billion dollars to $250 Billion dollars. In 2011 the average annual salary of a Customs and Border Patrol Officer was $75,000. In 2012 there were an estimated 21,394 agents. They of course have support teams and there are most certainly office staff to perhaps a larger extent. Just the cost of manning the border with little or no effect is tremendous. The logistical costs must be incredible. I could find no information as to that expense. So, not only is the issue one of taxation to pay for the benefits of illegal immigrants and the loss of jobs due to NAFTA, there is a tremendous cost to man the border.

We really only have two choices. To leave the matter without a solution much longer would of course be typical of Washington.

Without a solution our southern border is just a sieve for terrorism, illicit trafficking, and a wound bleeding tax dollars to the south. So, a North American Union type solution would mean no more costs to maintain a so-called “secure border.”

Of course there is one other solution which I believe is not advisable at this time. You can guess what that is and we will just leave it at that.

More on why I believe the country has chosen to proceed with the construction of a wall rather than with the idea of a North American Union later.

Copyright © William Thien 2013, 2016

Sign up to receive updates. It’s easy, safe, and free. Just go to the upper right hand corner of this page and add your email address.

Personally I don’t believe the incoming administration is going to be as conservative as the media and all of the left wingers would have the country believe.

Already the Washington elite have begun hacking away at Trump’s campaign positions. A softening of just about every position he had during the campaign, that which put him where he is in the first place, appears inevitable. He will be made to realize that his ideas were (as in past tense), “a bit too much.”

Trump’s Tweets have even become less terse, more diplomatic. Though less profound in Trump’s case, it is clear that what everyone feared would happen is in fact happening. President-elect Trump is being brought into the political fold he fought so valiantly against during the campaign.

I think instead it is quite possible that you will see a great deal of the real legislative and perhaps “physical” activism rise out of the House and Senate, both populated by a majority of Republicans after the election, something nobody predicted, also.

Yet the massive political shifting doesn’t stop at the federal level. Well over 40 states now have elected Republican governors and Republican majorities in the house and senate.

So what’s next for conservatives?

Opportunity. Opportunity like conservatives have never seen before at the national level to the local.

Though I don’t entirely equate conservatism with Republicanism directly, and I’ve written to that effect before, if there ever were a time for conservatives to activate and incentivize the elected in their favor, now is that time. There is in fact no time to waste.

With Clinton winning the popular vote during this election, there may not be another ‘what’s next for conservatives?” like this one, for some time or even ever.

All those estimated millions of people who said they were going to leave the country if Trump were elected are still here. I don’t see a massive exodus happening anywhere, do you?

Copyright © William Thien 2016

Sign up to receive updates. It’s easy and safe. Just go to the upper right hand corner of this page and add your email address. We will never sell your contact information to anyone.

This is a reprint from 2015. I’m just reprinting it because I think it has a certain contemporary significance to it.

Last year one of my favorite sports personalities came clean about his use of “performance enhancing drugs.” It was a big deal in the media.

To me what was really disturbing about the episode, though, was not so much that he used steroids, or whatever he was using, but that almost immediately a regional convenience store and gasoline chain dropped its endorsement of the guy.

At first I suppose you could say, “Well, I guess he had it coming to him.”

But at the time the price of gasoline was well over $3 a gallon, closer to $4 a gallon, and it had remained at that level for several years.

It occurred to me that the convenience store chain’s move to drop their endorsement of the guy was a bit hypocritical.

Here they were raising the price of gasoline when someone sneezed in a foreign country or when the weather changed one way or the other (they used both as excuses), or when there was a tropical storm in some other part of the world, or when one single fuel truck somewhere ran off the road, or when some politician was caught for infidelity, or when some little war somewhere flared up, or when the seasons changed, or when there was a holiday and people were traveling, or when global warming was announced, then climate change, then it was determined that global warming might not happen, then only when climate change happened some times, then when baby boomers started retiring, when some volcano somewhere fired up, when it flooded somewhere, when there was a drought, when it snowed, when it rained, when the sun was shining, on cloudy days, when birds started migrating, when the birds returned, and the list goes on and on.

Here and everywhere else the gasoline station/convenience store chain was giving it pretty thoroughly to everyone up the you know what along with all of the others who sell gasoline and totally mucking up the economy, eating up everyone’s discretionary income, and THEY, yes THEY were dropping the endorsement of some guy who used performance enhancing drugs so he looked a little better on the field.

I tell you what!

Why don’t they take the ethanol out of my gasoline because that definitely doesn’t enhance the performance of my car and it is driving up the cost of food, too. Why don’t they stop adding water to the gasoline? That would help, particularly at this time of year. And take all of those varnish type solutions out of the gasoline so I can store it for a couple of years like I used to be able to do. If you ask me, America’s fuel supply could use some “performance enhancements” itself, particularly now that the price of gasoline though down recently is going right back up.

Needless to stay I stopped buying my gasoline from that convenience store chain.

Copyright © William Thien 2015, 2016.

Sign up to receive updates. It’s easy and safe. Just go to the upper right hand corner of this page and add your email address. We will never sell your contact information to anyone.

First of all when we consider the entire election process in America we must understand that the election is not just the actual practice of voting and tabulating the votes.

There are other processes involved as well.

For example, the media have been fawning over The Clintons for decades. I could give reasons for that phenomenon but there is nothing like scandal to get the media tongue wagging in this age of tabloid journalism and of course The Clintons have been at the center of many major scandals.

The media have been catering to the Clintons with such media properties as “Madame Secretary” and the first five minutes favoring Hillary at the beginning of every evening news broadcast on a major network for at least since this election season began. Years before Clinton decided to run for president she has been receiving favorable media attention, not to say that she shouldn’t be receiving favorable media attention, she is after all a former First Lady.

There is also the treatment of Trump by The GOP as well and he has been treated like an outcast from the very beginning, required to publicly take special oaths and swear to boyscout style impromptu allegiances. Clearly it is not just The Democratic Party which has institutionalized some of its candidates.

So, when Donald Trump states the election is rigged, perhaps there is no question about the actual tabulation of votes, though many believe there are questionable practices there as well, at the very least there is significantly favorable treatment of one candidate, Hillary Clinton, by the media over the other, Donald Trump during the campaign season when there are significant questions about the integrity of the candidate that is receiving all of the favorable attention.

So, yes the election IS rigged.

Because the election isn’t just about the tabulation of votes, it is the entire process I’ve described, media fairness and more and from my perspective the entire process has treated Donal Trump unfairly. Yes, the election is rigged because the entire process has been rigged.

I not so sure it is the first time, though.

Copyright © William Thien 2016

Sign up to receive updates. It’s easy and safe. Just go to the upper right hand corner of this page and add your email address. We will never sell your contact information to anyone.

Wow, Donald you have to watch what you say!

With all of the important issues that need to be addressed during this election to me what is most disappointing about this election is that it has focused primarily on an old, antiquated notion of femininity, one of perfection and purity of character, a notion which was redefined by women/feminists themselves in the sixties and seventies as “equal to men in every way,” not requiring any special treatment. Supposedly.

Yet, now all of the feminists are screaming about Donald Trump’s treatment of women as if we were living during a time prior to the sixties and seventies when it was almost required to hold the door for a lady and push in her chair. Women were treated with deference and respect as if they were better than men. And in my opinion, women are, and should be. But once again they are trying very hard to prove me wrong.

What is obvious now by all of the screeching and moaning coming from such types as Elizabeth Warren is that the women in this campaign are really frustrated not so much with what Donald Trump is saying about women but that they can’t have it both ways. They can’t be treated with deference and respect but then step into the pit of modern American political campaigning and leave unscathed, their expensive makeup jobs smudged, their colorful yet militant dresses and $10,000 pantsuits paid for by foreign donations and astronomically expensive special interest speeches ruffled.

Unless women want to return to a time before their latest and most dramatic feminist transformation during the sixties and seventies supposedly making them equal to men in every way, most of the things Trump has said about women, often he believed in confidence, are in my opinion non-issues. I say “most of the things” he said because public discourse requires some decorum and I do not condone everything he has said.

But women wanted equality. Women forced it upon the American public with demonstrations and withholding. Women burned their bras and threw away the dresses. Women wanted to play professional football and swear and chew tobacco and spit. What men said didn’t matter but now suddenly it does once again. Women started basketball and hockey teams. Women sought jobs in construction. Women wanted to be police officers and Army soldiers (Something I support, by the way). Women defined the so-called glass ceiling. Women pushed for Title IX.

Now more than ever for women it’s time to play ball instead of crying for a foul each and every time the opposition scores against you.

It could be said that the extensive and often false and unrealistic social boundaries created by feminism also created the conditions for somebody like Donald Trump to enter the race.

So, until you play by the rules of the game you yourselves have redefined over the last sixty years you are not getting my vote. That’s all there is to it. As much as I don’t like it, you leave me no choice.

And one other thing, when I see you on the television, I will turn it off. When I hear you on the radio, I will turn it off. When I see you on the internet, I will turn it off. Others I know will do the same and they will tell others they know and they will tell others to do the same.

You are just a bunch of haters and it shows.

Copyright © William Thien 2016

Sign up to receive updates. It’s easy and safe. Just go to the upper right hand corner of this page and add your email address. We will never sell your contact information to anyone.

 

 

 


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Find by month

Find by date

December 2017
M T W T F S S
« Nov    
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
Follow William Thien on WordPress.com
%d bloggers like this: