Will Tax Breaks For Corporate Abusers End?

During the election spitfire, Barack Obama said that he would “end tax breaks for corporations that ship jobs overseas” while firing at John McCain for refusing to condemn such loopholes. That is now part of history. Yet, the truth remains that Barack Obama was right on target with this issue. While Republicans were in office, little to nothing was done to right the wrongs done to the American people since the prior Bush Administration and the Clinton Administration.  Politicians continue in their incestuous escapades with corporate multinationals including central bankers and investment community. Employment is no longer about bolstering nations even for benefit of the corporate oligarchy, but about the largess of corporations that ransack the globe to sustain themselves. President Obama proposed the idea of change during the election, but  did America hear him or care about what he said?  Are American voters willing to hold presidential candidates immediately responsible for correcting the blunders that continue to economically decimate our country?

During the election, President Obama was not precise about how he would alter the rules other than to say he would end “permanent deferral” of income abroad. So far, this isn’t on his radar, yet is just as important as health care for the American people. Even so, even during the election, job offshoring was not mentioned among important policies or on their campaign websites. Our venerable politicians have resisted correcting tax law since 1991 on corporate bodies leaving huge gaps available for rampant abuse. Multinational business simply fills the gaps left by government regulation. As a result, the abuse and lack of policy continues unabated. What politicians are receiving from leaving the policy holes are questionable. What the U.S. economy is losing is immense, no less than the greenbacks that the U.S. economy sends overseas for oil every year to the tune of billions.

Blaming the corporate ideal of free trade and business leaders alone for the present situation of American workers is misplaced. American politicians, ill-conceived government regulations and lack of foresight along with the willingness to make sound adjustments are responsible for nearly all of the job losses the United States has seen over the last decade.

offshore banking

Politicians are afraid of losing revenue, yet they continue to export revenue in wholesale fashion by allowing loopholes and abuses to continue. The declining economy has resulted in huge tax losses as well. Meanwhile, corporations and individuals of wealth send billions tax-free to offshore havens in the Cayman Islands, Switzerland and other various outlets because of lack of restrictions in doing so. President Obama said that he would consider a reduction in the corporate tax rate as long as it could be done without losing revenue. Concerns about the short-term loss of revenue is short-sighted at best. Further, a reduction in the corporate tax rate would have little, if any effect in reducing the offshoring of U.S. jobs from our nation. A process known as earnings stripping through “corporate inversions” is largely at fault.

Because of this fear along with any benefits that politicians can glean from the corporate world, multinational corporations send untold billions legally overseas as they manipulate open-ended tax law while exploiting the masses here and abroad. The nation has passed a financial crossroads. Further inaction will further erode the national economy while giving others more power in the name of “political revenue.” If politicians continue to delay, the exportation of the nation’s most valuable resources will render this economy incapable of recovering or restoring what is being lost in any sense. Bankers are part of the problem as much as part of the solution since they have as much to gain or to lose as multinational corporations. Will politicians do what is required to repair the systemic abuse? Only when the American electorate and citizens hold politicians accountable for the wholesale rape of our economy through poorly designed law, banking abuse and multinational profiteering can this country hope to be made whole. Politicians are betting that you aren’t smart enough to know the difference if they remember themselves. ~ E. Manning

Check out more details about job offshoring on TNTalk! at this link.

Divorce in America: End of the American Dream

Anti-father and feminist sources indicate that in a nationally representative sample of 11-to-16-year-old children living with their mothers, almost half had not seen fathers in the last 12 months. Protagonists of the nation’s fathers indicate that the nation (United States) has seen an increased refusal of fathers to provide for their children, leading to high levels of poverty among single-mother families.

When a couple breaks up, the standard of living of both mother and father declines. Why? Incomes that once supported a single home are now supporting two. The drop in living standards has been mistakenly blamed on fathers when it has nothing to do with them.

Based on U.S. Census data, non-custodial mothers are 20% more likely to default on their child support obligations than non-custodial fathers. This is despite the fact that non-custodial mothers are less likely to be required to pay child support. Non-custodial mothers with support obligations are asked to pay a smaller percentage of their income in child support than noncustodial fathers.

The vast majority of divorces are initiated by women. Research shows that most divorces do not involve a serious transgression by fathers. Data backs up the fact that the majority of fathers are not guilty of violence or adultery, but divorce is a result of the mother feeling unappreciated or emotionally unfulfilled for other reasons unrelated to the marriage directly.

From a man’s perspective, his wife ended the marriage against his will, removing his children from his daily life. He sees the children as harmed through the destruction of what was a stable, two-parent home and a shared prosperity that all had enjoyed together. From the male viewpoint, the decision of the wife mandates that he dramatically lower his standard of living in order to finance the decision to end the marriage.

While there are women that are mistreated in marriage and for whom divorce is a liberation, most divorced women aren’t victims. As a result, the facts reveal why men that once worked hard to support and prosper their families become disheartened and refuse to make the same or more sacrifices under new conditions foisted on them.

Politics pretends that simply not seeing one’s children is the same as paternal abandonment or irresponsibility. The politics of the broken family created by government is contradicted by a wealth of research combined with millions of personal experiences of divorced and separated fathers. There are fathers that voluntarily withdraw from the lives of their children for good reasons. There is more evidence that many fathers are driven out of the lives of their children by maternal sociopathic behavior sanctioned by the system. Linking reality to male irresponsibility is ridiculous, if not patently absurd.

Fresh data from the Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement shows that the huge numbers of so-called “deadbeat dads” earn poverty level wages. The reason is not addressed. Yet, most dads that are able to pay their child support do so despite often being unfairly cut off from their children. The fact is that because of the system, they have little choice anyway as they have become an undertrodden subclass of Americans, part of a machine that destroys and humiliates a united family. Fathers with divorced families receive no positive credit for what “they must do”, even when they do so with love and care.

Even worse, the multi-billion dollar divorce industry is heavily funded by custody battles and government itself. Arguments over division of assets are a significant part of lawsuits. Lawsuits are also driven by fathers that insist on the right to see their kids while mothers try to limit the role of the father. Declining incomes of both mothers and fathers makes decent legal remedies more remote since the system by nature feeds on  any residual incomes, further hurting children in a negative atmosphere of temporary insanity. In this economy, a large cross-section of Americans don’t have the income to fight much of anything, let alone deal with the basics. Those are the facts and resulting blight of the American Dream: court politics sustained by a broken system of misguided politics and government exploitation. ~ E. Manning

American Fathers Being Destroyed by Economy & Law

A Message to Women: Women, Entitlement & Happiness

Rush Limbaugh: Talking Trash

Recently it was announced that Rush Limbaugh is no longer affiliated with the business group which is preparing to submit a purchase bid for the Saint Louis “Football” Rams. Mr. Limbaugh’s financial clout and marvelous impression of himself were not enough to secure him a place at the table within one  of America’s most exclusive business clubs. There’s an old saying that applies here: “Water seeks its own level”.

Recently the Miami Dolphins were acquired by a group that included many celebrities from the world of sports and entertainment. They had the money and investors as they stepped up to be representatives and supporters of sport. They got the deal done without a hitch. The investors included Dwayne Wade of the Miami Heat, The Williams sisters of tennis fame and even entertainer Gloria Estephan (to name a few).

Now comes a group seeking to purchase the Saint Louis Rams, to which Mr. Limbaugh has somehow attached himself. I consider Mr. Limbaugh’s interest in such a professional football venture curious, given his many racist prognostications over the years. This flies in the face of the fact that the National Football League is predominately comprised of Black athletes. Given Limbaugh’s well known statement that characterized NFL players as Bloods and Crips (gang members), I am surprised that Mr. Limbaugh would want to be associated with them. After all, if you share Mr. Limbaugh’s impressions, why would you want to be associated with a bunch of thugs and low-life’s?  I emphasize that this is Limbaugh’s estimation, not mine.

What I find most interesting, even modestly comforting, is the fact that the welcome mat was rolled up as Mr. Limbaugh sought to enter the elite class. That welcome mat was not rolled up because he did not have money. It was rolled up because the key players (no pun intended) in the deal and the league, view him as a low-life.  To them, Limbaugh is a media mug . At the end of the day, the league and players did not want to be associated with his largess. Rush failed to make the class cut!

Without question, the NFL is not without problematic membership. Problematic leadership exists in Congress, the corporate business community in this country and the religious community. Americans are ill advised to seek out opportunities to pass judgment or celebrate the stumbles of individuals as they go through life. Why? Anyone can make a mistake. However, making a mistake or a slip of the tongue is one thing. Crafting a longstanding professional career and image for being insensitive, insulting or even hateful with a correspondingly loud mouth, is something altogether different.

This is an insightful and remarkable turn of events. As the debate continues about America and what her people want politically and, it is now clear that the masses and those within business, even the social elite, are not buying into what ol’ Rush is selling. The NFL is a multi-billion dollar industry that attracts or touches much of America through its regular season and certainly for the Super Bowl.  The league owners and investors are an exclusive club of accomplished and wealthy business investors. The reach of this organization is massive with its image very closely monitored and guarded. I’m not seeing any tears of sorrow or any ground swell of resentment over the news of Rush’s ouster.

As a “Reality Radio Personality”, Mr. Limbaugh has now found himself firmly cemented within the ranks of those trash talking athletes, rappers, reality TV figures and others who have plenty of money, and substantial followings, but who are not accepted by the mainstream. Why? They lack culture, education, and principles while they cultivate images that are socially troubling. In this great country they are certainly permitted to do so. However, they will never have significant influence, or be accepted among the social or business elite because they are reckless and uncultured. In short, they have no class. To steal a phrase from Mr. Limbaugh: “There, I said it”.  Whenever Rush decides to label anyone a “low life”, I can only consider what his now departed business group was saying to him is “it takes one to know one”.

Rush has been sidelined along with the rest of the riff-raff that he has much maligned because he is one of them. His newer legacy of an outsider will cast  a pall on his listeners should they fail to acknowledge the real life ramifications of this embarrassing snub. Rush has worked very hard to achieve this well deserved slap in the face.

More importantly, on a social scale, Limbaugh will remain exactly where he has now been told he belongs. ~ L. A. Walker

Nobel Peace Prize: There’s Great Big World Out There

President Barack Obama is being awarded the Nobel Prize for Peace.   As surprising as the award of this prestigious award may be, there are many who believe it is deserved.  Most notably the selection committee comprised of representatives of nations from around the world.

In spite of the many challenges that President Obama faces here in the United States it is clear that he has an appreciation for international affairs that reflects his new and refreshing world view.  Perhaps more importantly, many Americans, particularly conservative Americans, have failed to recognize or acknowledge that America’s Presidential leadership over the eight years preceding the Obama Administration created a climate of separatism, international diplomatic fear and irresponsibility that was globally frightening.  Even if we sidestep any discussion of politics or diplomacy as it relates to the previous administration, the fact is that much, if not most of the world, had come to despise America and more specifically, the previous presidential administration.  The world is a pretty big place.

In 1982 I stood on the deck of United Ship Independence as she transited the Straights of Messina on route to Naples, Italy.  At a particular point the passage for an aircraft carrier is so narrow, that it appears that the deck of the ship actually over hangs land.  As I watched with fascination as the Sicilian landscape drifted slowly by, a young boy came running from his small brick home waving an American flag in an excited frenzy.  This was among my earliest visions which caused me to begin understanding the importance and significance of international image and diplomacy.  My vision was reinforced only two years later as I stood on those same decks as that very same carrier loomed off the coasts of both Grenada and Lebanon and prepared to rain down death.

The image of an aircraft carrier, loaded with nearly one hundred warplanes is a majestic sight to behold.  The reaction of that Sicilian child (for me)  was emblematic of his fledgling understanding of his country’s admiration of America.  I saw no flags in Lebanon or Grenada.  I remember imagining the fear and horror that must have gripped those who observed from their home shores as an ominous man-of-war appeared on their horizon.   This stark contrast, “the political paradox of reality” is key to the reason why Nobel Prize is being awarded to our President.  The world had become uncertain of what America stood for and what she sought to accomplish from a geo-political perspective.  More importantly and significantly more troubling, was the fact that America had no intention to seek or scolicit the input, support or approval of the world community on diplomatic matters.  And figuratively and litterally there were concerns about when and why nations of the world (without provocation) saw American war machines on their horizons.

To much of the world, America is a beautiful and regal example of what the best of life and government and freedom represents.  And our military might is widely acknowledged and respected as a tool of protection and cooperation going back for generations.  However, prior to President Obama’s election, much of the world had become concerned, if not convinced, that America had abandoned them.  America might be knowingly or unknowingly doing severe damage to the continuity of the global community.  And in doing so, placing both herself and other nations in great danger.  Greater dangers which included economic, military and social risk.  The truth is, much of the world had become horrified, even mortified, at what we had seemed to become.  The election of President proved they were wrong, but from where they, the rest of the world, sat at the time, it seems their concerns were justified.

The award of the Nobel Peace Prize is simply a statement of support.  This is a grand statement, but simply a statement nonetheless.  This statement says: “The rest of the world can now sleep peacefully again at night”.  This statement says “We believe in you again America, and we are no longer afraid of what you might do”.  This statement says “We trust you President Obama; to make a sincere effort to welcome in, and attempt to unite the world”.  Certainly the politics and diplomacy (or lack thereof) which destroyed America’s image around the world are, and will remain, the topic of much analysis and discussion.  But there can be no question that much of the advanced world is now relieved that America is under new Presidential leadership.  We can only pause to ask ourselves why or how the world began to see America in such a negative light.  But what is now undeniable given this Nobel Prize Award, is that much if the world had a very different view of what this nation had become, than many conservative Americans would like to admit.

President Obama is being awarded the Nobel Prize for giving the entire world a good night’s sleep . . . ~ L.A. Walker

The Illegal President or Forgery?

As you may be aware, a United States president is supposed to be “U.S. born”. Technically, the birthplaces of both presidential frontrunners were under debate last year. The debate has seethed continually under political currents about the true place of birth for our president, Barack Obama. That place of birth has been purported to be the land of gentle breezes, Hawaii. Now a document has surfaced that indicates otherwise, complete with signatures. This document, supplied for a lawsuit in California, indicates that Barack Obama was born in Kenya. Is this a forgery or the truth? Does the document even make sense? Does it matter?

Allegedly, this document was not obtained directly through the Kenyan government and the lawsuit is seeking to do exactly that, supposedly forcing the subpoena of documents directly from the Kenyan embassy and to require a deposition from Hillary Clinton so they will be forced to authenticate the birth certificate.

The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.” The United States government has already turned the constitution upside-down as it seeks its own benefit. The supposition is that the United States is a growing nation that continually reinvents itself.  The foundation doesn’t seem to matter. Politicians don’t even try to create amendments anymore. We simply break the law by creating more law. Founding law principles are ignored and overwritten as it suits the power structure. This website often highlights these unpleasant facts and the resulting usury of America. Whether Barack Obama was born on earth at all is completely irrelevant. The American people and the electorial college have spoken. It’s time to come up with a more meaningful controversy. ~ E. Manning