Issue 115 Ideal Immagration part 1 July 8, 2013

Immigration is the hottest topic amongst politicians in all western countries. Why? Because immigration defines what jobs are taken, how the country progresses forward and even new political leaders. I write today a 3 part breakdown of an ideal immigration system. Let's get started.

Know who goes in and out: One of the key pieces needed for modern 21st century immigration is a system that monitors when someone from another country comes into a country. This can be done through a passport or even electronic finger prints, but it also must be applied when the person leaves as well. The reason is so that we know that they actually left. There are thousands of immigrants who come here to the United States legally and they simply disappear into society. The result is that we never know if and when they leave. So by tracking these people as they come in and out we will know whether we have to find them or not. As an added bonus, we can also track where they go when they leave to better help understand population movements and use it as a form of intelligence if say they happen to be an enemy of the State.

Back Ground Checks: With all the data mining going on, background checks are becoming very routine. Thus, we can easily apply it to those visiting the United States and those who want to become American Citizens. So what do we look for in a background check? We look for what groups they are affiliated with (economic, ideological, religious, etc). This helps determine if they may or may not potentially be spies or terrorists. Job history and family history also aid in determining if the person is right for society. There will be two tiers of classification though. Tier one are those who are visiting for a vacation which can generally last 2 months. As such government officials will look at the type of tickets they bought (one way, two way, for how many people, etc.) and their other purchases such as hotel rooms and intended places of travel. This is a type of profiling to aid in determining if the person is a possible threat, but vacations are short and only require more modest scrutiny such as basic affiliations. Those wanting to stay longer will require a full and lengthy background check to get a clearer picture of who they are.

Those who come in illegally: It is hard to police those who sneak over the boarder (and they are not just Mexicans, they are Irish, Russian, African, etc.). Any new immigration policy will attempt to deal with them in some way, shape or form. Problem, if you try to determine if they were born to illegal immigrant parents or not, it is almost impossible without a birth certificate. As such if they do have a birth certificate they should become legal citizens right away. But for those without then they will have to apply like everyone else. I offer no penalty save deportation if it is determined that they have no job, are homeless and may have gang or other negative affiliation. Those without such affiliations will be allowed to stay, and receive a small $1,000 fine. Why such a small fine? You're not going to take back taxes from them, or give them additional punishments? Well, no as that would not solve the problem at all. The small fine works to pay for the costs of them becoming official citizens if the want (those who do not want to be citizens will have the fine used to buy them a plane ticket home). Jailing them just costs too much and makes no sense for a person who committed a non-violent crime, and taxes that they should have paid if they came legally are nearly impossible to determine. So I will not bother wasting time on something so expensive. But these illegal migrants will be required to go through a background check. As to those who are deported, they may re-enter after 90 days if they are determined to be a person in good standing through the background check, and this time we know who they are and when they leave.

Conclusion: By making the system requirements easy to understand and go through, you limit the hard ship and incentive to seek an alternative rout such as illegal immigration. Keep it simple, yet effective. Once done, the only ones left crossing will still be those who wish to dodge the system for what ever reason. If and when caught, they will go through the same process as an illegal immigrant who is already in country, a background check, a small fine and possible deportation. We want immigration, and we want them to come in the front door. Sure the above is not ideal. Some may want all illegals deported, or want more penalties and fines, but those cost lots of money and the crime is almost always victimless. There is no sense jailing some one for a crime if their punishment is better served like a traffic ticket, and that they still must go through the same process as everyone else. The ideal is not ideal, but it is better than the status quo.

Issue 114 Pirates always win July 5 2013

Ever wonder why industries like the music industry and television always try and fail to protect their owner ship of songs and shows. Because Pirates on the internet always find a way to get that information and offer it up for free. Even more so, hackers (modern internet pirates) are taking other wise secret or proprietary information and bringing it to the public eye. And you know what, they cannot be stopped.

Dumb Government: Governments have always thought that they could control the airwaves, but they failed to account for pirate radio. These pioneers of radio found unused or hijacked signals to broadcast their music (and that of others). Sure it is illegal, but it did not stop them. If a pirate station would be shut down, then another would take its place. The internet made this easier as now sites like YouTube could broadcast anywhere all over the globe. Many times these pirates would translate foreign television and post it too. Thanks to the internet, bootleg versions of shows with quality equal to the original could be brought before the masses. As a result, laws changed. Copyrights became loosened up allowing people to see and sing what ever songs they want by different people without fear of being sued for copyright infringement. That’s right you can sing a Green Day song on YouTube or similar sight without the government coming after you (at one point people were being sued for singing songs as advertisers would post ads which gave those individuals money). Basically, government gave up.

The movie and CD industry: Bootlegs (illegal copies of the original) are common. Any knock off can be bought off a street corner for less than half the price (quality is a different issue). Entire villages in China make money from bootleg products. But the industries were forced to adapt. Some conscripted these bootleggers to make copies of their music and shows for them. Others release the CD's and videos as soon as the movie completes its run in theaters. Basically they try to head off the bootleggers before they can profit off their illegal bounty. But others still just move on. They stopped fighting these pirates and just let them do as they please. Companies make money from the first airing of a show, movie and song and then let the fur fly as bootleggers scramble to make cash on the product. Companies make their profit and then move on accounting for the bootleggers speed to bring products to the market. So companies know they must offer something better to entice people to buy more than just the movie. That is why some offer behind the scenes looks and mini shorts as part of the package. Bootleggers will get those too, but they have to rip the information out of a CD or DVD first that may be encoded. Thus, the industries buy time to make a profit while we enjoy better entertainment for a reduced price. In other words consumers reap the rewards.

Intellectual property: Hacktivists and others want more information to be made available to the average person. They are fighting copyrights laws to end monopolies on numerous journals, and articles and even patents. The result is hacktivists and other sights providing that content for free and making money based on site visits from advertisers or small downloading fees. The internet has allowed information to spread like wildfire and even if you manage to shut down one site thousands stand ready to take their place. Like wise government secrets are not safe either and thus we now know not just those we are being spied on but how they are doing it. This is thanks to these hackers and whistleblowers (regardless of their motives) providing us with the ability to watch our government and react to its abuses (in some respects the hackers are replacing the press in this role). As a result, governments are forced to re-evaluate themselves and are forced to change to fit their illegal programs within the framework of proper law that still protect our rights. So thank you pirates.

Conclusion: Pirates have existed in one form or another throughout history. They challenged social norms and pushed boundaries often forcing change. Today’s pirates (hackers) and bootleggers are doing just that. They have become de-facto protectors against corporate monopolies, corrupt governments and over priced entertainment. The pirates will continue to win, and they are unstoppable.

Issue 113 Keeping Secrets July 4, 2013

How do you keep a secret safe from prying eyes in an age of computers? Well, there are a few ways how to do just that.

Cryptography: Basically encrypting the messages digitally with only the receiving person or persons having the key to decode the message. This can be as low tech as a cereal code or a piece of digital tech. One group intends to offer up a service that encrypts all your calls. They have been using this program in Iraq and Afghanistan so as to protect Soldiers phone calls to their families back home from terrorists tapping in and targeting their families. Basically it uses the internet to create a link between the two individuals talking. The entire communication is encrypted so that only the two individuals have access to the content of the call or message. It is important to know that the same program must be used by both persons in order to talk for without it the content of the message or call cannot be understood. As an extra security measure the data from the message or call is deleted once the call is complete leaving no trace of contact between the individuals ever having been made. It is not an alternative to the phone company just yet and the service is a simple monthly fee (based on the interview with the individual) but essentially it works like Skype but with security devices installed.

Speed: Communications go very fast. As a result we can talk to each other across the globe. But that speed is not enough. Apparently, communications being delivered faster can prevent intercepts by those trying to listen in. Currently in testing, quantum communications which use photons to communicate are seen as the next big thing in communication. The information moves so fast that no listening device can catch the signal. Current prototypes are wired but future ones will be wireless. On top of being fast, many communications using this still experimental technology are encrypted as well. Reason being is that technology will not remain stagnant and a quantum interceptor may be eventually developed. However, these devices come with another unique feature; you can tell if your communication is being tapped into. So you can instantly drop the call in that instance. It does this by reading any disruptions in the signal (those disruptions are those accessing the call) aka, the photons in the communication are being disrupted. So speed in communication is now life when it comes to keeping a call safe.

Low tech: Others may simply have to remove themselves from as much of the tractable world as possible. Social Networking sites and search engines track your every move. GPS devices in phones keep tabs on you and the government or clever hacker can turn them on even when they are off. Mot to mention call logs are always recorded. The internet though has more privacy so long as you know which services to use (ones that conceal and protect your private information) or have the right program.

Get security: Cyber security firms are a growing business. Former government officials and hackers are getting into the act. Even former spooks whose job it is to find people are now switching roles to enable certain people to disappear. They know the governments along with others are watching and now they want you to pay to keep your secrets and your personal life safe. So expect more services similar to companies like life lock, or hacktivists looking to make a quick buck to come to your aid.

Conclusion: With the thought of people looking at your private email and postings on the internet, people are feeling violated. And I don't blame them. Probably the simplest thing to do is to either limit your use of the search engines and the social networking sights or do like I do, don't post anything or search anything that can potentially be used against you. It really is that simple. Don't post or search what would embarrass you, your family or your friends. Hope you find this information helpful. Good luck.

Issue 112 Fuel from food July 3, 2013

We have all heard of bio-fuels like ethanol and bio-diesel. But why is it good and why is it bad? Let's analyze.

The good: Currently we use "fossil fuels" like oil. These fossil fuels are limited due to the amount we are able to access and the amount we have yet to discover. And thus is not considered a renewable resource. Bio-fuels on the other hand are renewable. They are made from plants like corn, switch grass and even oils from animals slaughtered at the slaughter house to make our hamburgers. We basically grow the fuel we need to run our cars and power our homes and appliances.

Neutral: It has been proven (or at the very least debated extensively) that these bio-fuels are no cleaner than there fossil fuel counter parts. Basically they put about the same amount of pollutants in the air. Environmentally speaking, they still cause ecological damage as these fuels are extracted from crops. This means cutting away at forests and other parts of the natural environment to grow them. So it can be just as bad as an oil spill in some instances.

The bad: The biggest issue is that these fuels take more energy to produce than they put out. Think of it this way, it takes a full gallon of gasoline to make just a half gallon of bio-fuel. As such, bio-fuels while bio-degradable have less power out put. On top of this, growing bio-fuels can be considered a security threat. By using more crops to make fuel rather than food you limit the food supply. It is great for the farmer as he makes allot of cash, but it means that to meet out food requirements we have to get it from other countries. This may inadvertently make us dependant on food from other countries and thus controllable. Don't think it has happened before; well it has to small island nations during the age of imperialism. The Dutch East India Company had islanders grow cash crops and forbade the growing of food crops. This made the islanders dependant on food from the company. If the islanders rebelled, then the company simply cut off their food supply. But a more pressing issue may result. Food being grown for other purposes will inherently make food prices rise and may result in people being priced out. Basically, they cannot afford to buy food. This has happened in Ireland (Great Irish Famine) and Nepal. The result was an artificial famine despite plenty of food.

Conclusion: Are bio-fuels worth it? Maybe not. However, the fact that we are considering alternatives is a good thing. Currently wind and solar are still developing but are not efficient enough to work large scale. Natural gas is just as polluted as gas despite the larger number of sources from which it can be obtained. Hydrogen can defiantly work, but it has no infrastructure to take advantage of the "clean" technology. Whatever the solution to our energy woes, unfortunately bio-fuels are not it.

Issue 111 Data collection and spys July 2 2013

Data collection or data mining is a practice of accumulating data and then putting all that data together to make use of that information. This information is your phone records, your tax records, surveillance camera footage from anywhere. The list goes on and on. So I'm here to tell you that big brother is always watching.

They know what TV you’re watching: When you turn on your TV, the cable provider knows through the box that you are watching a particular channel at a given time and thus knows what show you are watching. Same thing with certain forms of radio, they know you are tuned into a certain frequency and thus what you’re listening too. It is disturbing to know that they know your likes and interests. And guess what, it is all used by the companies to sell more ads and thus the information is up for sale. In fact this information was used by the Democratic Party to help President Obama win his second term in office by looking at who was watching what and when so they could buy ads and commercial time so as to get those likely to vote out to vote for the President. The republicans lagged behind but their strategists predict that in the next election such information will play a crucial role.

They know what you’re searching: Just like with the cable providers, the internet search providers and social networking services know what you are searching and how often you view those pages. These are primarily used to sell ads so that they make money. Think this is wrong, well you agree to them collecting your data when you downloaded their technology to use on your computer. Again, this information is up for grabs and in fact does not require a warrant by police to view as it is not considered by law a personal conversation. Civil rights activists are up in arms however to make such information require a warrant as per the fourth amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

They are watching you: Public cameras are also used to gather information. They can know when you passed through a red light or with just a simple search program can track you from your house to your work place. Adding in simple devices like easy pass and membership cards like a cvs card or a discount card as per your exclusive membership enable them to also know what stores you stopped in and what you bought in each of those stores. You are being tracked everywhere you go.

Data miners: A data miner finds and collects all this information, all without the need for a warrant to get a clear picture of your habits and interests. Such people work for both the government and for private agencies for spying, for locating missing children, to just selling advertisements. It even helps with public relations with respect to getting a president re-elected. Your information is no longer yours to keep.

Conclusion: You are being watched by literally everyone. They know when you use your cell phone and what number you’re calling. The only thing at the governmental level they cannot do is listen to your actual conversations or read your mail (physical and electronic) with out a warrant. Civil liberties activists are suing the government to make all such data apply to the forth amendment so as to protect citizens from any more intrusions by the government with some going a step further to stop private companies from collecting and keeping our data as well. Be aware, big brother along with everyone else is watching.

Issue 110 State's ripping off our healthcare July 1 2013

Did you know that the State and local governments in the United States are reaping the benefits of our high priced health care and are in fact making it more expensive? Well, that is exactly what they are doing according to the Forbs article "How State Governments Raise Costs and Rip hundreds of Billions off the Federal Government using Health Insurance Premium Taxes" by Avik Roy (posted 5/25/2013.

How they rip us off: The article used Ohio as an example to demonstrate how States raise costs on health care. Ohio charges a 5.5% sales tax on Insurance premiums with an additional 1% state health insurance tax. In 2011, the average employer based plan for a single person is $5,025 which resulted in the average Ohioan spending an extra $327 a year just in taxes alone. Yup, that’s our money that we thought was going to health care that isn’t.

It gets worse: The Federal Government spends $300 billion a year (approx) through the tax code to subsidize employer sponsored health insurance. With Ohio being 3.7% of the U.S. population that means $11.1 Billion of that subsidy flows through Ohio and then gets taxed as part of a person’s individual insurance tax. This results in Ohio collecting an extra $721.5 million a year in tax revenue just from the federal money going to subsidize these plans.

Yup it gets even worse: Medicare and Medicaid are also affected. $50 billion is spent on Medicare part D and another $200 billion on Medicare advantage. Over half of Medicare enrollees are in private managed care plans accounting for around $150 billion a year. Using the same math the federal government spends $400 billion on privately managed Medicare and Medicaid plans with $40 billion a year that States collect in tax revenue by taxing those premiums. Altogether that is about $75 billion a year to State governments due to an accounting trick.

Yea, we dug our own grave: These costs and the amount of money that States are going to rip us off in taxes are only going to increase and that is partly due to subsidies in Obama care (the affordable care act). This accounting trick was used to justify Medicaid’s expansion. As a result, with the overall Expansion State revenues will increase by 1.6 to 1.7 billion over 10 years. Ohio Medicaid expansion is an additional 2.5 billion, but 1.7 billion will be paid in taxes with possibly the whole amount offloaded onto tax payers through the same accounting gimmick.

The States are not alone: Counties, cities and towns may also tax premiums and services. In 2012, the total combined State and local sales tax rate in the U.S. was 9.61% leading to an extra 29 billion (approx) being spent by the federal government to make up the costs. If you add taxes specific to health care premiums and that number is raised to 30 to 35 billion in spending. Let’s face it, we are being ripped off.

Hospitals are not immune: Provider taxes are paid at the hospital and are passed onto consumers by charging higher prices. These same taxes are used to rip off Medicaid subsidies because States set their own reimbursement rates for Medicaid and thus States increase the rates equal to the increase in taxation allowing for the hospitals to come out revenue neutral at the end with the federal government paying the costs in taxation through the reimbursement from the federal government.

Conclusion: So what is the answer to this major spending increase that is ripping off taxpayers and increasing our health care costs? Simple, we have to stop taxing health care premiums, services and hospitals. Apparently these taxes alone increase the health care costs on over 180 billion Americans with private coverage and make it costlier to subsidize the coverage for the poor. That is over half the U.S. population being affected by higher health care costs and it is time we eliminate this extra expense that harms the poor, the elderly, the uninsured and the average American who just wants to get and stay healthy. This is why certain taxes should not exist.

Issue 109 The entitlements Conclusion June 28, 2013

The Conclusion:

            There are many solutions to the problems of Social Security and its partners Medicare, Medicaid and its ilk. It is however, up to the American people to seize upon one of them and say “I want that one.” The politicians will not do anything until they are forced to for they fear to act under the threat that they may be unelected. It is time we choose America. Let us save our retirement by selecting so of what I think are the best ideas.

Means test everything: Those who are receiving lots of money should not get any benefits while those with little money should get more. Social Security was designed during the Great Depression to help the elderly retire, open up jobs for the young who would replace these seniors in the work force, and help avoid ageism as seniors were being forced out of jobs due to age discrimination. Now we have millionaires who want to collect for some strange reason and they should be blocked from doing so.

Eliminate the Contribution cap: The amount of taxes paid per year toward Social Security and Medicare is capped. So the really rich finish paying within the first pay check of the New Year and then they are done. At the same time, lower middle class and the poor continue to pay large sums of money often times never reaching the cap. The result is less money at retirement. Thus, I say reduce the tax levels on everyone and make it so that everyone contributes for life (except double taxation). This will allow Social Security to have the funds it needs thanks to the richer portions of society. At the same time those reduced levels mean fewer contributions by the lower middle class or the poor. This is where supplemental forms of Social Security and Medicare kick in to give them a little extra boost. Also, the system still acts as a safety net for if the rich somehow fall below the poverty line, then they will get the money they put in the first place.

Make it accurate: Currently Social Security and Medicare are adjusted through the cost of living adjustment (COLA). By making this adjustment for inflation more accurate we can ensure that people get only the money they need to continue buying bread, milk, etc. Combined with means testing means more accurate adjustments of benefits so that those who are impoverished in a high expense area get more, while those in an affordable area get less. Basically, together these would insure custom benefits for each individual.

Make it Personal: Both Congressman Paul Ryan and Governor Mike Huckabee have the right idea. Make it so that individuals that hold off retirement longer can expect a greater rate of return and make it so that the money can be passed on to their children and grandchildren. Ryan does this by eliminating the age requirement for Social Security by being able to collect when a certain amount of money has accumulated and has the option for an investment type version of Social Security. Governor Huckabee would use the lock box type of plan by having the money become an actual account, like a banks. I would combine both ideas. Ryan's idea of eliminating the age requirement would end the debate on age entirely with his plan stipulating you must be able to receive money equivalent to 120% of the poverty level in the traditional system to retire. From there I would use the Governor's ideas of incentives to keep the money in by allowing for interest to be gained for keeping it in longer, while taking Paul Ryan's idea of investments and investing small sums of peoples retirement money into safe funds in the market and in savings bonds (people would have a say in what forms of investments). This would provide a greater pay out at the end as similar programs have worked in Galveston Texas which has an exemption from Social Security and in other countries as well. I find no reason to make two parallel systems like Ryan has done. Simply make Social Security into an actual bank account form the get go, and cut the extraneous crap. From there, if say you never collect, or still have money left in the account after you pass on, the money is added onto your next of kin's amount or other designated beneficiary. An alternative to adding the money to your next of kin’s account would to get a lump sum form the account. Both ideas give a major boost to who ever is going to collect the funds.

Vouchers: Health Care for both Medicare and Medicaid need this version of the system. All a voucher does is give money to a health provider you yourself designate who will then provide your health care. It works the same why as Medicare part D without the excessive amounts of money and paperwork. It already works in school systems, and in the current form of Medicare part D to provide cheap medication to those who otherwise can't afford it. So this option is essential.

Decrease health care costs: I have always found it stupid to put more people on some form of health insurance rather than look at the system and fix it to make it cheap. Part of the reason is patent law with drug patents not expiring for 20 years and Congress possibly being lobbied to increase how long that patent lasts. Let’s face it; corruption is part of the issue. Also, Drug companies have to get approval from the FDA before they can increase or decrease production of a medication. Originally this was meant to prevent price gauging, but has backfired making cheap medications more expensive. Also, allow generic drugs to remain on the market longer, as if that drug still works let it be up to the doctor and patient to decide if that medication is still right for them. As to health insurance, let people buy across State lines. States limit coverage per State for each insurance registered in their area. As such you may be paying for more health care than you need, or possibly even less than you need. By removing the States from this equation, and letting people buy from anywhere and everywhere even insurance in other countries (I find no problem when it comes to free trade with respect to health insurance) this will reduce overall costs. Also, don't tax hospitals, Doctors offices, health care premiums and the like. That only adds to the total cost of health care. All this combined will aid in reducing health care costs to more manageable levels. From there the non-health care related issues increase costs, like patent law, taxation on business on the Federal, State and local levels. So by allowing free trade in health insurance, insurance companies can more to the cheapest State to operate in and thus allow them to reduce costs to consumers even further.

Costs at doctor’s offices can be reduced further by eliminating waste paper work from government institutions. Doctors have multiple forms they have to fill out to get reimbursed from the government for Medicare and Medicaid. By switching to a voucher system here, it reduces the paper work as the insurance enforces the rules rather than the government. Thus money is saved at all levels, not to mention time and effort. Also, malpractice lawsuits are a major issue as well. By implementing loser pays lawsuits (where the loser pays the costs of the winner) it will decrease the overall costs of fictitious lawsuits as most will not occur or they will just lose in court and the doctor loses no money if they were in the right in the first place. For the rare chance that the person in the right will loose, there is a new industry of looser pays insurance providers ready and waiting to start work. I am not saying the costs will be completely reduced to the point that we may not need health insurance, but at least costs will be more manageable no matter ones age.

Conclusion: We can change the system. It will be hard, and people will push back out of fear of change despite the fact that change is inevitable. I do not believe that Social Security or any form of welfare or safety net will be there for me let alone for my parents when I retire. Change must happen and I believe the aforementioned ideas are the best changes to start off with short of tearing up the whole system and stating over. Let's make the change that we need to happen.