<![CDATA[HALEY2024 - Blog on Haley2024 the Movement]]>Sun, 19 Nov 2017 04:54:04 -0500Weebly<![CDATA[We Should Stop the Funding of Programs and Setting of Policies Through Lawsuit Settlements]]>Sat, 18 Nov 2017 18:40:23 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-haley2024-the-movement/we-should-stop-the-funding-of-programs-and-setting-of-policies-through-lawsuit-settlements
Government officials are people just like everyone else.  Many people want to control others.  Some take the power of government to exert their control.  They use powers from all three branches of government.  This blog concentrates on the executive branch using the judiciary branch.  Of course, the other branches and advocacy groups play a very big role in using the courts for their control.
​I will start with the new deceptive practice and then fill in some old but still concerning techniques. I have started to notice that governments are settling lawsuits in a way that matches their legislative agenda that they cannot get through Congress. I believe they, the Left, in the Executive branch, are not getting certain funding and policies through Congress.
So they are inviting, behind the scenes, groups to sue them, the state or federal government. The executive department then ‘settles’ the case in a manner they always wanted. The federal government’s budget has a lawsuit settlement budget that is now used often as a slush fund for certain desired programs desired by the Left by ‘claiming’ they ‘have to’ because of the court settlement.
For example, "Attorney General Eric Holder agreed to pay the plaintiffs $3.4 billion, $2 billion of which would be set aside for a land consolidation scholarship program to benefit Native American investments."   Congress did not pass this, it is just a sneaky way to fund a program they wanted.
Another technique is that government sues a company and gets awarded a lot of money. Then government officials state that if they ‘voluntarily’ give to an advocacy group dealing with the issue, they will get a 200% credit for the donation. Meaning if they give $1 million to a group that helps the poor get housing, the guilty of discriminating bank would have $2 million taken off their judgement. Of course, these groups are made up of the Left.
We see the same when it comes to drug companies. The government bureaucrats know they can extract any concession from pharmaceutical companies when they hold the keys to FDA approval. The number of FDA rules are very concerning. Some are vague and others contradictory. This is a lawsuit haven.
When tens or hundreds of millions of dollars are at stake, concessions and settlements are easily extracted. The drug companies end up ‘voluntarily’ funding programs outside of government that the executive bureaucrats wanted and could not get through Congress.
​Many people claim that they need government to ‘protect’ people from greedy companies. That is an ill-informed judgement of free enterprise. The greatest protection is being able to switch companies if someone or a company treats you badly. My idea of a ratings system within free enterprise regulatory reform could help protect people with knowledge.  Sunshine is the best disinfectant.
There is a common argument that laws against price gouging, predatory pricing, and collusion can always be threatened. One is pricing too high, one too low, and collusion is when you match prices with competitors.  Many companies have been threatened and usually give in to government’s or politician’s demands.
We saw Microsoft not playing ball with politicians concerning campaign donations, slapped with a major monopoly lawsuit.  This company and industry is in a constant flux with any appearance of monopoly vanishing in months. Almost everything Microsoft had in the late nineties was obsolete by the time when they settled a few years later.
The 25-year, $246 billion tobacco settlement should be viewed more like a tax then a lawsuit win. The purchaser of cigarettes is paying higher prices and then government collects it from the stores. It is put in the general budget and spent on general budget items. Some states have built programs with this settlement money as its main funding source. ​​
Government makes an insane claim that government is responsible for medical care and then states tobacco is harming health so they should pay. WOW, that is ripe for abuse and major government’s control.​  Banks were forced by regulators and the Justice Dept. to predatory lend.  Very heavy pressure came from the justice department to increase minority lending.
They were denied branches, mergers, and other necessary business practices until they had higher lending to the black population.  They had to lower standards for black populations, which is a big part of predatory lending.  This greatly harmed many black families because higher standards protect BOTH the lender and the home owner.
The Left then sued the banks for predatory lending. Similar to the pricing issue above, the banks are sued either way and sometimes literally both at the same time. Sorry, but if the average black family has dramatically different net worth, income, and credit history, they will have different lending rates if the banks use the same standards for everyone. ​​
The disparity between whites and blacks is true, however, the reasons for the disparity is a different blog.  The point here is that you do not help black people by lowering standards. The greater point for this blog is the “damned if I do and damned if I don’t” regulations.
Civil asset forfeiture is a little different, however still very concerning.  Some police departments' budget have a certain amounts of money coming in from forfeitures.  This creates a situation that the policemen’s job is threatened if they don’t steal from citizens to fund their paychecks.  Yes, civil asset forfeiture is theft. 
Please remember that consumers ALWAYS pay for the high cost of defending lawsuits and the cost of the judgments.  Consumers are the ONLY place where companies get their money.  However, these millions and billions of dollars also negatively impact payroll and investments in future growth or existence of these companies.
While necessary in certain circumstances, let’s always be aware that these judgments take money away from employees and future employees up and down the pay range.  Often, after certain large judgments, major company budget cuts are announced to cover the costs.  Also ‘sticking it’ to publicly traded companies means harming retirement plans that invest capital in those companies.
​​Social policy has been set by the court as well.  The congress or state legislative branch does not have the votes to pass a leftist social policy, so they find a leftist to bring suit, citing the nonexistent ‘fairness clause’.  Leftist judges then unconstitutionally ‘makes law’ and mandates leftist policy.  
​Too often conservatives unwisely try to pass a law reversing the new policy, instead of claiming the courts overstepped their authority and forcing the subject back to the norm.   Gay marriage and trans-gendered locker rooms are two recent manifestations of this plan.  Abortion is a forty-year-old example.  The examples are numerous. 
<![CDATA[Disaster Relief in A Haley2024 World]]>Wed, 06 Sep 2017 23:45:12 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-haley2024-the-movement/disaster-relief-in-a-haley2024-world
​After a natural or man-made disaster, government increases their footprint in a big way.  Whether a hurricane, blizzard, flood, tornado, or the 9-11 twin towers collapse, the government at all levels really steps up.  Too many people think that it is a good thing.  Certainly, people need to step up, however is government the best way to make things happen?  Can and should free enterprise, charity and individuals take over?  
​This is not making the claim that government does not have a role, however can we create a structure where government is not needed as much because the private sector steps up?  Certainly, government crowds out greater private action now, however free enterprise, charity, and individuals are still the primary force feeding, housing, and taking care of those most affected.  
​Government is starting to do more after every disaster and building expectations from too many to wait for and rely on government.  Government is creating perverse incentives that crowd-out private action.  If government is going to pay to rebuild a home that was not insured because they ‘need-it’, and not any to the insured homeowner because they don’t ‘need-it’, then people will quickly stop buying insurance.  
In the Haley2024 world, government would have a smaller footprint to begin with, thus they would have less of a role, not zero, but much less.  Currently, the government is forcing out private endeavors and creating many moral hazards.  People wait hours in a parking lot of a grocery store waiting for food and water from government even when the store is open and stocked.  
This is the time and place for the Rating Agencies to really shine.  What charities are being the most effective.  What road CRA’s plans proved the most helpful.  What military corporations should get more of the money.  How are extra labor hours utilized within CDA’s or first responders? How many people were rescued and how much damage was limited?  How fast were vital services up and how efficient was the team?
​This rating system brings together people normal desire to do their best to help people with the self-interest of extra profits that flows indirectly with better ratings.  Most CRA’s will require extra hours of work to those within their control and the money and/or service will go to the relief efforts.  After a disaster, too many people are sitting around being taken care of instead of going out to help.  People have been and always will be the greatest asset.
​Taking People in to your home would likely rate high with CDA’s and would likely fulfill volunteer hours requirements and very much needed after a disaster.  CDA’s, ID companies and others will be able to vouch for reputations.  While certain people will ‘do the right thing’ without compensation, many more will if they are given credit and consideration.  
Competitive Regulatory Agencies-CRA’s will promote and require their businesses to be part of the system to help in a disaster.  Multiple rating agencies will examine and rate. Charitable Distribution Associations will become very dynamic and will implement their systems looking for the best ratings.  Government could pass additional labor hours or payment requirements for charities and first responders to intensification the efforts.   
​Military rating boards could release extra funds for military corporations that are designated for relief efforts.   Utilities corporations will have ‘insurance’ or other risk pool agreements and systems for fast response.  Statism organizations will have plans to help those in their organizations.  Financial and insurance CRA’s will be seeking ways to improve their ratings in this regard and play a large role in moving capital to the highest needs.  Road CRA’s would implement their plans.
​CRA Organizations will organize CRA’s from every sector and will coordinate all the relevant CRA’s activities to a certain degree.  All the CRA organizations will experiment with the best models and counterfactuals will quickly eliminate ineffective practices and make others better.  Their will likely be coordination between organizations to put everyone’s assets to their best uses.  The Ratings System will sort out where the help came from.  
​Teams of construction workers that are well vetted and rated high will likely be formed with inputs from home insurance companies to have a quick response team to limit the damage by quickly patching holes that would likely lead to greater damage.  Other quick response teams might be contracted to clear roads, repair cell towers, and other vital services needed to continue the relief effort.  CRA organizations would be the likely command centers.  Many of these team will have access to the pool of extra labor hours with known skills.
​CDA could set up risk pools where everyone within their system that wants to be involved could add more money or labor hours in exchange for greater consideration and help regarding when they are hit by a disaster.  All sorts of systems would be tried and the best would be improved.  CDA’s would likely have systems where they hold in reserve or allow people to work their labor hours ahead, to have plenty of labor hours to be used in a disaster.   
​Government should fully get out of the flood insurance business because government is really bad at assessing risk.  Subsidized flood insurance or even paying for homes that did not have insurance encourages people building in riskier areas.  We need to allow people to take their own risks and pay the extra amounts for insurance within the free enterprise system.   
​Government should tell EVERYONE that storm systems often have high storm surges or that concentrated rain could create floods.  Government should include in the statement that taxpayers are not going to pay.  Private insurance can and should handle these issues.  If the insurance is too expensive in low laying areas, then put your home on higher ground.   
​Every Insurance CRA will set up their own requirements for the insurance companies that pick them.  They will be rated on many aspects of business and how they deal with disaster relief would be an important aspect of the ratings.  Building codes would likely be shifted to insurance CRA’s with city and state governments possibly mandating a minimum on some aspects of ratings of building codes.  
Unemployment insurers should have in contracts that those receiving benefits, train, prepare and if needed go to the affected areas.  Training with search and rescue teams will allow local teams to quickly bloom to the size needed to get the job done.  CRA’s Organizations will coordinate food, supplies, currency and personnel to get the job done.  
​Some teams will bring in tarps and plywood to secure houses so they are not damaged further.  cell phone companies among other critical supply companies will also be able to access these volunteers as part of their plans.  Most people will still be needed at their regular job after a disaster however others are more flexible and will be able quickly turn their labor and talents where they are most needed.  This will all be part of a company’s plan.   
School bus drivers will be trained to go to threatened areas to evacuate and to show up after to bring supplies in and transport people out.  Financial institutions will implement plans to quickly make cash available.  The extra labor hours to help in an emergency is all part of A Citizens Responsibility.  In major flood events, we have seen ‘the Cajun Navy’, just normal people with boats, use those boats for rescue, sometimes against the orders of government officials. 
​These efforts could be more efficient if there was coordination to fill their boats with gas, to drive the trucks to safety, to have police officials hop on the boats to bring law and order, to supply them with energy bars, to have EMT’s accompany them, among the other hundreds of ideas that comes with competition to get the best ratings.  The goal is to make their labor count and become the most efficient, thus matching peoples’ natural desires.  
​There are many app’s that are helping and the coordination could become so much better.  Managers around the country could be on their computers developing teams, ensuring supplies are where they are needed.  School bus drivers will be part of this and managers a thousand miles away updates in real time where boats are dropping off people on dry land.  They will be able to identify and put those people to work within their skill level.  
​Trusted and previously vetted child care professionals will be in high demand.  ID companies and rating agencies will have good records on peoples’ reputations so in a disaster people can quickly put their trust in others.  People with needed skills might need others to watch their children so parents can be put to work or secure their home without small children in tow.  
​Haley2024 starts CDA and First Responders contributions at age 13.  This contribution of 3 hours of work a week will likely be training skills during the first few years.  Many talents and skills will be learned and perfected during the first few years.  These skills and experience will be put to good use during times of disaster relief, thus turning most people in a disaster from victims to be taken care of to people that immediately starts helping.  They will learn protocols to quickly be put on a team.   
​Coast Guard among other military equipment is often useful after a major flood event.  Extra law enforcement is needed.  Depending on the situation, the Military Capabilities Rating System will have the authority to tap into extra funding dedicated towards the help needed.  They will evaluate what military corporations do the work and get the best result and they will be compensated.  
​Many military corporations will also have contracts with cities, states, road corporations, insurance, first responders, and others to utilize their equipment, personnel, and services.  Military corporations will be able to call up those they trained within the mandatory labor hours system.  This will be very dynamic with everyone chasing the best rating.  
​Everyone choose who their mandatory help goes to and most will choose the corporations that have the best results and those results are shown in ratings.  Nobody wants to be underutilized.  They want their labor hours to matter.  The military and First Responders CRA’s will be competing for the best people and their labor hours.  The organizations that don’t show results will not be able to command as many labor hours.  
​Identity companies will all have protocols in place to identify victims, however also to have a person’s credit worthiness, skills, abilities among others so they can quickly be put into an ever-changing relief effort plan.  ID companies will have all credit card and bank account information that can be verified by pictures, user names and passwords, so someone losing their wallet in a flood is not without their money.  Online medical records could be vital for quick response teams.    
Too often government passes bills that pay for big events and not small ones.  9-11, Sandy, Katrina, Floyd and others received billions of dollars, however a simple house fire, a random murder, or small tornado effecting just a few receive nothing extra from government. If you are the only person taking a major loss or part of a massive group taking that same loss EACH, you should be treated the same.  
​Government should treat everyone the same and that treatment should be very limited.  Relatives of the victims of 9-11 received a huge dollar amount from government, however the relative of the ‘normal’ murder victim does not get any money.  Surviving family members suffer the same whether thousands died the same day or not.  The criteria for releasing benefits from government often make no sense because they are made on political considerations. Contracts, CRA’s, CDA’s, and insurance can better address compensation. 
<![CDATA[Transitioning the Post Office to the Free Enterprise System ]]>Mon, 04 Jul 2016 20:34:54 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-haley2024-the-movement/transitioning-the-post-office-to-the-free-enterprise-system
The question is not, if we should, but how, we should transition the Post Office to the free enterprise system.  The demand is there and corporations can do the job.  Haley2024 proposes the standard transition to free enterprise.  I will reiterate here and give some specific post office issues.   
The post office has many assets.  Planes, trucks, equipment, buildings, land, intellectual property, personal among many others.  All the assets will be divided up in to hundreds of for-profit publicly traded corporations.  There should be much debate and studies on how asset are divided and the size of each. 
Once divided all the corporations would need to work together to make the system work.  The Federal government would own all the stocks of every corporation.  All legislators would have a percentage of voting rights for stocks held by the Federal government.  By law, the stocks of all the hundreds of corporations would need to be sold off to the public at a one percent a month, thus less than 9 years, they would be totally owned by individuals.  
Legislators would be need to go through Corporate Proxy Groups to insulate them from too much control and possible corruption.  Individuals would likely use the Corporate Proxy Groups as well.  The revenue of selling the stocks would first go to unfunded liabilities of the post office such as retirement.  The rest would be used to pay down the debt.    
The universal stamp would likely still be used, however this would likely be for the bare bones of service and that stamp price would be reduced.  Many business models would develop.  People could pay extra to get home delivery and even more if you wanted 6 days a week service.  To keep the price down, some people would opt for a once a week service, while others see value in daily.
Some people would save money by opting to pick up mail at ‘cluster boxes’ or likely there would be small strip mall stores with P.O. Boxes for regular mail.  Many models would emerge to save money or people would pay for extra services.  Advertising mail would likely try out many models, and even have a service where people could opt out of all or certain types of advertisement.   
New contracts would be drawn up.  New competition would emerge.  All laws regarding the US post office monopoly would be repealed.  UPS, FED EX among others would likely be players within the system.  With emails and more efficient ways of delivering information to people, the mail has seen large declines and free enterprise deals with restructure much better than politicians and bureaucrats.  
In conclusion the bill to transition to privatization needs to be very short and allow the free enterprise system to handle the details.  Competitive Regulatory Agencies and the Rating System would be implemented.  There might be need to have a temporary floor on ratings of cooperation, however it would most likely not be needed.   
<![CDATA[Should Government Mandate?]]>Mon, 18 Apr 2016 23:04:38 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-haley2024-the-movement/should-government-mandate
The conservative mantra is that government should not be able to mandate that the citizens buy anything.  I generally agree with this, however everything in balance.  Let’s first realize that if government taxes citizens and then uses those funds to buy things, then that is very much government forcing people to buy things, although with a lot less individual control.
Are these same conservative stating that government should not tax and fund Social Security,  education, welfare, regulations, protecting the country (military), roads, police, health care, the courts among others that are funded by government?  There is no big push back stating that government should not force people to buy these things.  Again, if government taxes and then provides (funds) these, they are forcing people to purchase these services, however now under politician control. 
Under Haley2024 reforms and on the page A Citizen's Responsibility, Haley2024 calls for many of these programs to be done in the free enterprise system. To ensure that people do not become burdens on society, however to gain control over these areas in their lives, Haley2024 mandates for the individual and businesses to take care of what government currently provides.  Haley2024 does not add or expand the mandate, over what government currently provides, in fact reduces and allows great latitude in how the needs are satisfied.   
Regulations and bureaucracies are vital to society, however the government’s monopoly on these services stifles innovation and progress.  Government taxes to provide these ‘services’ thus mandating you buy these services through government.  
Haley2024 calls for the taxes to be reduced and the businesses mandated to pay for their onlywn private regulatory agencies that they choose. This does not increase or add a mandate, it just allows businesses more options.  
Government mandates people pay high taxes in order to fund education, thus mandating people buy education.  This requires parents to turn over control of how their child is educated, resulting in less liberty.
 Haley2024 segregates education taxes to just pay for education, thus taking it away from the general budget.  Haley2024 allows parents or teens to opt out of the benefit of a government funded education and out of the taxes.  Haley2024 agrees with a parent’s obligation that children receive an education and has a plan with the rating system to ensure educational neglect is addressed.
Social Security and Medicare 
Social Security and Medicare is government mandating that people ‘save’ for retirement, regular income and healthcare.  Haley2024 proposes to responsibly end these two programs and mandate that people reach a certain rating on not becoming a burden to society in their elderly years.      
Social safety net      
Government taxing and providing welfare is government mandating that you help the poor.  Haley2024 proposes that ALL welfare is moved away from government, both taxes and spending.  Haley2024 proposes mandating that every individual help the poor through charity within a new structure. 
Government mandates that taxpayers pay for roads.  Haley2024 proposes moving roads to free enterprise.  While there is no mandate within free enterprise to pay for roads, the cost of roads will be part of the expenses of most goods and services.  
If you look at each Haley2024 proposed ‘mandate’, you will see that the mandate is far less than what government is currently mandating.  Furthermore, Haley2024 proposals allows great flexibility and individual choice.  As a compassionate people, the people do not want to see great personal needs going unmet.  These mandates are mostly policies to stop people from becoming a burden on society.    
<![CDATA[Why is government involved in the first place?]]>Thu, 14 Apr 2016 14:57:39 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-haley2024-the-movement/why-is-government-involved-in-the-first-place
Why is government involved in the first place?  Free enterprise is not perfect and never claimed to be.  Often those desiring heavy government control creates a false narrative that any perceived imperfection needs to be fixed by government.  If a product is unsafe, a child goes uneducated, a doctor makes a mistake, a bank fails, a basic personal need goes unmet, an old person is without income among others, government thinks they need to get involved .  
Government often over steps and takes over too much.  Certain sectors of the economy are so controlled that, that sector can be considered socialism. One needs to examine whether government action is helping or doing harm.  Did they overreach and control everyone in a sector of the economy where only a small percentage was in need?  
Did government regulation forbid better options and standards?  Did government force out free enterprise in a section of the economy because government started to supply that item with tax money?  
Is it wise for government to supply a need that has a long history of being supplied by the church, especially when morality and spirituality are an integral part of that need and supply?  When government is forced to supply the needs in a secular and amoral way, great harm is done.  The founders believed that liberty can only work when the people are moral and religious.     
Politicians saw poor standards in some products and thought that they knew better and started to regulate.  What they missed is that standards improve when people get wealthier and can afford the safer items.  Often government decides standards need to be above a certain point that people are not ready for yet.
Some people are priced out of the market of that item altogether and actually live with much lower standards.  If a person can afford to increase quality from a 3 to a 5, but the new standard is 7, then they stay at 3.  Almost every trade makes both sides of the trade better off than before.  Often government regulations forbid better standards.  Government way over reached on regulations.
Politicians saw some children not being educated.  Instead of some small measure to give this small percentage of children an opportunity for an education, the government way over reached and turned education into total socialism.  The worst result, is the children are being educated in the shadow of the great wall of separation of church and state, creating great problems.  Government way over reached on education
Government takeover of education also greatly inhibits innovation.  Schools resemble schools from many decades in the past, whereas technology has greatly improved.  Cost of education has sky rocketed, where information technology has improved greatly with major price reductions.  Education regulations, even on private schools greatly inhibit business model experimentation or improvements.  

Social Safety Net
Serious personal needs went unmet in a small percentage of cases. Government involvement necessarily pushed aside charity.  Government is mandated to conduct welfare in the shadow of the wall of separation of church and state, where charity was often religiously based.  Religion is an integral part of caring for the poor.  
How and whether to help is very important.  Providing for the poor can be enabling dependency or empowering.  Government strict rules often creates a situation where people endeavor to meet the requirements to be on welfare and start to feel entitled and thus entrapped.   Charities have the ability to assess the situation to ensure empowerment.  
Roads are something that most people just assume government must provide.  There are challenges for the free market and places that government must get involved, however there is a natural demand for the services of roads and businesses have proven they can supply roads.  With a small structure and a little government involvement, free enterprise would provide better road services at a better value.   
Retirement planning
Social Security and Medicare were established to take care of a few people that did not plan for their own retirement and became a burden to society.   Government way over reached and socialized a large portion of retirement planning.  A simple mandate that people have a certain level of planning is far superior to a total government takeover of everyone’s retirement.  Annuities and long term health insurance are available in the free enterprise system.  
Look at the other reforms within this website to see how free enterprise can accomplish most government functions.  

<![CDATA[Education, Tax, and Social Security]]>Fri, 18 Dec 2015 01:51:06 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-haley2024-the-movement/education-tax-and-social-security
Government fronts the money for the education of 90% of the citizens.  
Government offers everyone, that is willing to accept government control of their child’s education, a government funded education.  Roughly 90% accept that funding and control.  Everyone, whether funded or not, pays back that investment in taxes the rest of their lives. 
Government collects taxes during the productive earning years of all citizens.  A big part of taxes is paying for the education they already had and then paying taxes for the future in the form of government retirement, which is socialism for the elderly.
Haley2024’s reforms will have similar investments, payments and retirement, however in the free enterprise system. Investment houses could help fund education during a child’s education years with long term repayment terms during a citizen’s productive earning years.  During those earning years, they save for their own retirement.     
During the Haley2024's reform transition, state government will have to issue debt bonds to fulfill promised Social Security and Medicare promises.  General Government taxation will also stop funding education and the limited time education tax will transition to funding these retirement debt bonds.  
Since 90% of people were educated by government, thus had the money invested in their education, they still need to payback the investors, in the form of taxes.  The 10% of those that did not have government funded education, should be excluded from that repayment tax because because government did not invest in them.   
<![CDATA[Haley2024 the Movement: Superior DNA]]>Fri, 06 Nov 2015 01:11:14 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-haley2024-the-movement/haley2024-the-movementsuperior-dna
How to structure society. Knowledge and results
Just like DNA orders proteins in certain ways, so does government incentivize or disincentives people in fulling their potential.  The structure of protein is highly important, likewise government. 
Badly structured protein dies or is greatly inhibited from the protein’s full potential.  Likewise, people living under badly structured government are inhibited. People living under freedom and liberty are fundamentally no better than the people living under statism. Their God given potential is the same!  
History of governments has proven that socialism among other heavy government controlled systems, inhibits people thriving, thus resulting in a much lower standard of living.  Freedom and liberty, however is an exception to the historic rule of the history of tyranny.  America has thrived and has been a shining city on the hill of what a free people can accomplish when not inhibited by heavy government control.  
Over the last several decades, increased government regulations, higher tax burdens and government providing for more of the peoples’ needs, have taken responsibly away from the people and hampered them from thriving.  Simply by removing government control and allowing those needs to be met in the free enterprise system unleashes the people potential for their greatest thriving. 
If you have material that is explosive and you put a flame to it, you can release tremendous energy.  Most of the time that energy does harm, however with the right structure of a well build engine, that energy can propel a vehicle.  It is also very important where that vehicle is headed.
Our bodies are similar, in that proteins, carbohydrates among others are directed by our DNA to make certain skin, blood, heart, lung, muscles among many other tissues and cells. God truly did make us complex.  Looking at how many millions of things need to go just right to stay alive is amazing.  Bad DNA often cause handicaps or death.       
Every human being has enormous potential to create value and worth to themselves and to others.  Government policies, the DNA of our society, can inhibit or can allow ever person’s to thrive to their greatest potential depending on the structure.  Government policies that limits people from mutually agreeable trade, which regulations do, does great harm by not allowing those that would be better off in the trade from trading.
While regulations are a very important service, a monopoly of those regulations by politicians, creates huge problems.  First, there is the knowledge problem.  The amount and scope of what government regulates is overwhelmingly more than what a politician could conceivably know or care about.  Second, the great power of MONOPOLY in regulations creates great incentives for corruption.  
Haley2024’s Competitive Regulatory Agencies allows for the free enterprise system to provide the service of regulations.  Correctly structured, with ratings and people wanting higher standards, free enterprise will increasingly improve regulations and allow for people to thrive.  Bad regulations will be driven out by good regulation when they can be freely chosen.      
Self-governance, which is every person providing for themselves through the interdependence of free enterprise is a far better system then a few politicians in government, providing certain NEEDS for the people.  When government provides a need, people do not provide that for themselves.  This makes the people dependent on government for certain needs.  Government provision inhibits the advancements in that product.   
Government provision for education has greatly inhibited educational advancements and has huge government control verses parental control.  Government provision of roads resulted in higher cost, lower quality and less supply.  Government provision ofretirement has had disastrous results. Government provision of health care has resulted in higher cost, lower quality and less supply.  
Government provision in ‘helping the poor’ has been disastrous to the poor in countless way, however the greatest way is destroying the family.  Government’s high control of utilities have led to higher cost, lower quality and less supply.  Government control of our money has resulted in heavy monetary tax, reduces people incentives to save and greatly distorts capital which inhibits capitalism.   
The taxes needed for government provision of needs, raises the tax rates, which disincentives people from earning in the first instant.  Business owners who hire employees are disproportionately affected by higher tax rates, thus resulting in less jobs.  Less jobs drive wages down, harming the poor the most with either no job or less pay.       
<![CDATA[The Article five Convention (COS) Of the States  ]]>Thu, 01 Oct 2015 21:06:47 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-haley2024-the-movement/the-article-five-convention-cos-of-the-states
Conservatives and many Libertarians agree on many of the goals of limiting the federal government, and there are many varieties of proposed amendments out there to do such.  They do not agree however on if a convention of the state (COS) is the best way to accomplish this goal.  Some very smart people have legitimate concerns and other very smart people recognize the concerns, however believe the laws are on their side and that the benefits outweigh the risk.  
Read the Haley2024 proposed amendments
I believe this fight on the ‘right’ between people with mostly the same goals is harming the conservative/liberty movement.  I believe the pro-COS people need to appreciate the concerns, put in safe guards and speak to those issues as to bring in the anti-COS people.  Having only half of the ‘Right’ will not achieve the goal of reining in the federal government. 
Let’s address the concerns about a ‘runaway convention’.  Although, I believe the law is on the side limiting the ability of a ‘runaway convention’, we see many lawless things happening now so, yes, that is always a concern.  However, the left could propose a COS and it could ‘runaway’ with them in the driver’s seat. Also, every time congress meets, they could propose ANY amendment to the Constitution. 
The amendment process is protected by a two-step process.  First, the congress or the states (COS) propose an amendment, either way is a difficult process.  Second, 3/4 for the states need to adopt the amendment which is even a larger hurdle.  A COS is just one method of achieving the first step.  Legislations from the states calling for an Article Five Convention should come with exact wording of the proposed amendment with strict rules to only entertain and only vote for the amendment proposed.  

While I agree with the direction compared to the current status-quo, this gives power to regulate where the original Constitution did not. I agree with Randy E. Barnett in THE ORIGINAL MEANING OF THE COMMERCE CLAUSE. We, the states, need to go much further in limiting federal control.
I propose stronger language:
​I am not opposed to this; however, I do not think it will have great effect. We need to limit government control over so many areas.
I do not have a current proposal for this, however, I believe this Commonwealth and nation needs to start talking about proportional representation. 
I like this one proposed amendment a lot. I would lower the percentage from 60% to 50%. I would also like to see language that allows clear rules for state nullification of federal law for just their state. If there is state nullification, that state will receive either an exemption of taxes or a block grant for all funding related to that nullified law or program. I proposed a similar amendment called Governor’s Repeal:
While Fiscal Restraints Proposal 2 is better than the current system, and I do not want the good to be the enemy of the best. I believe if we are going to go through with an amendment, we should go all the way and take the federal government’s taxing authority away and allow the states to take over. 
While I agree with the direction compared to the current status-quo, this gives power to regulate where the original Constitution did not. I agree with Randy E. Barnett in THE ORIGINAL MEANING OF THE COMMERCE CLAUSE. We, the states, need to go much further in limiting federal control.
I propose stronger language:
Definitely in the right direction. I think they need to go further. This amendment ‘effectively justifies’ their current involvement in too many aspects of the economy and our lives. Haley2024 propose the following: Congress will be limited to collecting 6% percent of GDP. 
<![CDATA[The Haley2024 Volunteer Hours Plan]]>Sun, 21 Jun 2015 19:34:11 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-haley2024-the-movement/the-haley2024-volunteer-hours-plan
Every able body person needs to help with the public good of securing our freedom from foreign and domestic threats and creating a rule of law.  Second as a compassion society, everyone should contribute to helping those most in need.  On both fronts, there would be a 5% tax with a minimum of $1,500 (2015 dollars) on everyone 13 years of age and older. The minimum and possibly more than this minimum could be fulfilled with real labor from the individual.    
Everyone would have the option to volunteer three hours per week, in which  to satisfy the $1,500 minimum tax (150 hours a year). Wide latitude will be given to the military and first responders on how to best use volunteer hours.  The $1,500 minimum charity requirement could also be satisfied with 150 volunteer hours. People could negotiate to do all there hours in rule of law or charity.  
People could also work ahead in their productive years so as not have this requirement when elderly.  people could do extra hours for extra consideration from the charity economy in their elder years,  
These hours would be monitored and rated by Competitive Regulatory Agencies (CRA’s), Charitable Distribution Associations (CDA’s) and Rating Agencies. Real and valuable labor will be ensured by CRA’s and CDA’s chasing the best ratings because citizens will demand highly rated organizations to donate, purchase, do business with or otherwise associate themselves with.  

The youth will began their volunteer hours at the age of 13 with likely training, apprenticeship, and other business/volunteer models that also result in real help being done as one builds their human capital to be of greater help in the future.  Some of the major fields would be nurse’s aide among other in the medical field.  There would be police and fire ‘assistance’ course so volunteer hours in those fields would be of great help in the future.  Military, forestry, among a wide variety of charity related fields would have training for the youth to have the much greater value in in volunteer hours in the future.   
The elderly do lose some productive value with age, however there would be people working for CDA’s among many others that would specialize in fully utilizing the great value and wisdom of the elderly.  One of the elderly’s greatest needs is to be ‘needed’ and they truly have much to give.  Many elderly could be bused to a school to help teach children or teach those going through technical school from their life time of experience.  Mentoring among other ways of instilling one’s human capital to the next generations is of great value.  The rating system, being very dynamic, will understand the limitations of people with disabilities and rate accordingly to gain and optimize the value of volunteer hours.  
Volunteering though one’s job could be a very highly rated endeavor if done right.  People through their work place could do extra work without pay to fulfill their volunteer hour requirements.  Often, one’s job is where they maximize their value in serving others.  CRA’s in all sectors would be seeking high ratings on how they help in charity and ‘first responder’ endeavors.  Whether your employer does direct work in these areas or just transfers the money earned to other endeavors, one’s workplace is where most people utilize their training and capital to best serve others. CRA’s, CDA’s among others will be very dynamic in these areas and requiring very dynamic rating agencies to fully realize the value being offered.   
The greatest benefits of the two $1,500 minimums equaling $3,000 is the fact that everyone should contribute at least a minimum to the two greatest benefits, protection and charity.  Second, this minimum also greatly reduces the percentage rate of the tax/ charitable donation needed to fulfil these two needs.  Higher tax rates creates higher disincentives of creating income (serving others and creating jobs) in the first instance (Laffer Curve).    

<![CDATA[Diversified Representation]]>Sun, 21 Jun 2015 05:13:18 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-haley2024-the-movement/diversified-representation
Currently elected officials lack the knowledge, experience or personal interest needed to fully understand the overwhelming power they have.  Voters lack the knowledge to fully understand how much quality each candidate has in all the areas they have the power over.  This very rational ignorance of the voter’s knowledge of candidates is profound. 
The solution is to diversify representation greatly.  This is done by dividing up responsibilities.  Switching from representation by geographic areas to individuals picking their representatives and that representative’s voting strength is based on how many of those they represent.  Rational ignorance is solved by voting for an organization that you agree with, which does in-depth research in to candidates.  There is also an element of using price to acquire the best talent for a job.   
Perhaps the greatest power a Politician has is the power to regulate.  Huge amounts of campaign money flows to politicians that can help them or harm their competition with regulations.  A politician could not possibly know the smallest fraction of the detail of all the industries that they regulate.  CRA’s first separates all the sectors of the economy and then allows businesses to pick which private sector regulatory agency will regulate them.  Standards will improve with businesses protecting their brand and chasing high ratings.    
Every person picks a rating agency that they agree with and has their trust. That pick gives real power to that rating agency.  These ratings, while often is just mandatory information on products, which is powerful, often mitigates negative externalities outside the transaction or to the broader public.  While current regulations and standards are often quickly outdated or ‘gamed’, these new Ratings System will be necessarily dynamic, changing quickly as new technologies emerge, companies ‘gaming’ the system and among other challenges.   
There are many ways to help those in need.  Politicians create one way in which the government helps.  The necessarily static way government helps is doing great harm.  The help needs to be dynamic.  However dynamic though, there are still different philosophies of helping the poor.  Every person will determine which CDA they will contribute their money or volunteer their time too.  Those that contribute to a CDA have voting power to pick the leadership of their CDA.  CDA's leadership will have real power.
Many programs currently controlled by government will be turned over to the private sector and many required to be in publicly traded corporations.  Representation will be within proxy groups created to deal with the rational ignorance issue of corporate elections.  People will be able to easily turn over the proxies they own to groups they trust to elect people to run the companies they own though stocks.  
There are some that want government to ‘take care of them’. They believe they government should provide them a job, a house, food, clothing, a living wage, health care among many other ‘needs’.  Anyone could join a group and the group would be self sufficient.  All the people that join a statism organization are said to be just as or more intelligent and caring as those within free enterprise, create your utopia. Representative elected by the members of the groupwould set the rules, benefits and responsibilities?  Every person would be able to pick which if any Statism Organizations they wish.  
<![CDATA[A Standard Transition from Government Control and Ownership to Free Enterprise]]>Tue, 17 Feb 2015 23:15:27 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-haley2024-the-movement/a-standard-transition-from-government-control-and-ownership-to-free-enterprise
When government has a long history of controlling a sector of the economy, they often build up a wealth of assets and capital.  When we transition to free enterprise, those assets are likely to be needed and valuable to private companies taking over those roles.  The following is a standard transition with the knowledge that there could be modifications depending on many factors.
The Transition
Once a bill is passed, the government will create a publicly traded corporation for each item or an appropriate group of items of value (school, Road, Building, ships, personnel, and equipment among others).   At the beginning, the government will be the sole owner of all stocks.  Each month they will have to price the stocks to sell off an additional one percent of the assets (adjusting in real time on the stock market). 
 As long as the government owns stocks in the corporation, each legislator will have voting rights for a percentage of the stocks that the government owns.  These legislators will have to go through Corporate Proxy Groups, thus giving a buffer of conflicts of interest.
All taxes that was supporting the government spending that transitioned to free enterprise will be eliminated by way of tax rate reductions and the free market corporation will charge for their services.  If there is a desire for a service, the private sector will work out the details.
Funds from selling the stocks of the assets will first account for debt realized from the current system and then the rest will be government money to pay down government debt.     
<![CDATA[Every time Haley2024 proposes to lower or eliminate government spending, tax exemptions, deductions or credits, I explicitly call for tax rates to lower to match ]]>Fri, 02 Jan 2015 04:14:34 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-haley2024-the-movement/every-time-haley2024-proposes-to-lower-or-eliminate-government-spending-tax-exemptions-deductions-or-credits-i-explicitly-call-for-tax-rates-to-lower-to-match
Every time I propose to lower or eliminate government spending, I explicitly state the taxes rates should lowered to match.  Most things that government does needs to be done, however they can be done in the free enterprise system.  Tax payer, businesses, and others will need lower taxes to pay for the services no longer rendered by government.    

When I call for the elimination of all deductions, exemptions and credits, I explicitly call for the tax rate to be lowered to match.  As I endeavor to persuade in my Laffer Curve page, higher tax rates lowers taxable economic activity, which harms those in lower economic situations the most.

<![CDATA[Campaign Finance Reform]]>Thu, 01 Jan 2015 19:39:34 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-haley2024-the-movement/campaign-finance-reform
When government takes greater control of an aspect of life that individuals and free enterprise use to control people turn to trying to control politicians so as to have their preferences become law.  The free enterprise system creates a system where everyone controls their own decisions therefore lowering the need for controlling politicians.      
The proper campaign finance reform is simply to give politicians less control over things that can be done in the free market.  Haley2024 reform on competitive regulatory agencies dramatically increases what the free enterprise can accomplish with the greatest liberties. 

Free speech is highly important and should never be limited outside of taking others liberties away.  Inciting violence and libel are two common limitations on speech because that speech infringes others liberties and rights.  There are some that claim that too much money in politics by the rich increases their influences on politicians therefore reduces the non-rich.  There is unquestionably that effect and it is detrimental to good government.   

Trying to stop someone from getting their message out is very problematic because there are so many ways to do accomplish that task.  If government limits how much someone can give a candidate, they could give to a political party, a P.A.C., an advocacy group, buy an ad directly or many other methods.
One method seldom used but could bypass most extremely restrictive laws is that one could sign up to be a write-in candidate  and run unrestrictive ads as a candidate stating they do want votes and they get their message out.  When people are eager to get their message out, people will find a way.  If government chased every new way out by an ever growing restrictions by law, liberty would be greatly infringed.    

Some people advocate partial or full public financing of elections.  I believe this comes with much danger and the negatives far outweigh the positives.  First, coming from someone that will most likely be outspend in my quest for the nomination by double digit multiples, the outside PAC and advocacy groups will not be able, nor should they be, from heavy spending.   Second forcing people though taxes to support candidates that have views contrary their own is very problematic.  The rich have many ways to show support to candidates to influence them on policy.  If the law stops one way others will develop.  Again, having the law chase every new way of influence will greatly inhibit liberty.    

The Haley2024 Plan
Haley2024 the movement calls for all candidates to move to campaign competitive regulatory agencies (CRA’s) for campaign regulations and the bureaucracies that follows.  Candidates would be mandated to choose a CRA and state on all campaign material the CRA they are in and their ratings.  Voters will look at their ratings as part of their assessment of the candidate.
<![CDATA[There Are Entrepreneurs Among Us]]>Mon, 15 Sep 2014 00:26:51 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-haley2024-the-movement/there-are-entrepreneurs-amongst-us
There are entrepreneurs among us that have proven their ability to create and sustain a business, employing hundreds of people, satisfying customers, and contributing millions of dollars to the economy. 
If businessmen look at high tax rates and ask themselves if working the many extra hours and risking capital is worth the extra income after a 60% tax rate, a certain percentage of people would say no.
Quite simply, the greater the percentage of income taxed by the government, the less likely it is that the already wealthy entrepreneur will create tens of millions of dollars of economic activity and employ hundreds of people.  All the subcontractors, venders, and companies that supply anything to this entrepreneur has more business as a result of the entrepreneur working.  
The principal of supply and demand works for labor as well. The greater the number of jobs, the higher the wages are needed for employers to seek out and compete for better employees. 
Conversely, when jobs are suppressed, employees have to compete by offering their labor for less to attain employment.  Small businessmen often go with little to no compensation to keep their businesses alive, however that can only go on for a limited time.  
Government taxes and regulations sometimes discourage the expansion of successful businesses. Because of excessive taxation, businessmen can be influenced to cut back their hours and employ less people, thus hindering them from their fullest potential and contribution to economic activity.  Any taxes or regulations that carry this effect should be minimized. 
Many would claim that if one entrepreneur does not start a business, then another will. Thus, by not starting a business, the economy does not suffer or lose jobs.  This, however, is an incredibly short sighted conclusion.
If the disincentive does not dissuade others from filling the gap, we have to consider the businesses that others are not starting elsewhere because of the need to fill this gap.  Every employee working adds one job to economic activity, and every employer adds multiple jobs and economic activity.
​It is important to remember that thousands of people have decided that this entrepreneur has provided service to them better than others, that is demonstrated by them turning over their money to the entrepreneur.  If an entrepreneur dose not start, expand or even stay in business, then service is not done for thousands of people.  We truly have lower quality of lives when we dissuade people from serving others.  
<![CDATA[Money Flow that Grows the Government]]>Sun, 13 Jul 2014 17:42:56 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-haley2024-the-movement/money-flowing-from-the-federal-to-the-state-or-from-the-state-to-the-local-grows-government
Haley2024 the Movement agrees with three levels of government (federal, state, and local), however, thinks it wise that they should pick their responsibilities. There should be distinct differences with no overlap and no money flowing from one to another.  Haley2024 the Movement calls for most of the current functions of the government to transition to the individual and free enterprise.  
When money flows down, lower level governments have large incentives to grow overall government.  The city of Chesapeake, Virginia makes up roughly 3% of the state, therefore the citizens of Chesapeake pays roughly 3% of Virginia's overall state taxes.  For every dollar that the city can manage to acquire from the state, they know their citizens and voters only pay 3% of that in taxes, thus motivating them to collect as much as possible. 
 Local politicians are never blamed for state tax increases, but in reality, collectively with other local politicians, they are often the cause.  If every dollar the local politicians spent had to be collected from their voters, they would be far more frugal.
There has been many speeches, talks and seminars regarding cities deciding if they wanted to apply for state or federal funds. The same applies for states seeking federal dollars.   
There is simply to much to know to put so much power and control in the hands of a few.
Under the Haley2024 plan, the three largest parts of the budget returns to free enterprise. There would be a certain requirement that people contribute to charity in a structured system.
They look at how much it would cost to acquire the extra funds and the controls they would have to give up.  Often the money needed to apply for the extra funds are a high percentage of the funds sought. Oftentimes, the funds come with major requirements that are hostile to the values of the local government.  In this case, it would need to be decided whether or not the hostile policies are worth the money, thus the federal government purchase of those hostile policies.
Throughout the country, state governments are debating whether or not to take Medicaid expansion dollars. The liberals have a very strong argument that if the state government does not take it, they are leaving money on the table. They argue that in essence, the state can tax the entire country for money spent only in their state. They see other states taxing the entire country for their own state's benefit.  The requirement to acquire federal funds is to become much more socialist and accept much larger controls of the health care industry. 
Another example of this is the Common Core.  This funds education with regulations that many find hostile.  Many road projects are decided not on the state’s most urgent needs, but rather on which the federal government will provide funds.  There is much discussion on whether or not to take road funds with certain requirements that a state does not want to accept, such as speed limits, HOV lanes, mass transit, environmental, agenda 21, etc.
In conclusion, people will always spend other peoples' money before they spend their own. Likewise, governments will always spend more of a higher level government's money rather than money they are responsible to tax.  We should always have the value of only spending the funds your level of government taxes.   Each level of government has very distinct roles in which they hold authority and responsibility.   
click to go to my Knowledge and Corruption page
Politicians will talk about how political concerns play a large role on the flow of money. The political party you are in, or even inter-party conflicts play a major role in deciding, when there is discretion.  Often times legislation is crafted to apply only or mostly to allies.  Having a mayor of the same political party as the governor can be beneficial to your city.  There are certain governors that are very open about the power of their discretion in how those on their good side will benefit.

James Buckley on Reviving Federalism
addresses the ills of money flowing from the federal to the states 
He argues that repealing aid-to-state programs would free the federal government to focus on truly national matters, put the government on sounder financial footing, and improve the ability of states to manage their programs for education, welfare, transportation, and other activities. 

Same man, shorter talk on the issue: Former U.S. Senator James L. Buckley makes the case for ending subsidies to state and local governments.
It is very popular to take federal money when less than one percent of federal taxes come from Hampton Roads. While most of this is legitimate federal money spent by the federal government for the military, this makes the point that every locality fights to achieve federal money.
Haley2024 military plan  

<![CDATA[Five Big Reasons Why Free Enterprise is Superior to Government Provision]]>Sat, 14 Jun 2014 04:44:01 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-haley2024-the-movement/five-big-reasons-why-free-enterprise-is-superior-to-government-provision
Lower Tax Rates
Government provision necessitates government taxes. 
Taxes always reduce the activity taxed, thus economic activity (GDP) is reduced.  
-Deductions, Exemptions and Credits create a faster loss of economic activity
Political Decisions  
When the government spends versus when the free market spends, political decisions are made.  Power is taken from all citizens and given to a select few. Government spending crowds out the free market and diminished individual choices. 
-Knowledge and Corruption
-Campaign Finance Reform
-Using Government Money for Political Gain
Government provision is a monopoly with one business model, thus making experimentation very limited and lacking in legitimate counterfactuals.  Therefore, proper evaluation of government services are limited.
Free enterprise requires people to satisfy their fellow citizen to earn their money.  Peoples' desire to receive the best deal requires a lot of effort to be more efficient than the competition.  New business models and advancements in all areas flow fastest from the free market because many private sector businesses experiment and have legitimate competition.  The best businesses stay in business with an eye on the rest looking to regain their market share of satisfying customers.  
Private Market Benefits
Government provided services naturally evolve into greater government control, more dependent citizens, and complicated bureaucracies. Separation of powers, while important for reducing corruption, is not conducive to running an ever fluctuating and complicated organization.  The free market naturally and by necessity exists to serve the people more efficiently, creating greater individual choices and reduced bureaucracies.  
Evaluation is vital for a business.  It usually comes from profits and loss, customer acquisition, capital buildup, market share, or various other results. There are certain signs and patterns that demonstrate whether or not a business has potential and value. People have to risk their own money in this endeavor, which sharpens their focus on serving their fellow citizens.  
The government's evaluation of their services is much more opaque.  Government services using tax payer funds crowd out private sector competition. Tax payer money from the general fund obscures the evaluation of benefits with the cost. Politicians using other taxpayer funds diffuses their focus on how best to serve their fellow citizen effectively.    
<![CDATA[The High Cost of Government Programs ]]>Sat, 14 Jun 2014 03:01:07 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-haley2024-the-movement/the-high-cost-of-government-programsThis article on Mises.org is very relevant to why I want less government control. 
Mises Daily

Home | Library | Why the Cost of Government Is Higher Than You Think
Why the Cost of Government Is Higher Than You Think

May 28, 2014Gary GallesTags Big GovernmentCorporate WelfareInterventionism

This article is also available as an Audio Mises Daily“Look what I did for you!” When our children were small, my wife and I got many gifts from them accompanied with those words (including most of our refrigerator art and many things that still adorn our Christmas trees), in search of approval and encouragement.

While that process was an endearing part of parenting, I have been struck by a far less endearing parallel to public servants. In a similar way, they are always rolling out some new plan or program “for you,” in search of accolades and votes. However, unlike our children, what they claim to have created is frequently misleading to the point of rank dishonesty, because they present the benefits of their panaceas as far greater than they really are and the costs as far less than they really are. And a substantial part of that political overselling involves overlooked crowding-out effects.

The most common examples of politically ignored crowding-out effects are from government fiscal stimulus to “cure” recessions. Such stimulus must be paid for. If financed with current taxation, reduced take-home incomes of those forced to bear the burdens will crowd out some of their spending. If the stimulus is financed by borrowing, savings and investment dollars that would have gone to finance private-sector debt (for factories and other enterprises) will be crowded out by government debt instead. Current borrowing will also require higher taxes in the future to pay off or continue to finance the debt. These future taxes then crowd out future spending and savings.

Unfortunately, macroeconomic malpractice in search of credit where credit is not due does not exhaust the cornucopia of ways the government overstates
the benefits and understate the costs of intervention in the economy.

What is not saved or what is not spent in the future, thanks to intervention, is never mentioned. A good example of this is the government “solution” to Americans’ savings “crisis,” including Social Security, in which forced “savings” are extracted by government from current workers and handed over to retired workers.

Social Security’s vastly under-funded promises of retirement benefits has crowded out (i.e., replaced) funds they would have saved. Those savings would have financed investment, increasing future output, and income-increasing tools — from hammers to factories — for future production. But thanks to government intervention, that investment never takes place.

Similarly, Medicare and Medicaid’s nursing home coverage crowds out saving for future medical costs. Unemployment benefits and various forms of disaster aid extract still more income from taxpayers, thus crowding out more savings by lessening the individual’s ability to save.

Crowding-out effects taint all income-transfer programs, including food stamps, lottery funds for education, and humanitarian foreign aid, among other programs. In each case, aid crowds out private spending, savings, and investment that would have taken place, and could have been directed to job creation and capital accumulation that would have benefited all levels of society. Instead, such programs divert resources to government administration and to recipients chosen arbitrarily through the political process.

Crowding-out effects are also created whenever government takes over any function previously left to voluntary actions. As the history of voluntary charitable groups illustrate, public welfare programs crowd out private charity, private insurance arrangements, family support systems and more by diverting capital and income away from these programs and into government programs. The effect is to make all of these enterprises less economically viable. And having crowded out these voluntary efforts (and taken its cut to pay government salaries and government administration costs), government promoters then falsely claim such interventions solve “market failures” that are, in fact, governmentally induced.

Moreover, every tax introduces a wedge between what a buyer pays and what a seller keeps, crowding out exchanges that would have benefited both (e.g., trading something whose cost to you was $20, but worth $25 to me, creates $5 of wealth. However, a $6 tax would eliminate the trade and the wealth it would have created.) The burden of regulatory costs, on top of taxes, similarly crowd out production and wealth.

Minimum wages crowd out on-the-job training (which would have increased workers’ skills and future prospects). Rent controls and burdensome housing regulations crowd out rental housing by reducing property owners’ incentives to build and maintain it. Means-tested welfare benefits crowd out work, by increasing effective income tax rates, via benefit reductions as incomes rise. Unemployment benefits crowd out re-employment by decreasing the cost of remaining unemployed (whether the worker is really searching for work or not).

In all of these cases, crowding-out effects are overlooked in order to exaggerate the net benefits of government programs. In other words, the promotion of strategic ignorance — overselling benefits and hiding costs — means that what citizens are led to see is far better than what they actually get. And what has society gotten from our cornucopia of crowding-out policies? Reduced freedom, less responsibility independence, frugality, fairness, voluntary arrangements, character development, family ties, and more. We have gotten a demonstration of Dennis Prager’s crowding-out adage: “The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen.”

<![CDATA[Eliminate Business Taxes]]>Sun, 04 May 2014 02:42:59 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-haley2024-the-movement/eliminate-business-taxes
The act of taxing decreases the activity taxed. It is vital for the economy to not create disincentives on operating a business. Given that after a 10 year transition, my plan would reduce government spending by 72%, my plan would be to fully remove business taxes.
 Looking at my Competitive Regulatory Agencies, you understand a business would be required to become regulated by private agencies all contending for your business.  They would charge each business for the service they render.  For example, a restaurant would need to be regulated by food safety agencies and would charge you for those services.  Businesses would need to balance so that all strong ratings listed on their door come from strong regulations that are well monitored and lower ratings are from laxer regulations that are not enforced as well.   
It is also vital for a business to directly link services  provided by the government to that service.  Those services of inspections and regulations by the state are often seen by a business to be obstacles and are often counterproductive to good business. In CRAs, businesses would look for agencies which eliminate counterproductive regulations and are fair and cost efficient in their services.  
Politicians have been known to alter regulations to harm their political enemies or help their friends. This can easily lead to corruption and often the appearance of favoritism. There are some that make an art form out of this to keep their campaign donations flowing.  They take bribes, some illegal such as direct personal payment for a vote or a vacation at the business’s expense.  
Knowledge and Corruption  

<![CDATA[Agenda 21 is Not Substainable ]]>Sun, 06 Apr 2014 20:36:13 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-haley2024-the-movement/agenda-21-is-not-substainable Haley2024 is different than Agenda 21. Agenda 21 allows massive government control of people. Haley2024 takes the power away from the government and returns it to the people and free enterprise. Statism always claims to help the people but instead gives them an inferior lifestyle. The great experiment of America was to give people freedom, rights, free enterprise, justice, and liberty. This experiment has given us a 5,000 year leap of high improvements in standards of living. Those living under any form of statism are trying through Agenda 21 to bring those with far greater standards of living into their poverty. 

Haley2024 is pulling towards liberty in the great tug-of-war of government control vs. liberty.
Error: Embedded data could not be displayed.
<![CDATA[Why do People Vote for Bigger Government]]>Sun, 06 Apr 2014 04:58:10 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-haley2024-the-movement/why-do-people-vote-for-bigger-government
When people receive benefit from the government, they develop interest in ensuring the growth of that benefit.  
Just a small list of so many hidden taxes.
To those who pay taxes indirectly, taxes are incredibly detached and dispersed.  It is very hard for jobs that were not created do to the disincentive of the tax. Higher prices at the store are often due to higher cost, yet it is very hard to fully understand the complexity of the economy.  Many are willing to accept a new tax when it is hard to see they are paying for it, however they clearly see the benefit.
<![CDATA[S.S and Medicare Payroll Tax Versus the Income Tax]]>Sun, 16 Mar 2014 18:50:23 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-haley2024-the-movement/ss-and-medicare-payroll-tax-verses-the-income-tax
Have you ever thought about the lack of issues surrounding the payroll tax? There are no fights over deductions, credit, or exemptions. Few people change business plans to deal with this tax code.   This is the most straight-forward and easy tax to figure out. The tax rate is far lower than the heavily progressive income tax and brings in almost as much money because of the lack of deduction, credit, and exemptions.     
My proposals are much more like a system of payroll taxes than progressive income taxes, although the top cap on the payroll would be removed. This is not for S.S or Medicare; these transition away from being government programs.  

The IRS targeting the Tea Party groups show the IRS can be used as a weapon against certain groups.  We just do not see this with a payroll type of tax.

<![CDATA[Vote Haley2024 to Return Control of Your Life Back to You]]>Sun, 23 Feb 2014 05:25:01 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-haley2024-the-movement/vote-to-give-me-the-power-over-your-life-so-i-can-return-it-to-you

Politicians and bureaucrats have far too much control over the economy, which is control over your life.  My philosophy is to return the vast amount of that control back to the individual.  

The Haley2024 movement is well defined by allowing the individual and the free market to control Social Security, Transportation, Healthcare, Welfare, Education, Regulations and Bureaucracies.
<![CDATA[The Change to Liberty is Scary]]>Sat, 22 Feb 2014 05:00:39 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-haley2024-the-movement/change-to-liberty-can-be-scary

When the government is taking care of a certain aspect of your life, it is understandable that having to provide those services yourself is scary.  Many people will not see the potential the free market will provide at first.  How will children be educated?  How will the poor and disabled be provided for?  How will roads be built?  All these things will emerge in the free market within the transitions periods.    

If the government were in total control of the production and distribution of food, most people would not be able to see business plans develop.  Understandably, some people would be concerned to rely on the free market. However the free market provides food in abundance to the rich and the poor and the number of products produced are extraordinary.
<![CDATA[Using Government Money for Political Gain]]>Sun, 19 Jan 2014 07:24:08 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-haley2024-the-movement/using-government-money-for-politalcal-gain

Currently, the government has the power over such a large portion of the economy, allowing politicians too much power and too little knowledge to properly and efficiently steward that power.
The structure of this government control creates the temptation to abuse power.  My plan is to spread power to the free market.  My plan for disaster relief would result in less fraud, abuse, and waste.

<![CDATA[Haley2024 The Movement]]>Mon, 16 Sep 2013 02:00:45 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-haley2024-the-movement/september-15th-2013

Over the years the government has grown too large.  Bureaucracy leeches onto every aspect of our lives, government spending crowds out private spending, and the free market is far from free.

This movement is not about progressing the federal government slower than the Democrats or removing a few regulations. It is about turning government power to the people in a truly innovative way. No one person has the knowledge or experience base to know how to run the government in the best way possible
In this structured system, the private sector absorbs much of the current responsibilities of the government. Government spending will be roughly 28% of the current amount.  The other 72% will still be spent however in the private sector in a structured system.  Haley2024 is that structured system.
Anyone who loves liberty and believes that the United States of America is going down the wrong path should invest their time and treasure in restoring the freedom God blessed this country with. 

 I, Bill Haley, am doing my part by starting a movement; Haley2024.  Haley2024 is well defined by privatizing Social Security, transportation, health care, welfare, education and bureaucracies.  Regulations would come from the private sector with mandatory ratings.  Roughly 72% of government spending (federal, state and local) will be taken away from government control.   Haley2024 creates a structure in the private sector that allows for greater results compared to government control.