Article Kingdom

Did you vote in the 2008 election? If so, how safe do you think your vote was? That was the question posed of a recent ABC news segment titled “How Safe Is Your Vote?” While Barack Obama beat out John McCain in the presidential race by a pretty resounding margin, other contests across the nation proved a lot closer, where every vote counted. As a result, voter fraud was on the minds of many as they entered and exited the polling booths.

A team of Princeton computer scientists recntly examined voting procedures in New Jersey and came to the conclusion that in this day and age of electronic voting machines, votes are “not that safe” and are far too susceptible to fraud. “All you need is 10 minutes of unsupervised access to a voting machine to open it up and stick in a vote stealing program,” pointed out one of the computer scientists involved in the investigation. “In 5 seconds he was able to pick the lock on a machine. In less than 10 minutes, the professor demonstrated how he was able to unscrew the back panel and replace the computer chip with one he programmed to steal votes.”

So what did the state of New Jersey do about its voter fraud susceptibility? New Jersey’s Director of Elections, Robert Giles, said, “Every one of the ten thousand voting machines used on election night will have layers of tamper-proof security. We have metal cable seals. We have security screw caps, tamper evident tape.”

The computer scientist who was able to hack in, however, questioned the state’s security measures. “Those tamper-proof seals can be faked; it’s not that difficult.” What’s more, New Jersey was “just one of a handful of states … [that used] … the paperless, electronic voting machines on Tuesday.”

When it comes to matters like eating, drinking and even voting, where one can never be too safe, reputable tamper evident protection can go a long way toward eliciting peace of mind. A leading manufacturer, converter and printer of heat shrink PVC, PET-G, OPS & EarthFirst PLA films provides that peace of mind not just on Election Day, but every day of the year. Specializing in vibrantly printed shrink labels, heat shrink bands used for tamper-evidence and shrink sleeves for promotional multipacks and other shrink products, such a company adds to consumer – and voter – confidence.

Tamper-evident shrink bands can be cut to the customer’s exact specifications. Other tamper-evident options include tubing in clear and white, which is printed with “Sealed For Your Protection.” Such tubing is offered in rolls for use on automatic equipment like electronic voting machines. Tubing can also be cut to order, and single vertical perforations can be added.

Whether the New Jersey Board of Elections had such protective measures in place prior to residents casting their 2008 ballots remains up in the air. However, such tamper-evident security initiatives are definitely something the state – and all states – should look into to assure the validity of every single vote that is cast.

Carmen Fontana is a Web Services Manger for Western Reserve Internet Services. Learn more about tamper evident packaging at www.printpack.com/sealit.

With the rigours of election taking its toll on Barack Obama, and the world weatching hopefully as he stepped up to deliver his winning speech as president elect and the first ever black president, Senator Obama could be forgiven for forgetting for a moment the little island of Cyprus, nestled away in the mediterrenean sea.

But they have not forgotten him.

Wednesday, the day Barack Obama was formally accepted and the world reflected, the Cyprus government pledged its commitment and support to the future Obama Administration, championing his policies and beleifs, not to mention his commitment to a resolution of the issues surrounding Cyprus reunification.

A governemnt spokesman cordially announced that,

“Obama has made specific declarations which we welcome. We hope that these declarations will be fulfilled”,

and it is a symbolic gesture of well wishing that matches Obama’s desire to help with Cyprus Reunification that he discussed openly in the run up to the primaries, when he stated that “There must be a just and mutually agreed settlement of difficult issues like property, refugees, land and security”.

The growing relationship between Obama and the Cypriot government is good news for all those in favour of Cyprus reunification, and it is high time that a political heavyweight like the American president elect weighed in with his thoughts; the island has now been divided since 1974, when the North of the island, close to the Turkish mainland, was invaded by troops sent by Ankara to protect the Treaty of Guarantee against the Greek coup.

Stalemate set in when Ankara decreed that North Cyprus be known as the TRNC in 1983, dispelling any hope that a resolution for Cyprus reunification was a work in progress.

It remained that way for a number of years, as presidents Rauf Denktash of North Cyprus and Tassos Papadopoulos, power wielder in the Republic of Cyprus, remained completely resolved against Cyprus reunification.

Now though, the two sides of the island have leaders worth noting, in Dimitris Christofias and Mehmet Ali Talat, and the island is in spirits to welcome Cyprus reunification just as much as they are ready to congratulate Obama on his road to presidency, and his commitment to resolution of the Cyprus reunification issue.

But why is Obama so keen to see the Cyprus reunification issue resolved? Why is Cyprus reunification so important? Take property in Cyprus as one case in point; when the Annan Plan Referendum in 2004 nearly led to a resolution of the Cyprus reunification issue, property prices soared.

Now as the issue comes back on the cards again, they accelerated, and property in Cyprus, flourishing as it is, is leading to the brilliant economic strength of an island that, despite its size, is one of the only appreciating markets in the world.

It is clear, then, why Barack Obama is so interested in the little island of Cyprus, and why they are so ready to congratulate a man who might hold the final key to the lock of Cyprus Reunification, covered once with nettles and thorns, and now slowly clearing to see the light of the sky.

Martin Gavin, resident sage on the complexity of Cyprus reunification, writes for http://www.whiterocksbafra.com

Days before elections Joe Biden, the Vice-President-elect, told campaign donors: “Watch, we’re going to have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle [of Obama].” Did Joe Biden really have in mind al-Qaeda?

In Britain, security officials say that there is genuine concern that during the transition period al-Qaeda will attempt a “spectacular” attack. Other Security officials also are fearful of an attack. Barack Obama has been given advice by leaders of other nations.

Besides developing a certain proficiency in one-way-flights, al-Qaeda is known to have been experimenting with biological agents, particularly anthrax, which they acquire from dead animals. Now they are interested in creating a CBRN device (chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear). The US has been preparing for this and has developed anti-CBRN units on constant patrol in main cities.

Why is al-Qaeda more threatened by Barack Obama than the Bush administration? Bush’s mentality and invasion of Iraq had damaged America’s image around the world and reinforced al-Qaeda’s narrative. Obama’s promise to reverse many of the policies of the Bush administration on issues such as detentions at Guantanamo, torture and the war in Iraq dramatically improved America’s image, especially in the Muslim world. Therefore, it will more difficult now for al-Qaeda to carry on their propaganda to the rest of the world that “America is still the evil crusader suppressing its own minorities”. Clearly the 2008 elections send the signal to the world that America is an open and tolerant society. Barack’s background makes him indeed a much tougher target to their propaganda attacks. These are good enough reasons to make al-Qaeda feel threatened.

Osama’s second in command (Ayman al-Zawahri) released a tape to Obama. The US officials said the message did not signal any increased threat against America. The message consisted of despicable insults against our new president along with the remark “the dogs of Afghanistan have found the flesh of your soldiers to be delicious, so send thousands after thousands to them”. Was the last remark a fearful warning or a provocation? Al-Qaeda always felt confident that they can handle a guerrilla war with us in the steep mountains of Afghanistan and defeat us as they did it the Soviets in the 1980s.

Charles Edmund Coyote writes in “W GOT HIS WAR” that before 9/11 bin Laden had sought battle with Americans, envisioning that a full sized ground invasion of Afghanistan, similar to that of the Soviets, would economically deplete the USA . “He [bin Laden] always wanted to draw the most powerful nation in the world into a guerrilla war in which his small but fanatical and experienced forces would gradually wear the great power down, bankrupting it by an unending conflict and the resultant destabilization of the Middle East and its oil resources on which America depended”. The chapter on bin Laden’s escape is FREE at “The Coyote Report”.

Bush’s attack on Iraq has cost $600 billion to date. This figure increases by millions of dollars every hour. Additionally there are future costs like long-term care for the wounded and disabled US soldiers, the replacement costs of the used up equipment, interest payments on the war debt, and the lost economic use of the resources and manpower squandered in war. Experts estimate that the already incurred out-of-pocket and future costs of Bush’s Iraq war to be $3 trillion, about the same cost as WW2. Robert Craig Roberts, the Father of Reaganomics, claims that these wars must end so that bankrupt Washington will be in a position to borrow from abroad the money it needs to bail out the US economy.

Let’s face it: we blew our opportunity to catch Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda’s leadership when the Bush Administration let them escape from Tora Bora, despite the CIA and the nearby US Marines asking for permission to surround and block their escape. The clumsy use of military forces to continue the Afghan war will likely turn it into a second Vietnam further draining the already weak American economy.

The low-cost, yet the most effective way to fight terrorism is to employ police and intelligence (CIA) with the intermittent use of military force when appropriate.

Coddie Adwar

Coddie Adwar writes exclusively for THE COYOTE REPORT a different kind of POLITICAL NEWS BLOG, a conservative alternative to closed mindedness, and the home of “W GOT HIS WAR” e-book and “GOOD RIDDANCE BUSH, THE END OF AN ERROR” bumper stickers. Get a FREE CHAPTER of “W got his war” written by Charles Edmund Coyote, on how the Bush administration let bin LADEN escape from Tora Bora!

Not even First Class is good enough for the CEOs of the biggest three automakers, Rick Wagoner of General Motors Corp., Alan Mulally of Ford Motor Co., and Robert Nardelli of Chrysler Corp. Each CEO flew in style in one of their company’s luxurious jets hoping to make their case to Washington that the auto industry is running out of cash and needs $25 billion in taxpayer money to avoid bankruptcy.

Wagoner, who flew in GM’s $36 million luxury aircraft to ask for $10-12 billion for GM alone, cost his ailing company an estimated $20,000 for the trip to Washington! Even as the companies are running out of cash, Ford Motor continues to operate a fleet of eight private jets for its executives. GM and Ford say that it is a corporate decision to have their CEOs fly on private jets and that is non-negotiable. This is a slap in the face of taxpayers” said Tom Schatz, President of Citizens Against Government Waste. If the Union of Automobile Workers (UAW) is blamed for costs that add about $2,000 to the cost of a car, one wonders how much the executive multimillion legacies add to the cost!

Detroit’s automakers burned through nearly $18 billion in cash reserves during the last quarter—about $7 billion at GM, $3 billion at Chrysler and $7.7 billion at Ford. GM said it may run short of funds before the end of 2008, and Chrysler said that survival would be difficult without aid.

The CEOs claimed to congress that what exposed them to failure now is the global financial crisis which has restricted credit availability and reduced sales. They claimed their problem is neither their business plan nor their long term strategies but the financial situation we are in now. However, for years the Big Three kept building what they wanted without paying attention to the economics of the world around them and the needs of consumers who started to prefer cheaper and safer cars with better millage. At the same time foreign car companies were building better performing, more reliable and fuel efficient cars. The truth is that the American car industry for the most part had snoozed.

No matter what your political persuasion, no one thinks the auto company executives are doing a good job. It is hard to be sympathetic to an industry that has been so grossly mismanaged. People fear that they are going to take this money and continue the same stupid decisions they have made for 25 years. Let them go down, they say. Taxpayer money will go up in smoke if given to such incompetent management. Money to bail out GM will go to build a $300 billion factory outside St. Petersburg in Russia to continue making SUVs! Redesign and retooling will end up with jobs shipped overseas! Companies fail every day and others take their place. We will still get automobiles, but they won’t be made by American companies!

Easy to say, but there is so much at stake. If just one of the automakers declared bankruptcy, if we also include the workers that produce materials and parts and the people that work in dealerships, some estimates put U.S. job losses next year as high as 2.5 million. A GM shutdown alone could push the U.S. unemployment rate next year to 9.5 percent. According to a forecast, a GM collapse would cost the government as much as $200 billion for expenses associated with unemployment insurance and other programs. Other statistics suggest that a 50% reduction in U.S. automaker operations will cause over $108 billion losses in Federal, state and local governments in tax revenue over three years. Therefore, some argue, it is a choice between $25 billion in loans now or several times more billions in lost taxes in the future. It is estimated 850,000 retirees and their families depend for pensions and health care on the Big Three. The Big Three contribute $21 billion a year to Social Security and Medicare. If we add in all the businesses that depend on the auto industry, and we are talking about one-tenth of the U.S. labor force.

Japanese and Koreans are setting up factories in USA. Do we want them to pick up all the slack? We bail out Wall Street plutocrats and big banks. To let the auto industry die is to write America out of much of the economic future of the planet. The truth is that our auto industry is important to our country and its industrial basis. A lost manufacturing capacity, if needed in war, will raise a threat to national security. If this is true, why don’t we think like President Roosevelt during WW2?

President Roosevelt kept the American workers busy with the manufacturing of what was needed. Yes, we can bail them out but with big stipulations. Just asking for a plan for “viability and accountability” is not good enough. We can demand “radical” changes. Then, leave the ball in their court, so they can be considered responsible in case they refuse to comply. “Off with their hands”. They can take it or leave it. Otherwise, we may as well suffer the consequences of their fall now, because if such a deal is not made, America will lose the industry anyway along with the taxpayer money.

What are these “radical” changes? The incompetent managers will have to be replaced. The buck stops here! No golden parachutes. No outsourcing. The government needs to have decision making, voting-stock, to ensure that the industry will help us build a nice transit system, and create inexpensive, fuel efficient cars that are environmentally friendly. Of course all this work must be done domestically. By playing their role in reducing our dependence on foreign oil, the auto companies can be part of a much desired solution. Such a transformation would help the US economy in countless ways, and I am sure most of us would be happy to see our taxpayer money be used for that purpose.

Coddie Adwar

PS. More than anything, what would really help relieve the auto makers is a National Health Care Plan. There is a lot of controversy, so this should be the subject of another article.

Coddie Adwar writes exclusively for THE COYOTE REPORT a different kind of POLITICAL NEWS BLOG, a conservative alternative to closed mindedness, and the home of “W GOT HIS WAR” e-book and “GOOD RIDDANCE BUSH, THE END OF AN ERROR” bumper stickers. Get a FREE CHAPTER of “W got his war” written by Charles Edmund Coyote, on how the Bush administration let bin LADEN escape from Tora Bora!

If Hillary Rodham Clinton serves as a secretary of state, Clinton vetting would also include a closer look at Bill Clinton. Obama’s transition team has been carefully reviewing Bill Clinton’s international business deals and the Clinton-foundation fundraising to see whether certain activities would preclude the appointment of his wife as secretary of state.

Would Bill Clinton stand in the way of his wife’s chances to serve as secretary of state? It is said the vetting has gone smoothly and both Clintons had been fully co-operative with the process. He has already agreed to disclose some major donors to his charitable foundation and to subject his future foundation activities to ethics reviews. It has also been reported that Bill Clinton would step away from day-to-day responsibility for his foundation while his wife serves.

Would Bill Clinton also have to agree to forswear any personal income from foreign sources? Probably. The former president would also have to alert the State Department to his new income sources and speaking plans. The former president has engaged in other deals, like raising money for his foundation from the Saudi royal family, Kuwait, Brunei and the Emirate of Qatar, and from a Chinese internet company seeking information on Tibetan human rights activists. That may complicate his wife’s work with foreign governments as secretary of state.

However, as one Clinton adviser noted, former President George HW Bush has given paid speeches and participated in international business ventures since his son, George W Bush, has been president - without stirring public complaints or controversy about a possible conflict of interest.

Would Clinton’s appointment be a distraction to Obama administration and Obama will end up spending lot of time defending actions of the Clinton family? Would the message of change will be washed away as Obama brings into the administration the very same people he had to fight in the primaries to steer the nation in a new direction? Or would her appointment unify the democratic party? Would qualified people such as Senator John Kerry, and Governor Bill Richardson be a better choice?

We agree it is wiser not to put a military man, like Collins, in charge of diplomacy because it leaves diplomacy out of the equation when discussing conflicts. If Hillary says that negotiating with our enemies without preconditions is na?ve, how is Obama going to get his foreign policy implemented if his secretary of state remains dead set to a softer negotiation approach? Would that be perceived as a lapse of judgment from Obama’s part almost comparable to Sen McCain’s choice for vice-president?

Would Hillary be best as an Ambassador to Israel, a nation she claimed to favor over all other nations during her presidential campaign? Or would her appointment as secretary of state bring out the best in her skills making her an ambassador to the world in the tradition of her idol, Eleanor Roosevelt?

Could Hillary be a great diplomat? Has her previous campaign demonstrated any instinct for negotiation or knowledge about the scientific field of study about negotiating? Many people do not think so. Because she has devoted most of her public career to domestic issues, especially children, poverty and health care, she is probably most needed in the Senate. She’s been waiting a long time to get her health care initiatives passed and probably knows more on the subject than anyone else. Universal health care has been her particular issue since her husband entered the White House; Obama has promised to work toward it, and she is in every way the ideal person for that post. She will be an enormous help to Obama in the Senate and, frankly, the Senate, itself, needs her.

One has to agree in one thing: It cannot be worse than President Bush’s administration!

Coddie Adwar writes exclusively for THE COYOTE REPORT a different kind of POLITICAL NEWS BLOG, and the home of “W GOT HIS WAR” e-book and “GOOD RIDDANCE BUSH, THE END OF AN ERROR” bumper stickers. Get a FREE CHAPTER of “W got his war” written by Charles Edmund Coyote, on how we let bin LADEN escape.

Dear President Elect Obama:

As you have hopefully inspired many Afro Americans to aspire to greater goals; I have been inspired by George Bush and Sarah Palin. I now believe that I am smart enough to be President. I realize that there are many people in Congress smarter than I, but few with as much common sense. Please keep this in mind as you read my “vision” for America.

Taxes: Generally raising taxes in a bad economy is not a good idea. However, we do have a $10 trillion debt. We can’t reduce the debt by lowering taxes. If you do increase taxes on the top 5% don’t give it back to me. If you increase taxes for some and give it back in the form of welfare; you haven’t accomplished anything. We may be a consumer economy. However, spending beyond our means got us into this mess.

A VAT may have been a good idea 30 years ago. I’m retired and living off my savings, much of it already taxed. If we switched to a national sales tax in place of income tax I would be taxed twice. Don’t forget the group I’m in.

Social Security: Private accounts just like a VAT may have been a good idea 30 years. I would have opted out of Social Security if allowed. But, I wasn’t and no should anyone else. Everyone should be required to participate. Benefits should be for retirement, and should be based on the amount paid in. Why should someone who paid in 40 quarters get the same as I do after paying in for 120 quarters? Benefits should be for only those citizens who paid into Social Security and definitely not for illegal aliens.

Taxing benefits is not fair unless the income threshold is so high that the recipients would not even miss their check, were it stopped. I am now receiving Social Security benefits. However, because of the unacknowledged inflation and the decline in the stock market I work part time to supplement my income. So in addition to being taxed on my benefits I must continue to pay FICA taxes, which are no benefit to me.

Free trade is a two way street. Expecting China to import our products, especially Harley Davidsons, is not protectionism.

Water: on any given day there is a flood somewhere and a drought somewhere else. We need a system to redistribute water to where it is needed. 71% of the earth’s surface is covered by oceans, and if Al Gore is correct it’s going higher. Not having clean drinking water anywhere in the world in unacceptable. One solution for the rising water levels is to drink it. We have the technology to turn sea water into fresh water. If we put our minds to it we can make it economically feasible to produce fresh water on a large scale. We could even sell it. There may be alternative to oil as a fuel, but there is no alternative to water.

Energy: Until ours cars run on something other than gasoline we need to drill for oil. Even though we can’t drill our way out of the energy problem; it’s no reason not to drill. Start in Alaska. Their governor is all for it. We also have plenty of oil shale. Let’s develop it. It might cost a little more, but eliminating our dependence on middle east oil is priceless. Developing a car that is powered by the energizer Bunny is a long way off. However, there is no reason to use any oil to generate electricity. We have natural gas, wind , coat, hydro power, and nuclear power.

Ethanol and bio diesel make no sense when there are people starving in the world. Insufficient research was done when ethanol was introduced and many marine engines were damaged. Ethanol and bio diesel cost just as much and reduce the mileage. So where is the savings? We need more fuel efficient cars. The Hummer should be discontinued immediately. Regarding the marine industry: most boats are lucky to get one mpg. If we increase it to two, the cost of boating falls, and our carbon footprint is reduced by 50%.

Bailing out the auto industry: The US auto manufacturers have no one to blame but themselves. Giving them any money is a bad idea on a long term basis. On a short term basis it may be necessary. But, not unless they come up with a new business plan. Top executives should work for $1 per year until they get back on track or be replaced. Unions will never admit it but they make too much. Forget the union vote in 2012. Without concessions there won’t be an UAW. Don’t forget Harley Davidson. They are the only US manufacturer currently making a vehicle that gets 50mpg.

Farm Subsidies: Stop them. Just because Congress gets paid for doing nothing doesn’t mean everyone else should.

Foreign Policy: Many sovereign nations have leaders that are considered dangerous or downright crazy. However, they are still sovereign nations and we can’t tell everyone what to do, how to treat their residents or run their governments. This is why many countries hate us. What we can do is react when a person or country does something against our national interests.

Health care: Every US citizen should have access to quality health care. But it doesn’t have to be free. If you can’t afford the co-pay for the polio shot for your fourth child; maybe you shouldn’t have four kids. I proposed a plan to US Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz for retired people, 55 to 65 years old, to join Medicare. Based on my circumstances I would have saved thousands and Medicare would have made millions on the 25 million Americans in my age group. Debbie Wasserman did not reply. She had more pressing issues, like speaking at a Hadassah Convention in California.

Good luck: You’re going to need it.

Bob E Sherman is author of the book Am I the Only One That Signals? and columnist for the Waterfront News http://www.bobesherman.com

Although I did not vote for President Barack Obama, I wish him well and I hope that he is as successful as President Bill Clinton. If Obama governs as a centrist as Bill Clinton did, he should not have any problem getting a second term. But if he chooses to govern to the left, he will have a troublesome and short four years as Jimmy Carter once had.

Why John McCain Failed…

John McCain failed in his quest for the presidency for a number of reasons, but primarily because he could not or would not explain the underlying problems with Obama’s economic policies.

Perhaps he could not explain the problems of Obama’s campaign promises regarding the economy, because he did not understand them himself. Perhaps the problems simply could not be explained in a sound bite.

But I believe that John McCain failed in his quest for the White House, because he would not accept advice from the faithful who were not part of his internal campaign team. Perhaps his people shielded him from outside input.

My wife says that the McCain team probably thought of me as a stalker in the wild. I had sent explanations of the problems of Obama’s economic plans several times, but it would seem that my help never escaped the email box.

Great presidents of years past were great because they surrounded themselves with really smart people. The measure of a great president - be it Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan, John F. Kennedy, Franklin D. Roosevelt and others - can be succinctly described by their ability to find and get people who best understood the needs of the nation and how to solve those problems faced by average Americans.

In the end, the American people were worried about the economy, and yet, John McCain could not show us why his approach to the economy would be better than Barack Obamas. That is why he lost his bid for the White House.

What Is In It For Me?

Barack Obama understood something else that John McCain seemingly could not. President-elect Obama understood that people vote on the premise of what is in the deal for them.

A tax cut for 95% of Americans and a tax increase for the richest Americans is something that resonated for many people.

So long as the tax payer thinks that they will gain more than they lose, they are frequently happy to hear promises of this type.

This is where the McCain campaign failed to understand the marketing of a politician. Jumping up and screaming about how the 42% who do not pay taxes now will receive a check from Obama, as if that were a bad thing, alienated the 42% who do not pay taxes. To argue that this was the equivalent of “welfare” was to stomp on the hopes and dreams of 42% of the electorate.

To have told the story to the American people in a way that could have swayed the electorate to McCain would have been to explain the underlying economy of Obama’s plan. But John McCain could not or would not do so.

The rich voted on principles different than the economy, because the rich understand what I am getting ready to show you now.

Shifting The Tax Burden To Business

Under the basic structure of Obama’s tax plan, he is going to eliminate most taxes paid by those who work for a living. On the surface, that seems like an awesome plan. Even I would benefit from lower taxes under Obama’s plans.

But here is the problem…

The Republicans utterly failed to tell us this story, so that most of us could understand the fallacy of this plan.

Higher taxes for business will not eliminate jobs directly, as described by the Republican brand! As a business owner, I have a hand’s on understanding of this scenario.

Businesses will do what is possible to bring the same amount of after-tax profits they have seen previously. Especially when the business is a sole proprietorship like mine, our profits become our incomes. So, if I need $70,000 per year to sustain my lifestyle, I will find ways to increase my business back to the level I need to be at to sustain my standard of living.

Taxing my profits only ensures that I must earn more money, so that I can maintain my standard of living. Laying off people is not an acceptable option, because fewer staff will ensure a shrinking ability to earn the money I need to keep my standard of living.

Since I am not willing to lower my standard of living and laying off people is not an option, I will have to find other ways to make the difference. The only way that I am going to be able to maintain my business is to increase my prices. And so long as the consumer feels that my products and services are necessities in their lives, my customers will pay the higher prices.

How This Affects You…

The bakery company will not cut its profits or lay off people; instead, it will increase the price of a loaf of bread.

The lumber store will not cut its profits or lay off people; instead, it will increase the cost of lumber.

The oil companies will not reduce its profits or lay off people; instead it will increase the cost of gasoline.

All in all, the prices of all products and services will increase to reflect the new tax environment.

As prices eventually increased to reflect higher fuel prices during the summer of 2008, so will all prices increase to reflect higher business taxes and the increasing prices of all raw materials, due to higher business taxes. Increasing prices for any reason will increase the rate of inflation for everything in the United States.

Amazingly, the 42% who did not pay taxes under George Bush will now be paying the new taxes on everything they buy. And you will pay those taxes, because you cannot stop eating or buying goods and services.

Whereas 42% of Americans do not pay taxes now, all Americans will soon be paying for Obama’s “new taxes on the rich”.

Maybe that check that Obama will send the 42% who do not pay taxes now will offset the increase in the cost of living - maybe it will not.

Will Obama’s Economic Policies Reflect A Net-Gain Or A Net-Loss?

If the tax cut for the middle-income and the checks for the lower-income families are greater than the increased cost of goods and services, then this plan will be a net-gain for all middle- and lower-income families home finances.

If the tax cut fails to add enough money to the budgets of families to offset the increased cost of goods and services, then the American people’s personal finances will experience a net-loss.

It is all about standard of living. Will you in four years have a better standard of living under Obama’s tax cuts? Or, will you find that the increased cost of products and services have eaten away the benefit that you received from Obama under his tax cut for 95% of American taxpayers?

In Conclusion…

I am not very optimistic about middle- to lower-income families finding a net-gain under Obama’s tax plans… But, I hope that I am wrong.

Many pundits suggest that Barack Obama will not be able to keep all of his campaign promises, and it is still my hope that in four years we will be able to look back to see that Obama’s tax plan was one of the promises that Obama did not keep.

With Arlo Mooney’s background in finance and economics, he strives also to help people understand complex economic principles, by explaining conditions in a way that makes the complex seem simple. If you want to learn the inside story of the September 2008 economic collapse, click here. Read more at: http://cash-advance-payday-loans.org/blog

2008 has been a year of change. For one, Cyprus reunification is now back on the agenda after the appointment of Dimitris Christofias to the presidency of the Republic of Cyprus, joining Mehmet Ali Talat to solve the disputes over Cyprus reunification.

That appointment, an appointment that can solve a problem that has lasted for over a quarter of a country, has in some ways been overshadowed by the more internationally minded affect of the credit crunch and the recession, which is arguably the defining feature of 2008 so far.

Interestingly, Cyprus has not been affected as badly by the recession as some of the major world countries like the United Kingdom, France, German, the United States and Japan. And it has one of under five currently appreciating markets in the world, including the burgeoning and flourishing of the Cyprus property market.

But elsewhere it has taken its toll, and the world’s media have in some way neglected the endeavours of Dimitris Christofias and Mehmet Ali Talat to reunite the divided island; after replacing long standing leaders Tassos Papadopoulos and Rauf Denktash, the two set out trying to undo the work of the fiercely segregationist leaders by pledging themselves to weekly reunification talks and promising to attempt to resolve the issue by the close of 2008.

It is that Cyprus reunification push that is spurring the appreciation of the Cyprus property market, so it is perhaps unjust that it has lost so much media coverage; the political will of the island is directly linked to the economic prosperity of North Cyprus and the island of Cyprus - Cyprus properties - so that politics and economics in Cyprus are battling bravely against the global recession.

Dimitris Christofias is not the only new appointment this year, though, and the success of Barack Obama, now president elect, in becoming the first black president, is argued by the world’s media to be battling for the title of the most important events of the year.

But truly the three events are not so separate from one another; in the run to the American primaries Barack Obama stated that he greatly wished to see an end to the partition, expressing his support for the heads of state and firmly recommending that, for the island, Europe - and for the international community - Cyprus reunification represents a sound move.

Now that he has been successfully elected, he can add his political weight to a Cyprus reunification push that started with Kofi Annan in 2004 and now includes a majority of the major E.U powers.

With most journalists reporting that one of Obama’s biggest challenges will be the improvement of the world economy, perhaps something can be learned, too, from the performance of Cyprus, embodied most by its boom on property in Cyprus and the continued efforts for political union and strength in the face of adversity for its leaders, just as he has given wise counsel to the island in its push for Cyprus reunification.

The push for Cyprus Reunification, then, overshadowed by perhaps more glamorous events, is just as meaningful, and should not be forgotten.

Martin Gavin, a leading expert on Cyprus reunification, writes here about the importance of Cyprus reunification to the economic climate in the world at current. He writes for http://www.whiterocksbafra.com

This week, Senator Barack Obama beat John McCain in the presidential elections for the USA, to become the first black president of the country. Citizens of nations across the world are heralding the news as a triumph, calling the ascension of a citizen of African-American descent to the White House a ‘world changing’ event.

Ramifications of the appointment will tremor throughout the world. Already, the British press is discussing the potential reconciliation of the ’special relationship’ with America, with Gordon Brown being one of Obama’s long standing and most vocal supporters; the Republicans, in the run up to the result, even accused Brown of breaking international political tradition and implicitly backing Senator Obama with his continual words of encouragement.

Sarkozy and Merkel, president of France and Chancellor of Germany respectively, have also offered their support, and opinion polls prior to the election showed landslide majorities for Senator Obama in Europe’s most powerful nations.

The world, then, looks set for a change, and the importance of it cannot be denied. But as one continent sees vast change, as the states of America unite to vote in their first black president, the small island of Cyprus, nestled between Greece and Turkey in the Mediterranean sea, is patiently waiting for a solution to its own problem.

Cyprus Reunification and the Cyprus Problem

Since 1974, when Turkey invaded North Cyprus to protect the island under the treaty of guarantee - Greek Cypriots had mounted a coup just months earlier - Cyprus has been partitioned. Several attempts, generally from outside the island, in the international diplomatic community, have failed to reunify the island.

This is largely due to the long standing presidencies of Rauf Denktash in North Cyprus and Tassos Papadopoulos in the Republic of Cyprus.Both were staunch isolationists, and refused for some years to even enter into negotiations.

In 2004, though, the brilliant work of former Secretary General of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, led to the acceptance of the Annan Plan Referendum in 2004. Each side of the island was allowed to vote on reunification of the island, and if both North Cyprus and the Republic of Cyprus voted in favour of Cyprus Reunification, then the two presidents agreed to take to reunification.

Unfortunately the persuasive powers of Tassos Papadopoulos meant the the Greek Cypriots voted ‘no’ to the referendum, though North Cyprus voted ‘yes’.

The New Presidencies

One part of the reason that North Cyprus voted ‘yes’ was the effort of their then-prime minister Mehmet Ali Talat, who defied Rauf Denktash in his attempts to curb positive voting.

He then took over from Denktash as president in 2005, and has since pushed heavily on the island and in Ankara, for a reunification settlement. From there, he was joined by Dimitris Christofias at the start of this year, who replaced Papadopoulos and also pledged to solve the Cyprus reunification issue.

So as Barack Obama takes office in January, and begins to try to right the wrongs of American foreign policy and the Bush administration, perhaps we will also see the return of the island of Cyprus to a unified island, thanks to the efforts of Dimitris Christofias and Mehmet Ali Talat.

Martin Gavin is an expert on world politics and the Cyprus Reunification issue. He writes for http://www.whiterocksbafra.com

The last election brought some interesting changes to the USA. You might say it brought “The Change” that some of us were looking for. The question now is “What does change look like?” and what shape will it take going forward.

President-Elect Obama’s inherited problems are mounting by the day. Today brings us a bailout which is approaching nearly 5 trillion dollars, due to a bait and switch that was approved by both elected parties.The auto industry is on the edge of collapse, along with American Express. This all comes before the holiday season, and the dismal retail reports that we about to see (of course, this is all great news from Wal-Mart’s perspective).

These are challenges that hope alone will not solve. We are looking at the imminent meltdown of the global financial system. The fate of the world is based upon the United State’s ability to repay debt. If the US defaults on any of the treasury bills that it is currently holding, then we will see world economies fall apart in a matter of hours.

This instant, China is holding between $600 billion and 1.3 trillion in government backed treasury bonds, depending on which reports you want to believe. Japan holds right around $700 Bln. in bonds. Our credit rating as a nation is about to lose its “AAA” best-of-the-best rating.

What does this all mean? President Obama will be at the helm of a rapidly deteriorating economy, pushing policies that limit free trade, virtually eliminating any way to make up the debt through reduction of import tariffs, etc.

He’s going to lose his sweetheart status with the rest of the world pretty quickly.In fact, he is already putting the pieces in place that will make him even morehated than George W. Bush. How? Well, Obama is heavily indebted to the Labor vote,based on his strong campaign for American-based manufacturing. This includes keepingin place generous pensions, wages, and health care plans for the automotive and mining industries. He can’t retract his promises now without a severe backlash occuring.

On an international front, he has hired Rahm Emmanuel as his chief of staff. While mostknow him domestically as a Democratic operative with really sharp elbows, the internationalcommunity knows him another way: A staunch Zionist. With the nation of Israel increasinglybecoming a thorn in Europe, Russia, and Africa’s side, the thought of a former IDF member counseling President Obama is sure to cause some severe uneasiness concerning US foreign policy, especially within the coalition of Arab nations. Let’s not forget the current situations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and any other challenges that might possibly arise.

From an environmental standpoint, his challenges are even more steep. How will President Obama balance an aggressive climate change policy when faced with the increased costs ofimplementing such regulations? The bureaucracy required to govern such a vast effort would be incredible. Let’s not forget, that while cleaner, the new policies will cost more. So- called “cap and trade” schemes will charge businesses for outputs above what the government deems appropriate. While this will be an additional revenue scheme, chances are that money will be used to repay debt, rather than finance cleaner technologies. Will he be forced to delay or abandon such a program entirely when confronted with a full-blown recession?

One problem President Obama will face is the tack to take with the financial markets. Stricter regulation is a given, but what about the increases on Capital Gains that he promised? He walks a tightrope there, as most people will take their profits(if there are any) before an Obama administration can raise the rate from 15 up to 30 percent. If he doesn’t enact them, then by virtue of the fact that he did not raise rates, it will be seen as a continuation of the policies of George Bush.

Along the same lines, what will Barack and Co. do regarding regular income taxes? The ceiling fell from $250,000 to an official $200,000, with Joe Biden at one point speaking of a $150,000 ceiling for those who cannot expect tax increases. The exact number has yet to be named. Some are saying that that level will fall to $100,000 or possibly further. Given that John McCain and Barack Obama both proposed adding an additional trillion in spending above our current levels, it is almost a foregone conclusion that tax cuts are not in the cards. In fact, a vast rate increase would be needed to offset our current liabilities, not mention policies that have not seen the light of day yet.

I wish President Obama success with these challenges, as they are surely myriad.His destiny and mine are seamlessly interwoven.As Americans, our national fortunes will rise or fall based on his handling. The questions remain but hopefully the answers will be clear, and correct when President Obama is called to answer them.

Kurt Hartman is Head of Employee Training at Mobile Fleet Service, Inc. They sell tires to the mining, construction, and heavy equipment industries. You can find news, commentary, and tire videos on their website: http://www.buybigtires.com