Getting ready for the New Normal

When I think about the new normal I think about driving into town and seeing every single restaurant packed full of patrons. If they were really hurting that bad, they wouldnt be eating at Red Lobster. With a family of 6 I cant leave there without an $80 or better bill every time. Nothing will change, and that is exactly why things will get bad fast. Most are living pay check to pay check now, and they are still Christmas shopping and eating out. What does that tell you?

Most have their heads either so far up their asses or so far in the sand that they cant see the coming storm. We can weather it, we are Americans. We can weather everything and anything. But we need to be ready and ready is not spending every dime you have on things you dont need.

Everyone who is reading this stop and ask yourself this 1 question: if today everything in the world stopped, no gas, no electric, no city water, no trucks delivering food, no nothing but you and yours and what you have right now, and you had to survive for 4-6 months, could you do it? If your answer is no, then you need to rethink those non-essential buys and prepare. Once you have yourself ready for 6 months of being off line and off the grid, then you can go back to spending money at the hair dresser or the jewlery store. That is not gloom and doom, that is smart and being prepared. The farmers of old could have done it easily. The Amish do it now.

So what will change here? I dont know, not much. I will still buy extra food each week to add to my stores, I will still add ammo, I will still add extras like batteries and duct tape, but I will live my life. I will get up and do my 0800 - 1630 monday-friday, then come home to my awesome wife and kids. To a house I busted my ass to buy at 33 and i am busting my ass to make my own through sweat and hard work. No one can take that from me. And, damn it, we will STILL drive to St. Louis next summer to tangle with those blue catfish. That is one cost I wont give up! LOL!

Are we better now than 4 years ago? You do the math. When I do it, it comes back a resounding NO

Why do people continually blame Obama? You would think everything was fine and dandy before he was in office. No, it wasn't. That's if you are complaining now. If you didn't live within your means many years ago it is much harder to cut back now with all the luxury's. I can see Social Security going back up to where it was (6.5%?) but how are you talking 13% increase in taxes? No way. I work with someone who bought a house based on what the stupid realtors and bankers will tell you, 28% of your income or whatever the figure is. Guess what, they based it on all the overtime we were once working, now there's no overtime and guess what, hard time making the mortgage payment. A/C? in a house? Never had it. It's a waste of money. I might one day buy a new car, but they won't make what i want, something with manual steering and manual disc brakes, roll up windows. I have neighbors whom pay to have their grass cut, less than 1/2 acre. Waste of money. They bought a lawn mower but are too stupid to cut the grass or too stupid to start the snow blower. Yet they also cheat on their taxes by not reporting income from an apartment over the garage. Who does that effect? Everybody whom works and actually pays taxes. I have neighbors who don't work. They collect SS because of some injury. Yet they can go out drinking, work under the table or go hunting pretty good. I have relatives who do the same thing, "i can't work". 50% of those claiming injures are complete bullshit. The problem with this country is not taxes, but the spending and the people expecting free entitlements. Get rid of the freebies and put them to work. Someone who can jump on a snowmobile can do work from home, at least. Drug and alcohol testing for anything gov related. Hard labor camps for illegal immigrants. That would stop the flow huh?

My new normal is be smarter than everybody else, be prepared for everything you can possibly think of. If it can happen,it will. Save. Invest. Ammo. Tools. Fuel. If you are just beginning to cut back, sorry, you are too late, you will never make it if the crap does hit the fan. 50's were before my time but many houses had their bomb shelters. There was a reason for that, it was the "possibility of war". Today, someone sitting behind a keyboard can shut down power to your house or empty your bank account. You might freeze to death if you had electric heat. How can you do anything about that? You can't. The Chinese can come marching down your street and you would get an excuse from the government, not a answer. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Since most here are middle class, we are the ones who get taken advantage of, so you will be offered something to keep you above the poor level.



This rant is not directed at anybody in particular, all similarity's are purely fiction and coincidental. If common sense is lost or non existent, please see your doctor as this can be a sign of a more serious condition.

I'm thinking I could probably save $50 / month in electric if i could get the other two people living here to turn off lights they aren't using. my part time job is to follow them around and turn off the lights, i can't figure out why they cant do this themselves. the only thing i haven't tried yet is physical re-inforcement, but even i probably won't go there. the other mystery of my life is why the doors are left open in winter to allow cold air inside and then closed in summer when it would be cooler to allow a breeze to move through the house via an open door to the screen door.

Nice rant Mozz, but I only disagree with one point. The poor are not getting poorer. What they call poor is increasing. The poor today have more then we had when we were kids.

Kevin

rberq wrote:. You want to blame President Obama, and I'm not going to defend or attack his policies here. But what you are complaining about is partly self-inflicted on the personal level, has been in the works for a long long time, and has been accelerating and becoming more apparent in the last 10 years.

You are so full of bull and along with Fred and the rest of you socialists have no idea if I am living above my means or not. I'm not but that's beside the point, who are you to say how I spend my money. It's my money, I worked for it and I get the right to keep as much of it as I can and spend it how I want. You have a problem with that because I seem to more then you do. Oh no, she can afford $10 a month for a personal 800 number, call the cops! Tough toenails.

Mark me words, things are going to get a lot worse for the average joe on either end of the income scale because of the policies of the Progressive movement, including the socialist in chief in the White House. I've been blessed through hard work and faith and put myself and my family in a situation that I hopefully won't hurt as much. It all starts in Jan 1213, get ready because here it comes. Lisa

PS. You don't like be called a socialist? Too bad, again. You are known by the company you keep and the politicians you support. Yours and every other family in America's take home pay is going down by 13% come the first of the year, and no one's to blame but your guy in the White House and his anti-business policies. That's can all be documented but hey, why start actually checking the facts out now. Lisa

From 1951 to 1963 the tax rate for those making $400,000 or more was at 91% except for 1953 and 54 it was at 92%. In 2012 its 35% for those that are making $388,350 or more. All these tax estimates show that taxes on the rich are the lowest they have been in half a century. But what about before 1960? Well, we know that the top marginal tax rate was even higher in the 40s and 50s than in the 60s; and it was very high by modern standards through much of the 30s too. So I think it’s safe to say that taxes on the rich are currently lower than they have been for not 50 but 80 years. Have these people invested in America via job creation...I think not. Are they going too...I think not, at least history has not shown this.

Welfare spending comes to about $235 billion, the bulk of which is SNAP (formerly food stamps) and about one-third of Medicaid. That's 12 percent of all federal welfare spending and about 6 percent of the whole federal budget. Honestly...does anyone believe that we can have a balanced budget by completely cutting $235 billion from our current budget? I can't make those numbers work! However, I do think there is much waste in these programs and for that matter every program the govt. has had waste that could be trimmed. Adding salt to the wound is the $300 billion per year spent on corporate welfare and this has NOT been paired down to just the last 4 years...its been over the past 12 years...need I say more!

The reason public (state and local) pension plans are headed toward financial disaster is simple. Ever-expanding public-sector unions have flexed their political muscle and larded up with lavish benefits to be be paid out decades from now.In a properly run,private-sector business, future retirement benefits are paid for using present-day contributions. This is not the case when lawmakers have the power to boost public-employee benefit packages while using accounting gimmicks to conceal and pass on the debt to future generations. I don't see this in the federal sector with my current job....in fact...out of the 16% of what I contribute to my retirement....the govt. only kicks in 2%. I have not had a raise in 2 years...because our govt. believes we can balance the budget by not doing so. And, in my humble opinion....I earn every cent that I make!

With all of this said, I have made cuts to my personal budget as well. I always look at ways to save a dime where I can, however, I spend my earnings as I see fit! I pay my bills/expenses, have a roof over my head, clothes on my back and eat well, as well as take care of my responsibilities as a single parent. My boys needs are met, but all of their "wants" may not be. My new normal is to continue on my current path and live within my means as I've done over the past 22 years no matter who leads this country!

Lisa, I think I already mentioned this, but, you're taking all this scarily personal when for myself it was not meant to be. You're the one that posted the frills that you were having to cut back on as examples. I believe that's what people are/were responding to. If, as you state in THIS post,you're not living above your means, why worry? Why cut back anything? Again, I don't buy all your projected gloom & doom. Lets see--socialists, full of bull, etc. "it's my money, I worked for it and I get the right to keep as much of it as I can and spend it how I want. You have a problem with that because I seem to more then you do Oh no, she can afford $10 a month for a personal 800 number, call the cops! Tough toenail" that's kinda confusing. I really don't care how you spend your money. My father had a saying he would use on occasion--"just remember, when when ya got that finger pointed at someone, ya got 3 pointin back at yourself--time to find a mirror"

From 1951 to 1963 the tax rate for those making $400,000 or more was at 91% except for 1953 and 54 it was at 92%. In 2012 its 35% for those that are making $388,350 or more. All these tax estimates show that taxes on the rich are the lowest they have been in half a century. But what about before 1960? Well, we know that the top marginal tax rate was even higher in the 40s and 50s than in the 60s; and it was very high by modern standards through much of the 30s too. So I think it’s safe to say that taxes on the rich are currently lower than they have been for not 50 but 80 years. Have these people invested in America via job creation...I think not. Are they going too...I think not, at least history has not shown this.

The rate was higher but no one paid it, or at least no one that could avoid it. You are missing some of the picture. Tax anyone at a reasonable rate and you tax everyone, make the tax unreasonable and the group shrinks and so does overall revenue. It has been proven time and time again. It is NOT the rate but the revenue generated we need to focus on.

Kevin

Maybe a flat tax then....the same for everyone across the board...no rights offs...keep it simple!

Northern Maine wrote:From 1951 to 1963 the tax rate for those making $400,000 or more was at 91% except for 1953 and 54 it was at 92%. In 2012 its 35% for those that are making $388,350 or more. All these tax estimates show that taxes on the rich are the lowest they have been in half a century. But what about before 1960? Well, we know that the top marginal tax rate was even higher in the 40s and 50s than in the 60s; and it was very high by modern standards through much of the 30s too. So I think it’s safe to say that taxes on the rich are currently lower than they have been for not 50 but 80 years. Have these people invested in America via job creation...I think not. Are they going too...I think not, at least history has not shown this.!

How many people made that much money back then?

The top marginal tax rate in the 30's was 94% and it effected exactly ONE person. And his last name was Rockefeller.

You know what else we had in the 50's and 60's? MANUFACTURING!

Generally because by 1948, the industrial capacity of England, Germany, Russia, Italy and Japan had been bombed into rubble. If you wanted something made, we made it.

We were also on the gold standard but I don't want to get to far off track.

One thing we DIDN'T have was NAFTA and other was to make it easy and desirable to off shore US jobs. NAFTA was proposed by Reagan, pushed by Bush and signed by Clinton. As George Carlin said, the word "bipartisan" means a larger than usual deception is being carried out.

So while you figures aren't wrong, they certainly don't tell the whole story. Like the old saying goes. Figures lie, and liars figure and throwing up the fact that top rates were higher in the past is a lie of omission because they don't reflect the reality of today vs. yesterday.

Northern Maine wrote:Maybe a flat tax then....the same for everyone across the board...no rights offs...keep it simple!

The government will never do that because write offs are a subsidy for things they want like married couples, children, and home ownership.

lowfog01 wrote:You are so full of bull and along with Fred and the rest of you socialists …

Ah, yes! An eloquent and well-reasoned response. Now I remember why I resolved not to argue with you any more.

lowfog01 wrote:Yours and every other family in America's take home pay is going down by 13% come the first of the year

I’d like to think Congress won’t let that happen, though I have to admit they have given me few reasons to trust in their wisdom. I am curious where you get the 13% -- my take-home pay went up slightly when the Bush tax cuts took effect, but nothing like that! So even if the 2% payroll tax cut it is revoked, and the Bush cuts are revoked, I estimate at most a 2.5% impact. Being a full-of-bull socialist, I am willing to absorb that if necessary. The country might be better off if the cuts had never taken effect; maybe we could have paid for War Criminal Bush's Iraq war instead of putting it on the credit card.

Jpete, there were a lot more than Rocky, there were quite a few & as always there were ways of avoiding some tax but the end result they were paying a much higher amount & they avoided tax by doing something almost unheard in this country anymore called investing & modernizing. Sure they treated workers like crap & that's way the much hated unions were formed & silly little things like OSHA to at least cut down on the rate of death & accidents. Those things just like the greed get out of hand but at the time were necessary, a big part of all of this was that the gap between the rich & the poor was growing far too wide there has to be a happy medium. Back then as you said we were producers more so than consumers, we had import, export taxes & fees up the wazoo we were making money & spending what we made as always even then, the prices always rose as pays did now many spend what they don't have(maybe learned off Gov.) bottom line is many if not most got their wants & needs confused & now we're gonna pay for it & it didn't just happen as some want to think.

All things considered...we need a tax code adjustment, pair our spending in areas beyond welfare (both corporate and the likewise) and invest in areas that will bequeath a future of prosperity. Unfortunately, manufacturing of the "old days" has come and gone and will never return to that era for several reasons, but the most evident one for me is that U.S. citizens desire to pay a low price for the products we purchase as a whole.

freetown fred wrote:Padre, my thoughts & prayers go out for your wife. Basically what I'm hearing is that you are living in the same financial world as everyone I know. EXCEPT for the healthcare thing--that needs to be dealt with & companies that do/did what yours did need to answer for that--in my opinion, that would be BO's responsibility being he is the one that put obama care on the table--my question would be--who's in bed with who on that one. Sounds like a much more realistic housing situation you are in now.

I replied to this saying that the government as the majority stockholder approved the rate increase on my retirement health insurance plan. The government allowed AIG to raise my rates from 1/3 of my retirement pay to 200% of my retirement pay over three years. I worked my rear off for 27 years to build up my private pension plan. My wife and I worked and scrimped and saved throughout our active work lives to put some money away in an IRA so we wouldn't have to depend on the government. 2008 Financial collapse wiped out half our monthly dividend income reducing our income by over 1/3. If I hadn't invested prudently our entire IRA could have been wiped out like many others. I went back to work to maintain our chosen standard of living. Just like everyone else we decided what we wanted our standard of living to be. We could have cut expenses by 1/3 at that point but decided a part time job would make up the difference. Then the insurance company decided they wanted more and more and more of my hard earned money. They didn't get it. They set the rate and I decided no way was I going to give them my entire retirement pay PLUS 100% more for their health care coverage.

This is called free enterprise. Under normal past circumstances they couldn't get away with doing that but in the case of AIG, they had the governments blessing and encouragment. I chose to move on and get coverage elsewhere. I found Christian Healthcare Ministries. They are not insurance; they are a Christian medical cooperative. I wasn't sure what they would reimburse us for so when my wife and I were faced with over 60k in uninsured health care benefits we cut back drastically and put our home on the market just in case. We took the responsible path so we wouldn't dump our healthcare expenses on others.

We CHOSE to jetison our way of life in our retirement years to do the responsible thing.

I didn't like it, I didn't want it, and Fred, I am sure not looking for whether or not you approve of our lifestyle and to be blunt it is not your call, as to whether or not my wife and I have a "more realistic housing situation" as you put it. Our big house was being used for ministry purposes. We bought it with that in mind. Was it too big for two people? You betcha!!! The extra bedrooms and baths were used by people who got beat up by life and we would take them in and help them get back on their feet. Over the years we took in several people on our dime. We didn't send them out to government run shelters, or tell them how to get money from government run programs or how to get into government subsidized housing. We helped them get their head back on straight, find a job, get stable and then move out to a place of their own. Now we can't do that anymore because we have to cut back and prepare for the government trying to grab more of our money and give it to people who didn't do the responsible thing and look out for themselves. Most of my ministry is teaching people to live in a responsible manner and get off the government giveaway programs.

My wife and I have chosen our lifestyle and we will adapt. Our little house has two unused bedrooms and I am quite sure that we will get by and we will continue to help others in spite of the insurance companies, in spite of medical care, and most but not least, in spite of the government and their mandatory programs telling me what I have to do and what I can't do. So basically I am an American, I chose to live like an American, I will live like and American, and I will comply with what the government tells me to do because the Scripture tells us to render unto Caesar what is Caesars and to God what is God's. Don't get the two confused.

Pastor Larry Girardville Pa.