Trump’s Plan to Cut Budget by 5% Meets With Skepticism

From the Daily Signal

With the federal budget deficit reaching $779 billion, President Donald Trump is asking Cabinet members to cut spending in their departments by 5 percent next fiscal year.

Because such trimming is hardly slashing the total budget, however, some experts question whether that even will make a difference in fiscal 2020, which will begin Oct. 1, 2019.

The national debt is more than $21 trillion.

“We’re going to ask every Cabinet secretary to cut 5 percent for next year,” Trump said Wednesday during a Cabinet meeting.

The president, asked about increases in defense spending, said: “The military was falling apart, it was depleted, it was in very bad shape.”

Congress approved an increase in the military budget to $716 billion for fiscal 2019, but there will be a cut, Trump said, “probably” to $700 billion, for fiscal 2020.

Given the $779 billion budget deficit, and a 13 percent increase in discretionary spending from 2017 to 2018, each department should be able to cut 5 percent, said Justin Bogie, senior policy analyst in fiscal affairs for The Heritage Foundation.

Federal spending is also set to increase by more than 3 percent from 2018 to 2019. Congress and federal agencies should adhere to the 2011 Budget Control Act, which limits the growth in spending, Bogie said.

“Congress should stick to the current discretionary budget caps and, moving forward, should look to implement a cap on all spending,” Bogie told The Daily Signal. “We support defense spending to the level needed. But if you increase it, you should find a way to pay for it through cuts elsewhere.”

The president acknowledged that some fiscal hawks likely won’t believe a 5 percent cut is enough.

“Some will say I can do much more than 5 [percent],” Trump said during the Cabinet meeting, but added: “It will get rid of the fat, get rid of the waste. It’ll have a huge impact.”

Such a cut is achievable, since government spending increased by 16 percent in the previous two years, said Maya MacGuineas, president of the nonprofit Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

“We should be able to scale back one-third of that, easily,” MacGuineas said in a prepared statement. “A 5 percent cut will actually cost money, though, since current law brings back budget caps next year that equal a 10 percent cut. So going with 5 percent over 10 percent means a $63 billion deficit increase just for a single year.”

She added:

Something will have to give if we stay on our current track. With trillion-dollar deficits returning in as soon as a year—indefinitely—5 percent budget cuts to a small portion of the budget will pale in comparison to what will be needed in 15 years.

Thoughtful reforms phased in now over time will be much better for the American people and economic growth.

Presidential budget proposals rarely are enacted by Congress.

Some Cabinet members previously ran large organizations and will have some expertise in managing waste, said Tom Schatz, president of the nonprofit Citizens Against Government Waste.

“This is better than nothing, but we’d like to see more,” Schatz told The Daily Signal. “It’s achievable. We’d rather see a 10 percent cut.”

“If this was the Trump Organization,” Schatz said of the president, “he could say he wants a 10 percent cut and employees would come back with 15 percent. But given how government works, 5 percent is a good start.”

Government Economists Offer Window Into What a Socialist US Economy Would Look Like

By Fred Lucas the Daily Signal

If the United States were to adopt the socialist policies of Venezuela, the move would slash the economy by 40 percent—or $24,000 per year for the average American, according to a report by the president’s Council of Economic Advisers.

“Coincident with the 200th anniversary of Karl Marx’s birth, socialism is making a comeback in American political discourse,” says the council’s report, “The Opportunity Costs of Socialism.”

“Detailed policy proposals from self-declared socialists are gaining support in Congress and among much of the electorate,” the report continues.

The report specifically cites so-called “Medicare-for-all” proposals, which essentially would be a single-payer health care program. The study found that if Medicare-for-all were financed out of current federal spending—without additional borrowing or tax increases—it would eat up more than half of the entire federal budget.

That would require drastic cuts in Social Security and in national defense to pay for it, said Kevin Hassett, chairman of the president’s Council of Economic Advisers, told reporters in a conference call Tuesday.

Further, the report states, if the Medicare-for-all plan were financed through higher taxes, the gross domestic product would fall by 9 percent, or about $7,000 per person in 2022, because of the high tax rates that would reduce incentives to supply the factors of production.

Venezuela, where the economy is falling apart, is a profound example of what can happen under socialism, Hassett said.

“When you have a breakdown in the rule of law, and you take away private-property rights, it’s not unusual to have a pattern of destabilization,” he said. “When you undermine property rights, it undermines stability.”

Citing the worst examples, the report refers to Mao-era China, Cuba, and the Soviet Union, which nationalized the agriculture industry and caused tens of millions of deaths by starvation.

Asked about current-day China’s strong economic growth, Hassett said that’s due largely to a “hybrid” within its economy that allows private property and market forces in the parts of the economy that are most successful.

Even if the United States adopted the less-repressive socialist policies of Nordic countries—Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark and Iceland—it would mean a 15 percent lower standard of living, the council’s report says.

The Nordic countries in some areas are less regulated than the United States, the report says.

“Marginal labor income-tax rates in the Nordic countries today are only somewhat higher than in the United States, and Nordic taxation overall is surprisingly less progressive than U.S. taxes,” the report says.

“However, the Nordic countries do regulate and tax labor markets somewhat more; thus, American families earning the average wage would be taxed $2,000 to $5,000 more per year net of transfers if the United States had current Nordic policies,” the report continues. “Living standards in the Nordic countries are at least 15 percent lower than in the United States.”

However, in the 1970s, the Nordic countries had more restrictive socialist policies. If the U.S. adopted the Nordic policies of that era, the gross domestic product would be about 20 percent lower, according to the council’s report.

These 2 Companies Plan to Expand Workforce by 20% Thanks to Tax Reform

From the Daily Signal

The Wilson Construction Co. in Canby, Oregon, will be expanding its workforce by at least 20 percent in the coming months, says Stacy Wilson, who runs the business her grandfather founded 65 years ago.

Wilson credits the tax reform law, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, that President Donald Trump signed late last year for making the expansion possible.

So does the president of a Ridgewood, New York, electrical contractor, who says he will be increasing his company’s workforce next year as well.

Both joined Trump on stage at the National Electrical Contractors Association convention in Philadelphia on Tuesday.

“We employ about 500 employees, and thanks to Mr. Trump and tax reforms and the general confidence in the economy, we have really been able to invest more in our employees and grow our company in the last year,” Wilson told the gathering.

Trump invited her onto the stage to speak in the middle of his remarks about the economy.

“We are investing more in employee wages and benefits and bonuses,” Wilson continued. “We are spending millions on equipment and assets, and in general, we are just seeing a huge increase in the work that is coming out, because utilities are spending more to update this aging infrastructure.”

The number of employees could even grow up to 30 percent, she said.

“We have a lot of large projects that are starting,” Wilson said. “This will make a lot of difference. Really, these incentives that are good for businesses are really important for our employees, but also the communities we work in.”

The tax reform law cut the corporate tax rate, previously the highest in the world among developed countries, from 35 percent to 21 percent, putting the U.S. on par with most other industrialized nations, and thus making it more competitive.

The tax law also cut individual tax rates and eliminated some loopholes.

“At the heart of our economic revival are the massive tax cuts passed by Republicans in Congress,” Trump said when speaking to the convention crowd.

“We didn’t get one Democrat vote,” the president added. “Those tax cuts are one of the reasons the economy is doing so well. You are talking about a lot of money in the pockets of everybody in this room.”

Under the new law, Trump noted, small businesses can now deduct 20 percent of their business income, as an incentive to invest.

Trump joked that the economy makes him want to return to the private sector.

“Capital investments are soaring because you can now immediately deduct every penny spent on new equipment,” Trump said. “You can do one-year expensing.

“Nobody ever thought that was going to happen. In fact, I should leave and go back into business, maybe. If you would have told me that when I was a private businessman, maybe I wouldn’t have run for president,” he said.

Tax reform also means more jobs being added at Arcadia Electrical Co. in Ridgewood, New York, said Steve Gianotti, the company’s president.

“I’d like to thank President Trump for his perseverance in helping us with his fiscal policies, which enabled my company, Arcadia Electric, to bid on more work and take on more jobs that we are able to do, because we have more coming that is available to us, more than ever before,” he said after Trump invited him onto the stage.

“As a result, we have been able to keep our 120 people employed, but next year, we anticipate hiring 25 percent more hardworking union workers, middle-class workforce, that will bring our company to approximately 150 employees, which we are very proud of,” Gianotti said.

“They work hard. They are the safest, hardest union workers. Their professional abilities is what makes us successful,” he said.

Why even Republicans embrace socialism

By Bob Livingston

Why even Republicans embrace socialism 

The more government takes an interest in private affairs, the less individual freedom there is. The greater the government's involvement in regulation, the greater the threat to your life. Massive government spending on social programs designed to "improve" people's lives or correct ailments created by government intervention corresponds directly to loss of individual freedoms.

Always remember that personal freedom is inversely proportional to governmental freedom. In other words, in whatever interest or matters one chooses not to self-govern, others will govern for you. But individuals are often happy to relinquish this responsibility for themselves in order to seem altruistic. It might even make them feel patriotic. What they don't realize is that they are making a terrifying trade-off. Once an individual sacrifices himself to the collective, the collective can then sacrifice the individual to further its own ends.

Freedom does not exist in a vacuum; it does not exist for those who do not exercise it. Seemingly convenient at first, rule by others quickly becomes arbitrary, descends into slavery and ultimately becomes murderous. Much has been said and written about the supposed checks and balances of the Constitution, but the only reliable check and balance against tyranny is self-government.

Freedom is like a precious commodity to be mined from life. The politicians and global elite deceive the masses into believing that freedom exists mystically and ethereally, to be breathed in like air or enjoyed at one's leisure. They want us to think of freedom like that, as some nebulous, pretty thing to be unwrapped from pretty packages, tangible only when it is a meager privilege bestowed by other men playing God.

Freedom is a black-or-white, yes-or-no, either/or, zero-sum proposition. There are no gray areas or lukewarmness when it comes to freedom.

But the concept of freedom of the individual, or individual liberty, has been shoved down the memory hole and replaced by a popular mentality of diminishing the individual and independent thinker to a collectivist mind (mentality) which can be esoterically swayed, directed and channeled against his own best interest. The virtue and sanctity of the individual person and ego is no more, and anathema to the state.

What does it all mean? It means that a state of mind is developed and nurtured that freely gives oneself and one's production to the state. Each individual, in order to be a good citizen of the state, must contribute most of his means and be grateful for the services the state returns — whether they are necessary or useful or not.

The result is that even so-called conservatives have come to not only accept socialism but to embrace it in many forms. Oh, they'll reject it when it's called what it is, as conservatives have chimed in to reject and ridicule proposals by self-avowed socialists like Bernie Sanders and the new communist darling Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. But they readily accept socialism in its many forms, especially when it's proposed by socialists masquerading as Republicans.

Republicans claim to have the corner on genuine conservatism. But there is nothing conservative about the welfare state, the warfare state or the police state. All are big government programs and are used to steal liberties — particularly the liberties of free association, free assembly, free speech, free markets, religious liberty and control over one's own health and body.

With nary a peep out of the so-called conservative voter, Republican politicians just passed an $854 billion spending bill to fund the departments of Defense, Health and Human Services, Labor and Education which, as The Hill notes, "make up the lions share of total government spending." All but six of the 51 Senate Republicans joined all the Democrats (save Sanders) to vote for the bill. House Republicans have successfully marginalized the House Freedom Caucus and are getting set to pass the bill or something similar enough that it will be settled in conference.

Republican politicians and voters embrace Social Security, Medicare and its expansions, Medicaid, No Child Left Behind, a greater regulatory state and most parts of Obamacare. There is little effort beyond show to cut government spending by the statist Republican politicians, and "conservative" Americans call for spending cuts only until their favorite social or corporate welfare program becomes part of the discussion.

How can government socialism of Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez be bad but the socialism of big government Republicans be good?

There is no such thing as a little socialism. As Ron Paul wrote this week:

Many Republican politicians — and even conservative intellectuals — will say they are being pragmatic by not fighting progressives on first principles, but instead limiting the damage done by the welfare state. The problem with this line is that, by accepting the premise that government can and should solve all of life's problems, conservatives and Republicans will inevitably get into a "bidding war" with progressives and Democrats. The only way Republicans can then win is to join Democrats in continually increasing spending and creating new programs. This is why the so-called "conservative welfare state" ends up as bloated and expansive as the progressive welfare state. Refusing to question the premises of the welfarists and socialists is not a pragmatic way to advance liberty. While progressives blame social crises on the free market, Republicans and conservatives are unwilling to admit the problems were caused by prior government interventions… Until a popular intellectual movement arises that is able and willing to challenge the premises of Keynesianism, welfarism, and democratic socialism, while putting forth a positive vision of a free society, government will continue to expand. Fortunately, such a movement exists and is growing as more Americans — particularly young Americans — are studying the ideas of Liberty and working to spread those ideas. If the new liberty movement grows and stays true to its principles, it will be able to defeat the socialists of all parties, including those who call themselves conservative.

When someone is spiritually deceived into faithfully believing in a system, it becomes impossible for that person to think logically, rationally, coherently and consistently about the true nature and problems associated with that system. It took thousands of years for the elite and their spiritual descendants to put over this spiritually-based deception and system on a truly global scale. By perpetuating it, the elite remain in charge — a plutocracy masked by the usual labels: democracy, social democracy, socialism, global capitalism, free trade, etc.

Lovers of self-government and freedom always question consensus authority. A good rule of thumb that has always served me well is to believe the opposite of what the politicians and the media tell you. Remember that government has nothing good to give you. The government is in the business of shrinking freedom (and wealth), not expanding it; and in the business of expanding itself, not shrinking itself.

Socialism and its evil twin, democratic socialism, are disguised systems of stealing the wealth and production of the producers of wealth with spurious laws under the legitimacy of the vote. Stealing or taking from producers and transferring it to nonproducers is very sophisticated and concealed class warfare. It is a philosophy of envy, racism, weakness, ineptitude and collectivism. It is groupism, the hidden strategy to get the masses to give their minds over to the state.

This, my friends, is the politics of authoritarianism. Socialism = communism = fascism = democracy = tyranny. Things that are equal to each other are the same. All political power is derived from this. This must be understood or there is no understanding at all. 

The everything bubble: When will it finally crash?

By Brandon Smith

Much like the laws of physics, there are certain laws of economics that remain constant no matter how much manipulation exists in the markets. Expansion inevitably leads to contraction, and that which goes up must eventually come down. Central banks understand this reality very well; they have spent over a century trying to exploit those laws to their own advantage.

A common misconception among people new to alternative economics is the idea that central banks only seek to keep the economy afloat, or keep it expanding forever. In reality, these institutions and the money elites behind them artificially inflate financial bubbles only to deliberately implode them at opportunistic moments.

As I have outlined in numerous articles, every economic bubble and subsequent crash since 1914 can be linked to the policy actions of central bankers. Sometimes they even admit to culpability (to a point), as Ben Bernanke did on the Great Depression and as Alan Greenspan did on the 2008 credit crisis. You can read more about this in my article 'The Federal Reserve Is A Saboteur — And The "Experts" Are Oblivious.'

Generally, central bankers and international bankers mislead the public into believing that the crashes they are responsible for were caused "by mistake." They rarely if ever mention the fact that they often use these crises as a means to consolidate control over assets, resources and governments while the masses are distracted by their own survival. Centralization is the name of the game. It is certainly no mistake that after every economic implosion the wealth gap between the top 0.01 percent and the rest of humanity widens exponentially.

Yet another crash is being weaponized by the banks, and this time I believe the motivations behind it are rather different. Or at least the goals are supercharged.

The next phase of the financial elite's plans for centralization involve a complete restructuring of the global monetary climate, something Christine Lagarde of the IMF has often referred to as the great "economic reset." The term "economic reset" is more likely code for "economic collapse," one epic enough to facilitate a completely new monetary framework with a new global reserve currency. A historically unprecedented economic reset would require a historically unprecedented financial bubble, which is exactly what we have today.

The 'Everything Bubble' as many alternative analysts are calling it is built upon multiple crumbling pillars. Here they are in no particular order:

Central bank stimulus

Bailouts and QE measures on the part of central banks have been used as a stopgap since the 2008 crash to prevent market reversal whenever they appear. Most of all, central banks have been particularly obsessed with keeping stocks in a perpetual bull market, which Ben Bernanke and Alan Greenspan admitted was part of maintaining a certain positive "psychology" within the public. In other words, the purpose of stimulus measures was to give the masses a false sense of security, not heal the real economy.

The other primary initiative behind stimulus was to prop up debt poisoned governments and corporations around the world. However, the intention was not necessarily to help these institutions climb out of the red. No, instead, the goal was to keep them semi-solvent long enough for them to take on even more debt, to the point that when they do collapse the aftermath will be so devastating that recovery would be impossible.

The timing of central bank tapering of QE should be treated as an alarm on the crash of the everything bubble. With the Federal Reserve cutting off QE measures, the Bank of Japan using "stealth tapering," and the European Central Bank warning of high inflation and the need for tapering, it is clear that the era of easy money is almost over. When the easy money is gone, the crash is near.

Stock buybacks

Using steady loans from the Federal Reserve as well as Trump's tax cut, stock markets have been inflated beyond all reason by corporations implementing the equities manipulation scheme of stock buybacks. By artificially reducing the number of stock shares on the market, companies can increase the "value" of the existing shares and fuel a bull market rally. This rally has nothing to do with actual wealth creation, of course. It is a game of phantom wealth and inflated numbers.

Stocks in particular will require ever more debt on the part of corporations along with never-ending near zero interest rates in order to keep the farce going. The central banker, though, have other plans.

Near zero interest rates

Low interest rates should be considered a part of the stimulus model, but I'm setting them separately because they represent a special kind of market manipulation. The option for corporate entities to borrow from the Fed at almost no cost has done little to improve the effects of the 2008 credit crisis. In fact, corporate debt levels are now near all-time highs not seen since the last crash. This time, though, dependency on low cost loans has conjured a monstrous addiction within the business cycle. Any increase in interest rates will trigger painful withdrawals.

Central banks around the world are now increasing that pain as they hike rates well beyond what many analysts were expecting a few years ago. Corporate debt in particular is highly vulnerable to this new tightening policy. Without low rates, corporations can no longer afford to hold the debts they have, let alone take on more debt in a futile attempt to keep equities propped up.

Central banks argue that "inflation" is the excuse for hiking interest rates at this time. True inflation has been well above Fed targets for years, and the banking elites showed no care whatsoever. I suspect that the real reason is that the next phase of the reset is near, and a little chaos is needed.

For decades, the Fed has kept the neutral rate of interest well below the rate of inflation. For the first time in at least 30 years, the Fed under Jerome Powell is seeking to increase neutral rates to make them equal to the pace of inflation (official inflation). The Fed has approximately two to three more rate hikes (including the September rate hike) to reach the pace of inflation. I believe this is our window on the next crash; the moment at which the Fed completely reverses its past policy of artificial support for the economy.

Federal Reserve balance sheet

I have written at great length about the correlation between the Fed's balance sheet and equities and I will not go into great detail here.  Simply put, with each increase in the balance sheet over the past decade, stocks rallied in tandem. As the Fed cuts assets, stocks enter volatility. A divergence has occurred the past two months between the Fed balance sheet and stocks, but I believe this is temporary.

Corporate buybacks are at all-time highs in 2018, and it's obvious that this is meant to offset the Fed's waning support for the markets. As interest rates increase and the Trump tax cut dwindles, though, buybacks will die.

If we consider the possibility that the Fed's assets also include stock shares as many suspect, then the Fed asset dumps would also increase the number of existing shares on the market and sabotage corporate efforts to reduce shares through stock buybacks. I predict stocks will once again converge with the falling Fed balance sheet by the end of this year and that they will continue to drop precipitously through the last quarter of 2018 and the rest of 2019.

Timing is everything

Central banks need cover before they can launch their "global reset," and what better cover than a massive international trade war? Trump's trade war is an excellent distraction which can be used as a rationale for every negative consequence of the central banks pulling the plug on stimulus life support. Meaning, the disasters the central bankers cause through tightening into a weak economic environment can be blamed on Trump and the trade conflict.

I don't think it's a coincidence that almost every escalation in the trade war happens to take place at the same time as major central bank announcements on rate hikes and balance sheet cuts. The latest trade war salvo of $200 billion in tariffs against China is leading to a Chinese announcement on retaliation — all of this taking place on the exact week of the Fed's September meeting which is expected to result in yet another rate hike and expanded balance sheet cuts.

The Fed's tightening policies have resulted in a severe reaction by emerging markets which are already crashing and have diverged greatly from U.S. markets. American stocks will not escape the same fate.

The Fed's neutral rate efforts suggest a turning point in late 2018 to early 2019. Balance sheet cuts are expected to increase at this time, which would also expedite a crash in existing market assets. The only question is how long can corporations sustain stock buybacks until their debt burdens crush their efforts? With such companies highly leveraged, interest rates will determine the length of their resolve. I believe two more hikes will be their limit.

If the Fed continues on its current path the next stock crash would begin around December 2018 into the first quarter of 2019. After that, other sectors of the economy, already highly unstable, will break down through 2019 and 2020.

War on Nutrition

By Bob Livingston

In 1939 while Hitler was attacking Poland with military warfare, in the United States the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) declared biological warfare on the American people by making it mandatory to add synthetic vitamins to white flour, which became known as "enriched" flour.  The history books are full of details of Hitler's invasion, but not one word of the biological warfare by the FDA on the American people. Hitler's war ended. Biological warfare against the American people is still going on. This is a war of processed foods, chemical preservatives and sweeteners. Then when we get sick and debilitated, we are subjected to the drug warfare of the medical establishment. We look out on the landscape and we see symbiotic partners of the medical monopoly which includes the U.S. Government and the huge commercial food industry that creates those beautifully packaged "foods" that we buy at the supermarket, which foods are mostly devoid of nutrition. Nutritional deficiencies eventually translate into degenerative disease that feeds the medical machine. With what result? With the most expensive medical system in the history of the world, we are at an all-time high of deaths due to heart disease, cancer and stroke. The American people are helpless, sick and weak. They have been sold into dependence on government and science. Not one in a thousand will take the responsibility for their own health. Our immune function is getting weaker and weaker. Heart disease and cancer are nutritional deficiency diseases and silent starvation. Before 1918 and the widespread use of white bleached flour, there was no mention of heart attack as a disease. But today, after decades of chemical farming, we are a people on nutritional starvation. Biological warfare, under any other name, would be no worse. There are two kinds of starvation. Of course, one starvation comes about because of no food at all. The second and more insidious starvation is malnutrition over a period of time. Many seniors today die of pneumonia and the medical establishment can do nothing about it because they refuse to recommend nutrition instead of drugs. It has been well established over decades that no one will die of flu or pneumonia as long as they have vitamin C in the body. Dr. Alfred Hess, head of the Hebrew Infant Asylum in New York, established the fact before WWI that vitamin deficiency is the cause of heart disease, pneumonia, grippe, nasal diphtheria, scurvy, beri beri and many other named diseases. Heart disease and pneumonia are specific deficiency diseases. There is a second problem with malnutrition. It has to do with the great illusion and myth that synthetic vitamins and/or natural isolated vitamins will supplement one's diet and support the immune system as well as general good health. An isolated food factor or "vitamin" is a product of pharmacology and chemistry. A synthetic, isolated food factor is not food and certainly not nutrition. The science of food today is based on chemistry. There is a commercial vitamin industry in America, producing and selling counterfeit vitamins. They are riding high on public gullibility with the deception that isolated food factors or synthetic vitamins are nutritional and healthy. The simple answer to all this is whole food complexes that are live foods which contain live nutrition for live people. Medicine is in our food if we know where to find the natural foods. Let me recommend to you the humble carrot. Carrots contain many important nutrients, including beta carotene, B vitamins, vitamin C, calcium and potassium. The human body does a neat trick with beta carotene and changes it into vitamin A, which is very important in strengthening the immune system and promoting healthy growth of the cells. Beta carotene also boosts the immune system and is a very potent antioxidant. Antioxidants fight free radicals and help prevent them from causing membrane damage, DNA mutation and lipid (fat) oxidation. All of these conditions could lead to a variety of degenerative diseases. Another very important carotenoid found in carrots is alpha carotene. According to Michiaki Murakoshi, a biochemist at Japan's Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, alpha carotene may be more powerful than beta carotene in inhibiting processes that may lead to tumor growth. It has been shown that cancer cells coated with carotenoids experience a decreased ability for formation and growth. Fresh fruits and vegetables like the carrot are very rich in enzymes. Enzymes are the catalysts for the hundreds of thousands of chemical reactions that occur throughout the body; they are essential for the digestion and absorption of food as well as for the production of cellular energy. Enzymes are essential for most of the building and rebuilding that goes on constantly in our bodies. Unfortunately, when foods are cooked, enzymes can be destroyed. For this reason, raw foods and juices are very important for good health and our most potent weapon against the nutritional war being waged against us. Ideally, many people believe that we should only eat raw foods, but the reality is that this is nearly impossible for most of us. The answer, as is often the case, is a matter of balance. Balance your diet so that the scales do tip in the direction of raw fruits and vegetables.

Batinick believes tax increases will worsen outmigration, lead to recession

Batinick believes tax increases will worsen outmigration, lead to recession

by Glenn Minnis | Sep 12, 2018

 Rep. Mark Batinick

Rep. Mark Batinick (R-Plainfield) doesn’t mince words when assessing the impact he thinks a proposed statewide property tax hike would have on Illinois.

“I think it would send the state into another recession,” Batinick told the Will County Gazette. “It will send more people scurrying for the border and exacerbate the outmigration problem we’re already experiencing.”

 Mica Freeman

Economists for the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago recently proposed a plan that would have Illinois residents paying roughly 50 percent more in property taxes over the next 30 years as a way of paying off the state’s still-growing pension debt.

The DuPage Policy Journal has reported the plan would increase annual taxes on a home valued at $500,000 by approximately $5,000.

“It’s a horrific idea,” said Batinick, who is running for re-election in the 97th District against Democrat Mica Freeman. “By steadily raising property taxes, we’re taking equity from people’s biggest asset and what many of them have planned to retire on. It’s a desperate act to all the bad policy we’ve had coming out of Springfield that has put this state in this predicament to begin with.”

At 2.67 percent of a home’s value, Illinois homeowners already pay the highest property tax rates in the country, according to the Illinois Policy Institute (IPI).

Batinick laments that the tax increases might not end there, as Ford, Lake, Kane, Frankfort and Will counties will all have a referendum on the ballot this November asking voters to weigh in on a proposed 1-percent sales tax increase.

In Will County, much of the added windfall is pegged for local school districts, with more than a dozen schools already signed onto the referendum, IPI states. The hike would leave many Will County residents saddled with an overall tax burden in the same ballpark as the 10.25 percent rates in Chicago, home to the highest combined sales tax rate in the country.

In Frankfort, the sales tax rate would jump from 7 percent to 8 percent.

“Hopefully this election will prove that people have had enough of the governing of (House Speaker Mike) Madigan,” Batinick said. “Hopefully, they’re ready to hold lawmakers accountable for doing what needs to be done.”

The 97th District includes all or parts of Oswego, Plainfield, Troy and Wheatland.

Not one penny should be spent on pork,' Ives says

FY19 Budget: 'Not one penny should be spent on pork,' Ives says

by Karen Kidd |

 Rep. Jeanne Ives (R-Wheaton) | jeanneives.org

Illinois Rep. Jeanne Ives (R-Wheaton) believes state lawmakers need to reject political pork spending that was hidden in the budget that was passed earlier this year.

"The Governor’s Office of Management and Budget acknowledged in August that the new state budget is unbalanced by a staggering $1.2 billion," Ives said in a statement. "Now it is coming to light that untold millions of dollars in spending was hidden in the new state budget for legislators in both parties to designate for pork projects in their districts."

 Gov. Bruce Rauner

Gov. Bruce Rauner in May signed the $38.5 billion bipartisan compromise budget that "holds the line on taxes, increases funding for education, curbs spending, and creates a new adoption tax credit that will make it less costly for Illinois parents to adopt children," he said.

The budget overwhelmingly passed both chambers of the Illinois General Assembly with a 56-2 vote in the Senate and a 97-18 vote in the House of Representatives. Ives was among the few lawmakers who voted against it.

Ives hasn't warmed up to the budget, according to her statement.

"I refuse to participate in this initiative and am calling on my colleagues, Democrat and Republican, to do likewise," Ives said. "Illinois taxpayers deserve to know where every dollar in the budget is being spent. Not one penny should be spent on pork.”

Lyft Pushes Ahead for a 2019 IPO

Lyft Pushes Ahead for a 2019 IPO By Monica Savaglia Written Sep. 04, 2018 Public transportation has drastically changed recently. Within these past few years, we’ve seen an emergence of new ways to get from point A to point B other than the metro, bus, taxi, or train. Ride-sharing apps have made their way into our lives in full force. Globally, millionsuse ride-hailing apps as an alternative way to get to their next destination. I remember my first Uber ride. Honestly, it was such a crazy concept to me, and I was a little hesitant during my first ride. All my life, I’ve been taught to never get into cars with strangers, but ride sharing-apps like Uber and Lyft challenged that entire concept, ultimately changing our society forever. Now, an ordinary person can pick me up at my location and deliver me to my desired destination. Of course, these drivers go through the necessary steps to become Lyft or Uber drivers to ensure rider safety.  Uber and Lyft have transformed the way we think about transportation. Uber and Lyft: A New Way to Get to Your Destination According to Forbes, for 2017, Uber’s global business completed 4 billion rides. The company has been around since 2009 and now operates in 600 cities and 78 countries. Uber's business model was one to emulate... Uber’s competitor, Lyft, has been giving rides since 2012. And it’s become a strong competitor for Uber in those few short years. It’s been growing its business at a fast pace. In fact, in 2017, the company gave 375 million rides, up from 160 million rides in the previous year. That’s a 134% increase in just one year! Lyft has now taken 35% of the U.S. market share. While this might not seem like too much right now, Lyft hasn’t been around that long, and its business is growing fast. It’s also creating a reputation for itself that has made ride-sharing users appreciate and even prefer riding with Lyft to Uber. Uber in Crisis… Lyft Picks up the Slack 2017 wasn’t a great year for Uber, as it seemed to be going through crisis after crisis, but Lyft was there to catch the customers that were turning away from Uber because of its many catastrophes. Lyft became a better option as riders grew skeptical of Uber’s reputation. The year began with a trending hashtag: #DeleteUber. Hundreds of thousands of riders deleted the app. Then followed the loss of its CEO, as he was faced with an investigation into Uber’s work culture. Lyft’s VP of Operations, Woody Hartman, had this to say: I’ve been at Lyft five years, and every year is bigger and more exciting than the last, but 2017 really felt different. It felt like the year in which the public really got to know us for our mission and our values and that led us to bring a bunch of new passengers and drivers onto the platform and … Uber’s turmoil turned into Lyft’s reward. The public became more aware of Lyft as a ride-sharing option. And as they became more aware of Lyft and its business and values, riders began to respect and prefer Lyft. Hartman added: We started 2017 with about 55% of the U.S. population covered with Lyft and ended at 95%. So now almost everyone in America has the opportunity to take a Lyft and drive for Lyft and we’ve seen immense growth from that. In five years, Lyft has managed to build its business and brand. Now, riders are dedicated to using Lyft as a way to get around. This growth in both business and reputation has helped Lyft become confident in making its market debut. Lyft is now in talks to hire an advisor for a 2019 initial public offering (IPO). Lyft Aims to IPO in 2019 Lyft has been in talks with an advisor to guide the company toward a March or April 2019 IPO. Lyft recently raised $600 million in its most recent funding round, which was led by Fidelity Management in June of this year. This latest round has doubled the company’s valuation in just a little over a year — the company is valued at $15.1 billion. Uber has also been contemplating the idea of going public, and there have been rumors that Uber plans to go public in 2019 as well. Uber’s CEO, Dara Khosrowshahi, said the company is aiming for its IPO in the second half of 2019. You’d better believe Lyft will begin taking pitches from banks as early as this month in hopes of beating Uber to the public market. If investors get on board with Lyft before Uber, that would greatly benefit the company and its potential gain market share. 2019 is going to be a really interesting year, especially in regards to which ride-hailing company will benefit the most from its public debut. We’re finally going to see two extremely popular companies go public, but only onecan come out on top.

Orland Mayor Pekau gives an update

Last Monday, we had a special budget meeting to discuss the capital budget which focuses on our investment in capital assets such as buildings, streets, parks, vehicles, etc., as opposed to our operating budget that focuses on day to day operations and maintenance.  Six of us were in attendance, with Jim Dodge missing due to other commitments.  This was a discussion and not a final vote on any budget items. Village Manager Joe LaMargo opened the meeting by saying that staff is still looking for $433,000 in additional reductions in the operating budget.  More on that later.  Generally, we had a good discussion on the capital budget.  Staff presented it with baseline priorities and then additional priorities if we provided more funding sources. There were several additional discussion items.  We discussed fixing our parks, of which we were replacing equipment in one for next year.  An issue we are facing is that many of our parks were built during the same time period and as of January 1, 56% of our parks will be over 20 years old.  Because, we have 64 parks we will likely need to accelerate the replacement of our parks.  Trustee Calandriello suggested that we borrow money to do this.  Staff indicated, and I agree, that this would not be a good use of debt for several reasons.  First, if we fix a lot of parks in a short period of time and not on a consistent schedule, we will put a future board in the same position that we are in.  Second, we only have the capacity to fix about 6 parks per year.  Third, the parks are safe.  Older equipment does not mean that it is a safety issue, which neither staff nor the board would tolerate.  I pointed out that we need to develop a long-term plan for fixing our parks on a consistent schedule.  Staff indicated that we have a study in the budget next year to develop that plan. This brought up the subject of taking debt out to accelerate the repair of our roads.  Our Public Works Director and Finance Director agreed that this would be a better use of debt, because in the long-term, fixing streets sooner would save us money by extending the life of our streets.  Currently, there is an on-going study to develop this plan.  I informed the Village Board and staff that I would support using debt if there is a business case to be made that saves us money in the long run.  This is the proper use of debt and our strong credit rating.  Trustee Calandriello disagreed and said that “We are the Village of Orland Park, not the business of Orland Park.”  On this, he and I disagree.  I want to fix our parks but believe we should use debt if it saves us money in the long run, helps us generate economic activity that results in a net financial benefit to the village, is an emergency, or is a life-safety related issue. During our discussions, I discovered that the maintenance we do on our landscaping medians is part of our capital budget.  For some reason, this slipped past me last year.  However, I think this should be part of our operating budget.  I was informed, that historically this is what we have always done.  I feel strongly that this not correct, but it would be change in policy.   I agreed with the Trustees that making this change this year, while making other cuts, would be a challenge and delaying this change until next year is reasonable.  Staff indicated that there are a few other items similar to this in the capital budget.  They committed to providing us a list of all of these “on-going operating expenses” that have traditionally resided in our capital budget.  I will work on making these changes in the future to force efficiency improvements in our day to day operations and free up capital for our infrastructure. Trustee Carroll asked the board to commit to a restaurant tax of 1% that was proposed as an additional capital funding source.  He also suggested we could make it 1.5% and put 0.5% towards our operating budget.  He also asked us to commit to the operating budget revenue requests as well.    We know that approximately $270,000 in gaming revenue is included and that we all approve an increase in hotel tax to match our neighbors (from 4% to 5%).   Trustees Gira and Carroll were OK with the restaurant tax.  Trustee Calandriello was OK with the revenue from either the restaurant tax (or some other source).  Trustees Ruzich, Fenton and I did not agree and believe that new taxes are a last resort.  I also reminded the Trustees that the restaurant tax was studied at the time of the gaming revenue study which indicated that the Village would see a net loss due to reduced economic activity if a restaurant tax was added. After these discussions, the board agreed to the baseline priorities.  Of the additional projects proposed, the board also agreed that the first priority would be approximately $150,000 in technology spending that would increase efficiency and save money in the long run.   I believe that we can find those dollars without adding a new restaurant tax. The Village Manager, then asked for the Village Board to commit to $1.04 Million in additional revenue for the operating budget.  I responded to this and his earlier statement that staff was tasked with finding $433,000 in additional expense cuts.   I reminded the Village Manager that when this process started we asked him for $2 Million in cuts and $2 Million in revenue.  At the next meeting, he presented a request for $4.3 Million in revenue.  The Village Board left $3.5 Million on the table for hypothetical discussion but reminded him and staff that we wanted $1 in cuts for every $1 in revenue requests.   At the last meeting, he presented $1.27 Million in operating cuts and made $1.587 Million in revenue requests.  We then asked for $500,000 more in cuts not $433,000. Village Manager LaMargo said that staff needed us to commit to the $1.0 Million in new revenue.  Trustee Carroll said that at the revenue hearing we committed to $1.04 Million in revenue and we needed to stop this “3 ring circus”.  Trustee Carroll also indicated that staff could not keep doing this without a commitment from the board. I pointed out that when the Board is given revenue requests and expense cuts that total to exactly what we need, then the Board is not being given choices.  It is up to the Village Board to prioritize, not staff.  At the previous meeting we asked staff to find $500,000 more in cuts and also include revenue sources (such as sponsorships) that were brought to zero for the revenue hearing.  Between those two changes it would give the board more expense cuts and revenue options than needed.  At that point, the Village Board can prioritize our options. Trustee Gira then stated that we should not hold staff accountable for sponsorship revenue from year to year because they wouldn’t try to get new revenue because they would be held accountable for it in the future.  She also stated that she didn’t want to see special events that were supposed to be budget neutral but were not guaranteed (this was a swipe at the Centennial Park West paid concerts).  Village Manager LaMargo then stated that there were no new special events in the budget.  In other words, he has taken it upon himself to remove the Centennial Park West Concerts that the board gave approval to start booking over a month ago and is doing nothing to book those concerts. Upon reflection, I wondered why the operating budget and revenue request were inserted into our capital budget discussion.  It was clear that is was put in place for a few Trustees to make some points.  It is unfortunate that an otherwise productive meeting lasted an additional 45 minutes and changed nothing.  At the end of that time, we remained in the same place – find additional non-tax revenue sources, $500,000 in additional cuts and the Village Board was not committing to more revenue. Overall, the goal of the night was to discuss our capital budget and the Village Board came to agreement on the capital budget proposal and the first priority if additional funding is found.  I am an advocate for transparency, so I encourage all of you to come to our budget hearings (or watch on Facebook Live) as you will get a better sense of how the Village spends our money.     There are several upcoming meetings and events: Monday, September 17th, Board Meeting, 7PM Saturday, September 22nd, Harvest Hoe Down at Crescent Park – Tickets Available Wednesday, September 26th, Mayor Pekau Fundraiser at Crystal Tree, Tickets Available at https://secure.anedot.com/keith-4-mayor/c6d653be00fe279bb93c8