A Letter to the President from a Listener!

The following was a very interesting analysis in the form of a letter sent by a local listener to President Obama:

Dear Mr. President:



1. Your role as President is to inspire us, and give us hope for the future. Lift us up, instead of scaring us to death. There is no need to remind us that things are bad and likely to get worse – we already know. Please refrain from using words like “crisis” and “catastrophe” and instead reassure us by emphasizing the coming economic and financial recovery and the future prosperity that awaits us. Like a weatherman who forecasts a blizzard, even if it never comes, we’ll inevitably adjust our behavior accordingly by stockpiling food and milk until the shelves are clean. Similarly, if you continually remind us of how bad things are and how bad things are going to get, we’ll respond in similar fashion. Businesses will prepare for the coming economic “blizzard” by cutting costs and laying off employees. Consumers, concerned about their jobs, will likely reduce their spending. These actions will ultimately cause the very collapse in the economy we are trying to prevent. It’s all about confidence. If we believe things will get worse, they will. Conversely, if we believe things will get better our behavior and spending patterns will adjust accordingly and the economic sun will shine again. Stop playing politics – we already know things were bad before you took the oath of office and don’t hold you responsible. Become the leader we thought you could be, not the politician we feared you were.



2. If you really want to stimulate the economy, why on earth would you raise taxes during these depressed economic times – particularly on capital gains? Although typically the financial markets adjust in response to economic conditions, I would argue that this time it will be the reverse opposite – future economic fundamentals will depend upon financial market performance. Consumers will not spend, and thus the economy will not improve, while their wealth and after-tax income is eroding. Improvement in the financial markets will restore much of the wealth that has been lost and inevitably the necessary spending to jumpstart the economy. Given the steep losses in the financial markets, no one has capital gains anyway. Reducing or eliminating capital gains taxes – even if only for a few years – would cost the government little while providing a psychological boost to encourage prudent risk taking and the capital formation we so desperately need to get our economy back on track. A temporary elimination of the capital gains tax would likely cause the stock market to appreciate a minimum of 10 – 20% in short order. I assure you that consumer confidence and spending would quickly follow. And do you actually think raising income taxes in the midst of the current economic calamity will help reduce the deficit? Here’s a clue – tax me more, I’ll spend less. The less I spend, the worse the economy. The worse the economy, the more jobs are lost. The more jobs are lost, the less income you have to tax. Instead, tax me less, I’ll spend more and everything is reversed. Get it?



3. Why punish the financially responsible and reward the financially irresponsible? Why reward those who used excessive debt to purchase homes or other luxury items they couldn’t afford at the expense of those who lived responsibly within their means? I recognize we have a housing crisis and that mortgage delinquencies are contributing to our current economic malaise, but instead of forgiving the outstanding principal of delinquent mortgages at taxpayer expense wouldn’t it at least be more equitable to have a lien against future appreciation – perhaps at time of sale or even against one’s estate upon death? Please explain to us how simply forgiving the outstanding principal, with no possibility of recapture of subsequent appreciation by the taxpayer, is fair? All you are doing is incentivizing others to stop making their mortgage payments so that they too can be rewarded for their bad behavior by receiving a government handout on my and other taxpayer’s hard earned dime. It would seem to me that your policies in this arena will merely make the problem worse, not better. Nothing complex Mr. President – just common sense.



4. Please explain how reducing the charitable income tax deduction on high income taxpayers will help non-profit organizations throughout this country and increase the tax revenue to the federal government. Do you realize that this would potentially eliminate the very lifeblood of these organizations and the essential services they provide? Without the source of private donations most non-profit organizations would cease to exist, creating a void that only the government (and thus the taxpayer) could fill. More government involvement would likely equate to even greater taxpayer expense than any resultant increase in tax revenue. It’s not rocket science.



5. If you actually think we can become energy independent solely through alternative energy sources and little reliance on oil you are sadly mistaken. Your budget proposal to eliminate tax incentives on oil exploration will merely reduce our domestic oil supply, increase our reliance on foreign oil, compromise our national security, and further jeopardize our economy through higher oil and energy prices. Further, your proposal to limit certain emissions from the very businesses and manufacturers we depend upon for employment and job creation will only increase their manufacturing costs, reduce their global competiveness, and cause the loss of even more jobs than those we’ve lost already. Although the ideal of having clean energy and environmentally friendly manufacturing processes is indeed admirable, I don’t think our idea of a cleaner environment consists of the absence of manufacturing altogether. Want to turn a deep recession into a depression? Just go ahead and add even more cost and inefficiency to an already beleaguered U.S. manufacturing industry during these severe economic times.



It’s only been a few weeks since your inauguration Mr. President. You obviously have a lot to learn. It’s no coincidence that our financial markets are plummeting and our very way of life threatened since that time. It is readily apparent that neither the markets nor we have any confidence in your words, decisions, and proposed policies since assuming the highest office in our sacred land. Nor do we believe your policies and proposals represent the “change” we thought we were getting when we elected you. It’s now on YOUR watch, and there is no longer time for on the job training or assigning blame to others. Although the American people are patient, our patience is wearing thin. Please wake up – and soon. Be the great President that many felt you could become. Our hopes, our future, and indeed our very faith in the American Dream are dependent upon it.



Sincerely,

Kevin

Policy or Politics? A Note to President Obama.

A Note to President Obama!

Why is this Economic Stimulus package THE biggest defining moment of Your Administration? I have some questions as a citizen who wants you to succeed.

Is your vision of wanting solutions for this country more important than politics? It doesn't seem to be represented well in this economic stimulus package that deals less withn stimulus, and more with future programs that could be better dealt with separately rather than at this desperate moment when an immediate infusion is needed.

Can you pull in the reins on the Pelosi-Reid Alliance? Do you realize that they want the president under their thumbs, and Congress to have the power? You are in a battle with them and if you lose, you become a lackey to them. You must define who is setting the agenda now!

You should not be interested in giving Republicans what they want, but rather the American people what is best. If that happens to include some Republican ideas, you ought not fear it. If you do otherwise in terms of paying back those who put you in power with earmarks and pork in this drastic moment for our country, then you have failed to recognize that what you are really doing is politics over good policy.

Many in America have thrown in their lot on a general vision of hope and change with you Mr. President. There is unprecedented hope in a time of unprecedented distrust and disgust with our government. Your words have carried you to this point with no actions to back them up. Your words can uplift, but they can't provide the programs Americans need in a very drastic moment. Your job is to consistently match your words with the actions you demand. Your expectations are higher than any recent president coming in, and if you prove to be just another golden-throated political hack, it could be the finishing off of any trust the American people have in their political institutions. On the other hand, you could start us in a new positive direction toward the kind of new policy you talk about compared to the same old politics we have come to detest.

Respectfully,
Gary Sutton--Just a Citizen.

More Random Thoughts!

I promised some random thoughts, interesting or not, so here are a few more observations:

We didn't sell out on my old show when we went 6-9. It was economics. The radio industry sucks right now, but unlike so many others, the bailout money doesn't seem to be coming to help us. We have to cut back, take losses, streamline, do with less, and generally re-invent some things. In my case, that means adapting to a new time and expanding what the original show was by becoming more concise with valuable information, and more variety. Two of my colleagues lost their jobs because of this effort while I kept mine, so I take this morning drive opportunity seriously knowing that in my business, any day could be my last. For those of you who actually listen, WSBA has allowed me to have a free reign in that process. Anyway, I am rather enjoying trying to provide a different kind of vehicle for news and views.

Should Maybe Senator Roland Burris of Illinois be allowed to be seated in the Senate this week? If you go by the law, the answer is , Yes. If you use perception, the feedback is a resounding NO for Governor Blagoyavich's choice. Frankly, isn't this just Illinois-type politics with just a little bit more gall and brashness than usual?

State Senator Bobby Rush, an black man from Illinois, indicated last week that Barack Obama's former senate seat needs to be filled by a Black man. In this time of post-racial America, isn't that a bit of hippocracy at least, and at most racism. Wow, whatever happened to "a person shoulod be judged by content of character; not color of skin"? Mr. Rush went on to note that there would be a senate without any black members if the replacement for Obama, Mr. Burris, is not sent to D.C. What a problem? Can you imagine if we were to have a vacancy here in PA, and Governor Rendell was compelled to choose a white man because a white man had occupied that seat. Anyone say "racism?" Oh, I forgot, racism ony runs one way, though. All else is just getting even, right?

Other thoughts:

Is failing still ok in this country?

Maybe the government should have bailed out the "Big Four" in Detroit. That's GM, Ford, Chrysler, and the Detroit Lions (0-16 in the NFL; I knew they could do it.) in case you are wondering.

Does anyone know what the "G" commercial on tv with Muhammad Ali, Derek Jeter, and the mimes is all about? I haven't gotten it yet.

I saw the "Almost" commercial with the lonely elderly lady sitting by herself, and the voice in the background telling us that "someone almost brought her food; almost visited; almost took her to the doctor, and so on." It occurred to me that most people are very charitable and help others on their own. Do we really need the Ad-Council laying the daily guilt trip on us? Knock it off!

Lest you think I am cold-hearted, I really enjoyed driving kettle workers out and back to their sites during the holiday season. (One of the reasons I was remiss in my blogging responsibilities. I'm sure there is a commercial out there showing a blogger waiting in a rocking chair with a pc in front of him , and a voice somberly intoning, "Today, he almost received a blog from Sutton....") Anyway, I met so many joyful people who in many cases didn't have much in tangible wealth, but were incredibly rich in happiness. The stories we shared, and friendships we built were ones I will continue to try and cultivate, learny by, and remember.

Meeting the Glen Rock Carolers on their 161st Anniversary at sunrise Christmas morning is one of the simplest, most awesome Christmases my wife and I have ever had. The silence and beauty of meeting with others around a tree at 6 in the morning is an experience each of you should try some Christmas.

Burl Ives singing anything about Christmas still sucks.

My New Year's Eve present is news that I have bone on bone in my right knee, and torn cartilage as well. I've got to get a knee replacement, because my quality of life since the auto accident in April has disintegrated gradually. I'm losing weight, so I can get the replacement, and feel better in late January or early February. Happy New Year, huh? Anyone ever have one of those things? I guess I'm about to find out.

My wife and I broke down and got a 32" Flat Screen tv and a Wii. Picture looks better and Wii is addictive.

Jay's salads (I said I'm losing weight.) over at Jay's WOW Cafe and Wingery are the best around, especially with grilled chicken.

Emceeing the opening night of Christmas Magic at Rocky Ridge Park this year was one of the neatest things I've ever had the chance to do. Asking 250 little children and adults to countdown and help perform magic by pointing at trees, then seeing 400,000 lights come on in six different locations was cool.

I wish you all a Happy New Year, and hope to be more than just "an almost blogger."

Back from hibernation--Reflections on the holiday--Random thoughts!

Sorry I have been in hibernation, but I just needed to spend time with my wife, check out some medical things and enjoy the holidays. The following is simply a set of random ramblings with no particular ending, and a built-in invitation to respond or not.

First of all, I am still planning on blogging, though admittedly I am not very good at it. I know I lack the wit and insight of many of you, but I will make an effort to comment on the passing parade and ultimate circus.

On the "bailout mentality" now being debated in the country, I wonder what it does in continuing the idea that individual independence, free enterprise, and capitalism lie somewhere at the core of our country's success. What entities and institutions in our country are so important and intertwined with our system that they should be bailed out by we the taxpayers, and our irresponsible and generally dishonest representatives called the Congress, and government in general.

Let's see, so far we have bailed out financial institutions, now part of the car industry, and what next? Who else is so important they cannot fail? Retailers are starting to make some noise, but I was more intrigued by one of the great ironies I read the other day that I would share with you here.

Seems there is a problem with newspapers in this country; they're losing a ton of money, and they owe great debts. Bristol , Connecticut , incidentally the home of ESPN, is one of those cities trying to keep two newspapers going. It also seems Connecticut lawmaker Frank Nicastro sees saving the local newspaper as his duty. But others think he and his colleagues are setting a worrisome precedent for government involvement in the U.S. press.

Nicastro represents Connecticut's 79th assembly district, which includes Bristol, a city of about 61,000 people outside Hartford, the state capital. Its paper, The Bristol Press, may fold within days, along with The Herald in nearby New Britain.

That is because publisher Journal Register, in danger of being crushed under hundreds of millions of dollars of debt, says it cannot afford to keep them open anymore. Can the New York Times and The Chicago Tribune be far behind?

Nicastro and fellow legislators want the papers to survive, and petitioned the state government to do something about it. "The media is a vitally important part of America," he said, particularly local papers that cover news ignored by big papers and television and radio stations.

Here's the rub; freedom and the press to be separate from government and to be the watchdog on the government for the people. The ultimate irony, huh? The very group that needs to be vigilant in searching for truth on our behalf now needs money from the very group they oversee to keep doing their job. So how vigilant will they remain, and how investigative will they be in their reporting when it turns out to be the literary equivalent of biting the hand that feeds it? It is an amazing irony to me, and I am sure to many.

I guess the scariest part, if it would happen is that again it takes from the individual and bestows yet more power on a group of representatives who confiscate the individuals money to do it. Who wants to get off that merry-go-round first?

So, maybe sometime soon, we'll have the American version of Pravda, or maybe we will let failing businesses fail, and use good old American ingenuity to find a way to re-invent the newspaper industry.

Seems there is a

Source: Robert MacMillan, "Tax breaks (not bailouts) for newspapers"

Link to his blog at Reuters.

A letter from Ken and my response

This was a letter I received from Ken on Wednesday. I appreciate the time he took to write it, and I thought it deserved equal time considering it, and answering. Below is his letter and my response:

Gary,
We live in a democracy, we're part of a community, we make common decisions. It's sad but you guys seem to think that individual material gain is what matters. You may not realize this but you're mocking democracy. Where's your sense of solidarity and community. An atomized society flys in the face of democracy, it's shameful.

Kenneth, I also share my wealth by buying Thanksgiving dinner for people (7) of them this year, donating to charities, paying for lunches, dinners and tickets for people who can't do it themselves, and sponsoring people to baseball games who otherwise couldn't go. I also sponsor two scholarships for $4,000 and gave $3300 to a school to honor my mom and dad; money that would help for better education of students.

None of that money comes from the government; it comes from me despite the government's efforts to take more and more from me as a producer. Without people like me, the democracy, and particularly the representative democracy which puts them in power doesn't exist. Without my money and other producers like me who have bought into them representing me and you, they are nothing. They produce nothing unless I provide them with the means. My compact with them includes respecting my choices, and making decisions that respect the way I do business as a taxpayer, but more importantly a producer in this country.

When I and people like me stop producing, those who live off the fruits of those labors that are given money by our representatives will receive no more. Do not lecture me about democracy, which by the way means "people power" from the old Greek term. Do you think that meant we should have the power, or just the few representatives whose track record is far worse than most American households where we produce each day?

As far as my sense of community, each member of the community should be doing their best to contribute in some way to, and should not be whining about what the government can do to give them more or perpetuate dependence; rather should be fostering their own independence. That will certainly help the solidarity, togetherness and bond within any community.

Best regards,
Gary Sutton

Redistribution of wealth--Progressive or Regressive

The following is a reprint of a response I had in an earlier post. It is not an attenpt to be a revisionist historian to Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations" which I have read. Rather, it is to discuss the benefits and merits of a concept. Debate it rather than just offer up names. Here it is:

The idea that government should choose who the winners will be and who the losers will be is anathema to the whole principle of free choice, isn't it? Progressive taxes? Repudiation of the Bush-Cheyney policies? Come on.

The ultimate job of government is to get out of the way so that individual initiative can have a chance to realize goals if pursued by the individual. It is, or was, based on a society that believed in independence and work. The only "fairness" that we worried about was to try as much as possible to have a level playing field for all in this country.

I do believe that there must be stricter regulation and oversight for situations that we have seen in this financial crises. When power and wealth are abused, especially in a way that takes all of us with them, there must be safeguards in our system of freedoms. People make bad choices, and illegal choices. They must be held accountable.

Having said that, what is progressive about any tax? Government produces no money, but takes it from those that do, then make them pay progressively more than those who don't???? What is progressive about that? How does that provide greater incentive for people to create wealth in this country? How does a 35% corporate tax keep business in this country when every other industrialized country offers less of a strain on earnings? Senator Obama is right in the sense that wealth is built "from the ground up." When you start at ground level, don't you want to achieve higher status financially. What a goal to look forward to when you know that your efforts will lead to a "progressive tax." How is that progressive for success?

Lessen the tax confiscation, tighten the spending, and find an equitable way to provide tax cuts for 100% of citizens in this country; not just 95%. If you nwant to create a nanny state of dependency where we whine for fairness defined as what I can get, I believe we go opposite the very tenets on which we were founded.

Governor Richardson and Friday's Show

Governor Bill Richardson was supposed to be my guest on yesterday's show, but he stood me up. After waiting 1-1/2 hours to tape the interview, and with much help from an Obama aide, Ebony Meeks, we finally threw in the towel. Sorry. I like the Governor, and was looking forward to his insights. (Sorry especially to RB.)

Friday, we have Chris Markowski, "The Watchdog of Wall Street" from 6:10 to 6:25. This guy is sharp, and he'll be getting into analysis on gas prices, candidates' gas plans, and abolishing 401k tax breaks. Check out his website at http://watchdogonwallstreet.com/tv.html

We also have Dr. Terry Madonna from Franklin and Marshall College who will be talking about the new Franklin and Marshall/Hearst-Argyle Presidential Poll. Find out more at http://www.fandm.edu/x2217.xml

Our 8-9 Call-In Hour will focus on "What changes you would like to see to future presidential campaigns and elections" plus "When it comes down to it in the simplest terms, what is this election really all about?"

Join us 6-9am on York's Morning News.

Monday's York's Morning News

Our guests today on York's Morning News are :

Gary Gagliardi of The Science of Strategy Institute on the topic of ACORN (The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now.) If you care to follow up on his work, go to www.scienceofstrategy.com . 6:00 hour.

Joe Mahoney is an investment advisor with Edward Jones Investments in York, PA . He is discussing the financial bailoout and the progress on it in the 8:00 hour.

Thanks for listening--Comments are welcomed here! GS

Just a little bit of history and timeline on the financial mess

Just thought I would post some points since the "Elite media" seems to want to forget whose negligence, and involvement helped get us into this mess.

Political Gotcha or True Bi-Partisanship?????

So Senator John McCain is suspending his campaign to go help settle the economic crisis in Washington, and wants to postpone the debate scheduled with Senator Obama on Friday night. Is he right or wrong? Senator Obama has said that presidents should be able to do more than one thing, and he has no intention of canceling his campaign activities including the debate on Friday evening. Is he right or wrong?

Both are attending the meeting with the president and heads of Congress today at the request of President Bush. Is this situation so big that it's dragging every party and ideology into a decision? Could Bush actually be changing the tone of Washington finally?? Probably not, but what do you think?????

What are you doing to combat and overcome gas prices?

Carpooling, conservation, or other forms of transportation -- what are you doing and what suggestions can you make for dealing with the astronomical gas prices? Let's hear 'em right here!

Musings from a non-progressive person about politics, illegal invasions, and how the government enables.

You might be interested in the following information which seems to have become unimportant to many Americans.

Musings from a Silly Non-Progressive American on CHANGE! Is this what we want when we talk change? Oh, by the way, weren't all 3 major SENATORS part of this change that we have heard so much about during the campaign?

CHANGE- Part 1
In just one year. Remember the election in 2006? CHANGE HAS ALREADY HAPPENED -- Because a little over one year ago:

1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;

2) Regular gasoline sold for a $2.19 average per gallon;

3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%.

CHANGE - Since voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006 we have seen:

1) Consumer confidence plummet;

2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $3.50 average a gallon;

3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);

4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);

5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion dollars;

6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.

America voted for change in 2006, and we got it! Remember it's Congress that makes law not the President. He has to work with what's handed to him.

CHANGE Part 2:

Taxes -- whether Democrat or a Republican you will find these statistics enlightening and amazing.

www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html

GOOD OL' DAYS Taxes under Clinton 1999

Single making 30K - tax $8,400
Single making 50K - tax $14,000
Single making 75K - tax $23,250
Married making 60K - tax $16,800
Married making 75K - tax $21,000
Married making 125K - tax $38,750

vs THOSE UNFAIR TAXES under Bush 2008
Single making 30K - tax $4,500
Single making 50K - tax $12,500
Single making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 125K - tax $31,250

CHANGE - Both democratic candidates will return to the higher tax rates. It is amazing how many people that fall into the categories above think Bush is screwing them and Bill Clinton was the greatest President ever. If Obama or Hillary are elected, they both say they will repeal the Bush tax cuts and a good portion of the people that fall into the categories above can't wait for it to happen. CHANGE is all that matters (and all they will have left). This is sort of like the movie The Sting with Paul Newman; you scam somebody out of their money and they don't even know what happened....until it is TOO LATE....

CHANGE PART 3:

You think the war in Iraq is costing us too much? Read this:

Boy, am I confused. They say it is the Iraq war and the war on terror that is bankrupting us; I find that to be RIDICULOUS. I hope that you will carefully consider the following 14 reasons as to why they don't make sense.I have included the URL's for verification of all the following facts.

1. $11 Billion to $22 billion is spent on welfare to illegal aliens each year by state governments. Verify at http://tinyurl.com/zob77

2. $2.2 Billion dollars a year is spent on food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches for illegal aliens. Verify at http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html

3. $2.5 Billion dollars a year is spent on Medicaid for illegal aliens. Verify at http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html

4. $12 Billion dollars a year is spent on primary and secondary school education for children here illegally and they cannot speak a word of English! Verify at http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.0.html

5. $17 Billion dollars a year is spent for education for the American-born children of illegal aliens, known as anchor babies. Verify at http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html

6. $3 Million Dollars a DAY is spent to incarcerate illegal aliens. Verify at http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html

7, 30% percent of all Federal Prison inmates are illegal aliens. Verify at http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html

8. $90 Billion Dollars a year is spent on illegal aliens for Welfare & social services by the American taxpayers. Verify at http://premium.cnn.com/TRANSCIPTS/0610/29/ldt.01.html

9. $200 Billion Dollars a year in suppressed American wages are caused by the illegal aliens. Verify at http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html

10. The illegal aliens in the United States have a crime rate that's two and a half times that of white non-illegal aliens. In particular, their children are going to make a huge additional crime problem in the US. Verify at http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/12/ldt.01.html

11. During the year of 2005 there were 4 to 10 MILLION illegal aliens that crossed our Southern Border also, as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from Terrorist Countries. Millions of pounds of drugs, cocaine, meth, heroin and marijuana, crossed into the U. S from the Southern border. Verify at Homeland Security Report: http://tinyurl.com/t9sht

12. The National Policy Institute, 'estimated that the total cost of mass deportation would be between $206 and $230 billion or an average cost of between $41 and $46 billion annually over a five year period.' Verify at http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/pdf/deportation.pdf

13. In 2006 illegal aliens sent home $45 BILLION in remittances back to their countries of origin. Verify at http://www.rense.com/general75/niht.htm

14. 'The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration: Nearly One Million Sex Crimes Committed by Illegal Immigrants In The United States .' Verify at http://www.drdsk.com/articleshtml

The total cost is a whopping $ 338.3 BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR; which is NOT SPARE CHANGE.

Bee stings and poverty

Drake Bennett writes in The Boston Globe that

Compared with the middle class or the wealthy, the poor are disproportionately likely to drop out of school, to have children while in their teens, to abuse drugs, to commit crimes, to not save when extra money comes their way, to not work.

Why is this? The answer traditionally depends on your personal philosophy. Bennett continues:

Social conservatives have tended to argue that poor people lack the smarts or willpower to make the right choices.

Social liberals have countered by blaming racial prejudice and the crippling conditions of the ghetto for denying the poor any choice in their fate.

Neoconservatives have argued that antipoverty programs themselves are to blame for essentially bribing people to stay poor.

Charles Karelis, a philosopher and former president of Colgate University has a different answer. He believes that all these traditional answers are off the mark. Here's where the bees come in:

A person with one bee sting is highly motivated to get it treated. But a person with multiple bee stings does not have much incentive to get one sting treated, because the others will still throb.

The more of a painful or undesirable thing one has (i.e. the poorer one is) the less likely one is to do anything about any one problem.

Poverty is less a matter of having few goods than having lots of problems ...

[P]eople stop thinking in terms of goods and start thinking in terms of problems, and that shift has enormous consequences.

Now, it's interesting reading, but let's not get carried away -- the Globe article does highlight some criticisms of the bee sting theory.

Link to The Sting of Poverty (from the Boston Globe)

Who are the middle class?

Who are the middle class? The Congressional Research Service published a PDF report earlier this year on that subject.

Surveys indicate many people felt an income near $40,000 was the minimum to be considered middle class. On the other end, surveys suggested that those with incomes approaching $200,000 might still be considered middle class.

Well, that's pretty broad. And inconclusive, too:

There is no consensus definition of “middle class,” neither is there an official government definition. What constitutes the middle class is relative, subjective, and not easily defined.

Still, the short report (it's only six pages long) makes for some interesting reading.

Link to CRS report Who Are the “Middle Class”? (PDF format)