You just can’t make this chit up!

Dirty Business as Usual at California High Speed Rail

From the article:
Out of the entire universe of those who could have won the first phase construction contract for California’s high speed rail boondoggle, who would stand out as the last person who would win it if there were no political patronage.

Put another way, who is the most likely person to win it if there is political patronage?

Both questions have the same answer: Richard Blum, the husband of California senator Diane Feinstein.

So, who won the contract? Blum, of course, as the principle owner of Tutor Perini, the lead firm in the three-firm consortium selected by the California High Speed Rail Authority.

Yes, Diane, it really does look that bad to us little people.

A High Low Bid

The Perini-Zachary-Parsons bid was the lowest received from the five consortia participating in the bidding process, but “low” is a relative term. The firms bid $985,142,530 to build the wildly anticipated first section of high speed rail track that will tie the megopolis of Madera to the global finance center of Fresno. Do the division, and you find that the low bid came in at a mere $35 million per mile.

And that doesn’t include the cost of rolling stock (that’s engines and cars to the normal among us). Nor does it include the cost of electrifying the route. Does it at least include the cost of land acquisition? No, it does not.

As this fiasco progress, remember that this $35 million per mile represents the best California can do on the section of track the High on Crack Speed Rail Authority selected to go first because it will be the cheapest.

Damaged corn in a field in Oakland City, Indiana

Global food prices have leapt by 10% in the month of July, raising fears of soaring prices for the planet’s poorest, the World Bank has warned.

Wrong.

Such refinancing would cost taxpayers, who bailed out companies like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, billions of dollars. The government would lose future revenues. Investors who invested in mortgage-backed securities would lose money. Taxpayers could make their money back in the long run if less people default, but that does not mean there won’t be short-term costs. 

It is this type of mentality — and ignorance — that leads to the Obama administration’s investing billions of dollars of taxpayer money into companies like GM, which some believe are on the verge of another bankruptcy.

AP Photo

WASHINGTON (AP) — A veteran Wall Street executive who performed an independent review that exonerated the Obama administration’s program of loans to energy companies contributed $52,500 to re-elect President Barack Obama in the months since completing his work, according to an Associated Press review of campaign records. The executive defended the integrity of his conclusions and said he decided to donate to Obama after his work was finished.

The campaign contributions to Obama started just weeks after Herbert M. Allison Jr., in congressional testimony in March, minimized concerns that the Energy Department was at high risk in more than $23 billion in federal loans awarded to green energy firms. Two weeks later, Allison began giving to the Obama campaign. His contributions to Obama and the Democratic National Committee totaled $52,500 by last month. Allison previously was the former head of the government’s mass purchase of toxic Wall Street assets.

Allison did not make any Obama donations during his four-month review of Energy Department loans, and he has a long history of working with and giving money to both political parties. However, Republican Party officials and congressional critics of the energy loans said Allison’s donations to Obama raise doubts about his objectivity and highlight his decision not to assess multimillion-dollar loans to two companies that later went into bankruptcy - the troubled Solyndra solar panel company and Beacon Power, an energy storage firm.

Allison’s report, completed in February and touted by the White House, acknowledged that the Energy Department could lose as much as $3 billion in loans, but it concluded that was far less than the $10 billion set aside by Congress for high-risk companies. The review did not assess the two bankrupt firms because those loans were no longer current. Allison told Congress that “DOE has negotiated protections in the loan agreements that enable it to cut off further funding and to demand more credit protection if projects do not meet targets.” He also urged the Energy Department to toughen its oversight.

Allison defended the integrity of his review in an interview with The Associated Press. He said that he did not make the decision to back a presidential candidate until after he had finished his work and that his selection was approved by Energy Department lawyers before he began his review last October to “ensure there was no hint of bias or conflict of interest.”

“I was on the record with the White House that this had to be completely independent review and they agreed,” he said Wednesday in a telephone interview from his home in Westport, Conn. “It didn’t hew to anybody’s political suasion, I think, and it had to be fully factual or it wouldn’t be credible.”

Allison said he made his decision to support Obama after he saw “his administration in action and decided that I believe broadly in the things he’s trying to accomplish.”

Allison gave $2,500 to the Obama campaign on March 29, two weeks after he testified to the Senate Energy and Commerce Committee about his review. In May, he gave $15,000 to the Obama Victory Fund, a joint fundraising committee that supports both the president’s re-election campaign and the Democratic National Committee. Allison gave the same amount to the fund again in June and then $20,000 more in July.

Allison has donated money to both parties, but his gifts in the past have tended to be much smaller than his current contributions, typically no more than $1,000 or $2,000, according to Federal Election Commission records. Allison explained his larger donations to the Obama campaign by saying “there’s a hell of a lot more money in politics today than in years past and I decided I could go this route.”

Allison has given to GOP figures such as Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma and Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, and to Democrats such as Rep. Carolyn Maloney of New York and former Nebraska Sen. Bob Kerrey. Allison’s presidential preferences have been mostly Republicans - Sen. John McCain of Arizona and former Sen. Bob Dole of Kansas. He also gave $2,300 to Obama in 2008, a year before Obama appointed Allison as an assistant treasury secretary.

The White House and the Obama campaign defended Allison, saying his donations did not taint his work as independent reviewer of the loans program. They pointed to his repeated hiring over the past two decades by Republican presidential administrations and GOP campaigns as justification that Allison had the independence to oversee troubled government programs.

“Mr. Allison was selected to do this study because of his relevant expertise and he is a public servant widely respected by Democrats and Republicans alike,” said Eric Schultz, a White House spokesman. Schultz added that Allison’s “analysis of the DOE loan portfolio was thorough and reliable as evident by additional independent reports affirming his findings.” The Obama campaign said, “Having completed an independent assignment does not cost him his right to continue participating in the political progress on behalf of many candidates, as he has in the past.”

A former Merrill Lynch executive, Allison worked for several Republican administrations and earned a reputation for tackling troubled federal programs. During McCain’s failed 2000 presidential run, he served as national finance chairman and was rumored to be McCain’s choice to become treasury secretary if he had won.

Allison was named by President George W. Bush to head Fannie Mae after the quasi-government home lending agency was placed in conservatorship in 2008 following the Wall Street collapse. A year later, Obama named Allison as an assistant treasury secretary to oversee the Troubled Asset Relief Program that Bush had created to stabilize Wall Street banks and investment houses reeling with toxic debt.

During his work at the Treasury Department, Allison was among top officials who crossed swords with TARP Inspector General Neil Barofsky, who accused the department of failing to properly track government bailout money given to banks and investment houses. Barofsky declined to comment about his dealings with Allison.

Allison left the Treasury Department in 2010 but returned last year to head up the review of energy loans. The White House agreed to the review in the wake of mounting Republican criticism after Solyndra, a California firm, went belly up. The bankruptcy cost U.S. taxpayers $528 million in lost loans.

Rep. Cliff Stearns, R-Fla., who chairs the House Energy Committee’s oversight subcommittee, said Allison’s donations to the Obama campaign back up GOP warnings this year that the White House review was suspect. Stearns said Allison’s “financial support for the Obama campaign undermines (his) credibility and shows once again that the president did not want a careful, independent review of his risky green jobs scheme.”

Allison’s role as a large Obama donor “raises serious questions about an administration that puts campaign cash before taxpayer money,” said Joe Pounder, a spokesman for the Republican National Committee.

Allison declined to say whether he will keep donating to Obama. “Next time around,” he said, “I might support a Republican.”

  Buyers' remorse for California's 'bullet train to nowhere'

Ambitious plans for a fast track linking Los Angeles and San Francisco at speeds of up to 220mph in just over two-and-a-half hours were slimly approved by 53 per cent in a statewide ballot in 2008. That allowed the state to raise $10 billion from bonds and secured an injection of $3.5 billion in stimulus money from the Obama administration. There is currently no direct train route between the two.

Construction is expected to begin later this year in the middle of California’s Central Valley near Merced, a town of 80,000 people known for having one of the highest home foreclosure rates in America.

The plan calls for around 300 miles of track to be laid south from there over the next 10 years to reach the northern outskirts of Los Angeles. A northern link from the Central Valley to San Francisco would not be completed until 2028.

The project is still $54.9 billion short of what is needed, raising fears that the state will be unable to find the funds to finish later sections, and could be left with a futuristic rail line linking minor cities and farming communities.

Amid disillusion over the cost and handling of the project, voters have now turned against what was supposed to become a symbol of state pride.

A new poll shows almost three fifths would oppose the bullet train and halt public borrowing if given another chance to vote.

Almost seven in 10 said that, if the train ever does run between Los Angeles and San Francisco, they would “never or hardly ever” use it.

Not a single person said they would use it more than once a week, and only 33 per cent said they would prefer the bullet train over a one hour plane journey or seven hour drive. The cost of a ticket, estimated at $123 each way, also put many off. Jerry Brown, California’s Democrat governor, has championed the project as a way to create jobs and is backed by unions. The 74-year-old governor has been personally committed to a high speed rail link since the 1970s.

Because that 59% don’t pay taxes. When the last producers leave and the Hollywood stars register in other states their tax revenue will decrease even further.

talkstraight:

New disclosures show that one of President Obama’s bundlers is the wife of an executive at an energy company that received a more-than-$1.2 billion Department of Energy (DOE) loan guarantee for a solar power plant.

Arvia Few is a bundler for the Obama re-election campaign who has promised to raise between $50,000 and $100,000. She began bundling for Obama in the first quarter of 2012. Her husband, Jason Few, is an executive at a company that has benefited handsomely from the Obama administration’s clean energy spending, records show.

The U.S. Department of Energy granted NRG Solar a $1.237-billion loan in September 2011 to help build NRG’s California Valley Solar Ranch, which is described as “a 250 MW alternating current PV solar generating facility” by the U.S. Department of Energy.

The Citizen and the Government

In the Aesop Fable “The Grasshopper and the Ant,” there are moral, economic and political lessons for our time, or any other.

As the story goes, the lazy grasshopper wiles away his summer days singing and hopping and having an all-around good time while industrious ants work and march and struggle to carry kernels of corn to their anthills, storing up for the winter to come.

As you would imagine, the inevitable happens. Come winter, the ants have plenty of food to see them through the cold, fallow months. The fun-loving grasshopper has nothing. The grasshopper begs the hardworking ants to share their bounty, but they refuse.

Let’s begin with the political lesson. Government, the grasshopper in this little morality tale, is constantly trying to get its citizens, the ants, to cough up more and more of what they’ve earned by the sweat of their brows so that it might pay for its own needs.

The latest of many recent examples occurred last week in Maryland where the majority Democratic legislature passed another tax increase on “the rich.”

Democratic Governor Martin O’Malley and the legislators have lowered the definition of “rich” from the arbitrary $250,000 established by President Obama, to $100,000 for individuals and $150,000 for couples filing jointly. Maryland residents will now be slapped with a new tax on top of already high state and local taxes, tying the state’s new state-local tax bracket, according to the Washington Post, with that of “…the District’s for fourth-highest in the nation.” Especially in the expensive Maryland suburb of Washington, D.C., incomes of $100,000 and $150,000 are barely middle class.

Chuck Norris WTHR, the NBC affiliate in Indianapolis, recently reported about how millions of illegal aliens are getting billions of dollars in U.S. tax refunds without having paid a dime in income taxes. The story instantly went viral because it’s true. You won’t believe what illegals are getting away with, and our government is enabling them.

Here’s how it works.

Illegal immigrants cannot qualify for legitimate Social Security numbers, which would entitle them to work legally in the U.S. and file income tax returns, but the Internal Revenue Service allows them to apply for nine-digit individual taxpayer identification numbers, or ITINs, which also are used to file federal income tax returns.

In addition, a provision in the tax code permits illegals to claim “additional child tax credits,” which grant families $1,000 per “dependent” child. Roughly three-quarters of tax returns filed by illegals include these ACTCs. With the ITIN, illegals are able to get tax credits and refunds for nephews, nieces and other family members who never have touched U.S. soil.

For example, an illegal immigrant who makes $13,000 a year not only pays no taxes but also can receive a refund of $5,000 by simply filling in five ACTCs. One illegal used a fake address and said four illegal aliens lived there with 20 relatives as dependents, for a grand total tax refund of $29,000!

According to the Center for Immigration Studies, in the 2010 tax year alone, more than 3 million returns were filed with ITINs. About 2.3 million of them paid no federal income taxes and also collected a cumulative $4 billion from the Treasury in tax refunds for claiming ACTCs.

FactCheck.org confirmed: “The (Treasury Department’s inspector general’s) report stated that more than 2.3 million persons who did not have Social Security numbers valid for working in the U.S. got an average of roughly $1,800 each in 2010 in child tax credit refunds. That included 9,000 illegal immigrants who each got a total of $10,000 or more by retroactively claiming credits for tax years prior to 2010.”

A tax consultant snitched to WTHR News: “We’ve seen 10 (or) 12 dependents, most times nieces and nephews, on these tax returns. The more you put on there the more you get back. … Here’s a return right here: ‘We’ve got a $10,300 refund (for) nine nieces and nephews.’”

And if you think this is a relatively new IRS scam, consider the report for the Center for Immigration Studies prepared by Peter A. Schulkin, who holds a Ph.D. in economics from Harvard University and has taught at several universities. It was a follow-up to a November 2010 memorandum titled “Child Tax Credits for Illegal Immigrants.”

In it, Schulkin “highlights new information contained in a report of the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) dated July 7, 2011, (titled) ‘Individuals Who Are Not Authorized to Work in the United States Were Paid $4.2 Billion in Refundable Credits.’ The $4.2 billion is entirely the product of the Additional Child Tax Credit … for the 2010 tax processing year.”

Furthermore, Schulkin reported: “The July 7, 2011, TIGTA report echoes the message contained in the earlier March 31, 2009, TIGTA report in the statement: ‘Although the law prohibits aliens residing without authorization in the United States from receiving most Federal public benefits, an increasing number of these individuals are filing tax returns claiming the Additional Child Tax Credit … a refundable tax credit intended for working families. The payment of Federal funds through this tax benefit appears to provide an additional incentive for aliens to enter, reside, and work in the United States without authorization, which contradicts Federal law and policy to remove such incentives.’”

In fact, Schulkin’s memorandum reports a long history of IRS abuses of ACTCs by illegal immigrants — at least seven years.

FactCheck.org confirmed, “By 2005, the recent IG report said, 796,000 persons without valid Social Security numbers claimed refundable child credits totaling $924 million, and in 2008, these claims had risen to 1,526,276 persons claiming $2.1 billion in refunds.”

CNSNews.com reported that IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman was asked in April about what his agency is doing to collect taxes from illegal immigrants. He replied: “It’s a great question. And one of the pathways to citizenship that people believe is a good one is — even if you’re not in this country legally — to pay taxes.”

CNSNews.com additionally noted how, in 2006, Deputy Commissioner of Social Security James Lockhart said that in the year 2003 alone, 8.8 million W-2 forms had been filed on which the Social Security number and name did not match and the W-2 could not be attributed to a known taxpayer. The Social Security Administration pointed to the reason for both as “unauthorized work” being done by illegal aliens.

The words that continue to echo through my head are President Barack Obama’s chastising comment about the wealthy: We all must “pay our fair share” of taxes.

Illegal immigrants’ IRS abuses and theft of hardworking taxpayers’ money will not cease until Congress acts. In 2011, H.R. 1956 was proposed “to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to require individuals to provide their Social Security number in order to claim the refundable portion of the child tax credit.” But the legislation has had only one hearing before the House Ways and Means Committee. Why? According to FactCheck.org, “leading Democrats are resisting a bill that would stop future payments”!

Please call your representative today and say Congress needs to act immediately to stop this pilfering of the U.S. Treasury by illegal immigrants.

We all must “pay our fair share” of taxes?

And so Rome continues to burn.

 Has General Motors (GM) forgotten We the Taxpayers are still out $30+ billion on the $82 billion auto bailout?

Apparently so.

General Motors Co. — which owned the auto and mortgage lender Ally Financial Inc. until 2006 and still holds a 9.9 percent stake in the company — said it will consider a bid for Ally’s foreign operations.

GM CEO Dan Akerson told Bloomberg News on Monday that the Detroit automaker may buy if the price is right…

Ally’s troubled mortgage unit Residential Capital LLC filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy early Monday, as the Detroit-based Ally said it may sell its international businesses.

Let’s not get ahead of ourselves, shall we, Mr. Akerson?

At least $15 billion of the auto bailout loss is gone forever.  The rest we own in stock.

We still own 500+ million shares of General Motors (GM), which is currently trading at an anemic, pathetic sub $22—which is down more than a third from the post-bankruptcy IPO price.

Let us ponder that precipitous drop for but a moment.

After a 2011 of tax-free “record” profits and multiple awards for the (unprofitable, unpopular, combustible) Chevy Volt, GM stock is down by more than a third.

Meaning GM’s “success” is just so much more disingenuous President Barack Obama campaign hype.

For We the Taxpayers to break even on our GM shares, they must be sold at $53 per. Given the direction the stock is headed, that ain’t looking good. Were our shares sold today, we’d lose another nearly $16 billion.

Just another facet of the Obama Administration’s “success.”

Which brings us back to GM’s contemplated purchase of Ally Financial. GM has—while owing us billions—purchased before.

In a similar move in 2010, GM acquired AmeriCredit and renamed it GM Financial to expand its subprime auto lending and leasing.

Subprime lending? Meaning like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for Government Motors? Why, yes.

Just another in a long series of brilliant GM business moves.

Government Motors, as we said, sells Volt hybrids for $41,000. Volt hybrids cost GM $41,000 to make. It’s a zero-sum, non-profit product…

GM (in 2010) received more green (non-energy) energy patents than any other organization on Planet Earth…

And in bad joke harmonic convergence, GM spent $3 millionto install solar panels at a (non-profit) Volt manufacturing plant - in order to save $15,000 a year in electricity.

It’ll take GM 200 years to break even on these solar panels. Except they won’t, because in 20-25 years they’ll have to replace them all, which means they’ll save—at most—$375,000, before spending another $3 million (plus inflation) to start the inanity all over again.

And if you haven’t yet had enough GM solar, and you liked Solyndra, and Beacon Power, and Ener1, and…

Through Venture-Capital Arm, General Motors Pushing Boundaries of Innovation

…Since its inception, General Motors Ventures has closed on 13 investments worth around $60 million, according to (GM’s Tim) Brumbaugh.

They include a $7.5 million investment in Sunlogics PLC — a manufacturer of solar-energy systems — and a $6 million investment in Proterra Inc., which makes zero-emission transit buses.

Fantastic. But fret not:

“We are only investing in technologies that can be utilized in the automobile itself or through our manufacturing facilities — something that’s going to give us a competitive advantage,” Brumbaugh said.

Like their $3 million Volt factory solar panel fiasco.

And the visual of GM incorporating “solar-energy systems” in their vehicles is at once mind-numbing and absurdly hilarious.  Given that a 12-hour charge of a Volt’s 400 pound battery gets you less than 40 miles down the road, how much additional juice will a GM-venture-capital solar panel on the car’s roof provide?

“That would be a big strategic win for us,” he said.

There’s that Obama-Government Motors bizarre definition of “success” again.

“It’s not chasing a hot trend,” Brumbaugh said. “It’s something that if you’re doing to do it, you have to stick to it — and management has to stick to it — over decades.”

That sounds an awful lot like President Obama’s “doubling down” on his Solyndras, and Beacon Powers, and Ener1s, and the rest.

Much of Europe spent the last decade subsidizing non-green non-energy at levels far greater than ours and are now giving it up as absurdly wasteful and futile.

With decisions like all of these, is anyone shocked by GM’s stellar stock performance?

So before GM takes yet another flyer on yet another bankrupt idea, perhaps they should instead begin to pay down the huge debt they owe We the Taxpayers.

It would be the first good General Motors decision in quite a while.

And it might actually, finally begin to drag the stock price up from its current pathetic position.

 

Judges from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, federal district and bankruptcy courts in nine Western states and two Pacific island territories, along with lawyers practicing in those courts, and court staff, will gather at the luxurious Hyatt Regency Maui Resort and Spa from August 13 - 16, 2012 in what looks like a less than valiant attempt to ensure American justice is being served…at a cost to taxpayers of approximately one million dollars.

From tennis courts to the caddy shack and luau experience, justice will be served in a manner many Americans never get to experience. Breitbart News has reviewed a letter from the offices of the Ranking Member of the Senate Budget Committee, Senator Jeff Sessions, and the offices of Senator Chuck Grassley, the Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, with several detailed questions they want answered by the Ninth District. 

The letter cites the 2010 version of the Ninth Circuit’s annual judicial conference that cost taxpayers over $657,000 in travel costs alone, along with $860,000 in combined travel costs for the Ninth Circuit’s 2008 and 2009 annual conferences in Monterey, California and Sun Valley, Idaho, respectively. It also provides evidence of the Ninth Circuit’s awareness of the Government’s budget challenges in the face of a still suffering Obama economy, going on to challenge why the Ninth Circuit seems determined to go on spending large amounts of money on plush conferences, when a more prudent approach could provide the same value for professional purposes.

As in past years, the Ninth District seems content to leave taxpayers on the hook for whisking many judges and aligned judicial professionals off to an exclusive destination, so that they might also enjoy “yoga, surfing lessons, stand up paddle board lessons, Zumba (a Latin-inspired dance program), a tennis tournament, a day trip and tour of Upcountry Maui, a Gemini Catamaran snorkle trip, and an activity called ‘The Aloha Experience.’” 

That list from the Senate letter appears to have been taken directly from a flashy webpage that functions as a brochure of sorts for the expedition. All of the activities would be subsidized, or paid for by tax payers to some extent, despite a claim at bottom that “Government funds are not used for any sporting or recreational activities”.

What happens in Maui may stay in Maui, but one still has to get there and back, while salaries also have to be taken into account. That was pointed out in a previous report on the Ninth Circuit’s 2011 conference by another news outlet. In 2011, they claimed, “a minimum of $700,000 will be spent on salaries of the 267 judges in attendance, which range from $164,000 to $223,500” for last year’s event. They also reported that each judge was eligible for a $391 per day stipend for hotel and food costs, that could total $417,600 over last year’s four day Ninth Circuit conference.

Meanwhile, independent research by Breitbart News suggests some, if not all other districts, are taking a more prudent, responsible approach in hosting their annual conferences this year. The Eighth Circuit seems to be taking a more modest approach with a three day event, if this is representative: “The judges of the Eighth Circuit invite you to join them August 8 - 10, 2012, at the Kansas City Marriott Downtown for the Eighth Circuit Judicial Conference.”

 And you thought Octomom had her hands full—a Tennessee man who has fathered 30 children is asking the courts for a break on child support.

Desmond Hatchett, 33, of Knoxville has children with 11 different women, reports WREG-TV.

The state already takes half his paycheck and divides it up, which doesn’t amount to much when Hatchett is making only minimum wage. Some of the moms receive as little as $1.49 a month. The oldest child is 14 years old.

Hatchett explains how he reached such a critical mass: He had four kids in the same year. Twice.

Back in 2009 when Hatchett was in court to answer charges that many of the mothers were not receiving child support, he had 21 children. At the time, he said he was not going to father any more kids, but he ended up having nine more in the past three years.

The state cannot order Hatchett to stop making babies. He hasn’t broken any laws, according to the report.

Unbelievable. I wonder if he’s paying his “fair share” or if the rest of us need to pay more for this type of irresponsibility on both his and the mothers’ part.

antigovernmentextremist:

Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., has a status update for Facebook co-founder Eduardo Saverin: Stop attempting to dodge your taxes by renouncing your U.S. citizenship or never come to back to the U.S. again.

In September 2011, Saverin relinquished his U.S. citizenship before the company announced its planned initial public offering of stock, which will debut this week. The move was likely a financial one, as he owns an estimated 4 percent of Facebook and stands to make $4 billion when the company goes public. Saverin would reap the benefit of tax savings by becoming a permanent resident of Singapore, which levies no capital gains taxes.

At a news conference this morning, Sens. Schumer and Bob Casey, D-Pa., will unveil the “Ex-PATRIOT” – “Expatriation Prevention by Abolishing Tax-Related Incentives for Offshore Tenancy” – Act to respond directly to Saverin’s move, which they dub a “scheme” that would “help him duck up to $67 million in taxes.”

The senators will call Saverin’s move an “outrage” and will outline their plan to re-impose taxes on expatriates like Saverin even after they flee the United States and take up residence in a foreign country. Their proposal would also impose a mandatory 30 percent tax on the capital gains of anybody who renounces their U.S. citizenship.

I hate the government. I hate taxes. I hate people who think this is okay.

Rather than fix the system so people don’t want to expatriate, they want to punish individuals who want a better life. This is like when my family and I escaped from Bulgaria and the government found ways to harass and punish my grandfather which probably led to an earlier death. Fix the system so successful people want to stay and continue investing and producing.

“You get more flies with honey than vinegar”

“The carrot works better and longer than the stick”