Over-Achieving Capitalist of the Week: Wells Fargo

I normally don't talk about personal information, but I feel the need to talk about the latest credit card offer I received. My home mortgage is through Wells Fargo Home Mortgage services. Just today, I received a credit card offer from Wells Fargo that offered to give me rebates on my mortgage based upon the purchases I make with their card.

Below, are the bullet points of the offer:

• Earn a 1% rebate towards your home mortgage by making purchases* with the card.
• Earn a 2% rebate when using your card at gas, drugstore and grocery store purchases*.
• No annual fee.
• 0% APR for the first year, then 12.15% to 25.99% APR after.

* - Purchases minus returns/credits

So I called Wells Fargo to inquire where exactly the rebate comes from and they gave me an example, which did not make sense. Then I asked for another example, and it started to make sense. So, in return, I game them an example to see if my understanding was correct.

If I use the card for one year making only grocery store, gas station or drugstore purchases totally $5,000 but paying off the balance each month, then I will receive NO rebate towards my mortgage. However, if I carry a balance for a year totallying $5,000 of grocery/gas/drugstore purchases, then I'll get $100 towards the princple in my mortgage. Basically, I need to spend (worst case scenario of 25% APR) $6,250 plus late charges to get $100 off on my mortgage.

Wells Fargo was one of those institutions that received bail out money from the tax payers and has since paid it back. With the Fed keeping interest rates so low, the banks are still not making money like they used to so now they turn back towards their customers. Bank of America wanted to introduce a $5 monthly for using your debit card like a debit card. Wells Fargo wants you to carry a huge balance with high interest for a paltry return.

If I had known I would be insulted with an offer like this, I would not have chosen Wells Fargo as my mortgager. If you get offers like this in the mail from any bank, do yourself a favor and just shred them.

Why You Should Re-elect Barak Obama

We all know that every major presidential candidate receives campaign contributions from special interests and, upon being elected, is typically beholden to said special interest. Social, labor, defense, economic, agriculture and "from the heart" (religious) special interest groups all vie for the candidates attention and, more often than not, get that attention once their candidate is elected. When a Republican president is in office, you see moves to reduce firearm control (citing the 2nd Amendment) and restrict abortion. When a Democrat is in office, you see moves to increase firearm control (citing the symptom of urban decay i.e. poor neighborhood gang violence) and more Freedom of Choice.

No matter the party affiliation, every elected official is worried about one thing: getting re-elected. When speaking of congressional members, this scenario happens over and over. Too often, congressional members make politics their lifetime career and would rather face an easy re-election whilst making popular and fiscally unhealthy choices instead of facing a hard fought re-election bid whilst making the hard decisions (and sometimes unpopular decisions) needed to steer our country straight on social and fiscal issues.

There is one official in this country who should find re-election a liberating experience: the President of the United States. This one person is in a unique position to do the most good for our country no matter the party affiliation once they are re-elected. So long as he can survive his first term, a re-elected President might be a "lame duck", but he is also free to do what ever he wants. Seizing upon this idea, Obama's first term election promises are but a spring board to bring us "change we can believe in." The rest of this article will be broken down into broad areas for concern in our country and how they can be addressed by a liberated president. Future articles will address specifically the broad areas presented here.

Budget
Having a balanced budget is nearly impossible given the gridlock (i.e. re-election posturing) with the current two party system. Upon his start of his second term, Obama can immediately end this by pushing for a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution. Once the legal and obligatory framework is in place that requires congressional members to pass a balanced budget, Congress can get down to work of actually making a balanced budget instead of legislating a shit show and blaming it on the other party.

Once a balanced budget is mandatory, it's time to work at our back debt. Using budget numbers from 2010 (because current numbers are rife with math trickery and balance sheet magic), the United States total estimated deficit at the end of 2012 comes in around $15 trillion. Unfortunately, you can not single out one specific part of the budget to study because things like obligated medical care (entitlements) are broken up between seniors, non-seniors that don't make enough money and military (active and veterans) members. Likewise, part of the defense and veterans administration budgets are also split between the civilian and military populations for medical treatment.


To tackle such a large deficit will require a two pronged approach: making cuts in the yearly budget and addressing the total deficit apportionment. There are probably thousands of line items in each budget bill that is passed by Congress. Most people find process of looking at them all to be tedious; this includes me. But there are some larger items that immediately jump out at you.

Example 1: about 1.64% of our budget is aid to foreign countries - time to trim this budget. We can't solve the issue of fungal growth in Ethiopian crops or solve the African AIDS epidemic by throwing money at the issue. And why are we sending money to Russia or China?!? All they give us back is spam mail and cheap products made with questionable materials.

Example 2: the corporate tax code (both state and federal) is rife with loop holes created by lawmakers in the pocket of special interest groups and corporations. For example, in this country, corporations are not taxed on their gross income but, rather, are taxed on the income they do not spend at the end of their fiscal year. In the last 60 years, corporate taxes fell from more than 30% in the 1950s to 6.6% in 2009. Why did current federal revenue from income tax top out at $1.1 trillion but corporate taxes only came in at $181 billion?

Example 3: Congress (both the Senate and House) passes a new budget each year. What you may not know is that the unbalanced budget they legislate follows procedural rules that automatically raises the debt ceiling every year. In fact, Obama's re-election year budget relies on these procedural rules to further raise the debt ceiling. Time to end this bogus status quo.

Social Issues
There are many social issues to address that I will list that, at first glance, may not be typical "social" issues. But to me, they are all related. The standards, or lack of standards, and the average American's surroundings, contribute towards their perception of their life and status in life. These issues include, but not limited to: lack of national standards for education and teacher training, urban decay, gang violence, crumbling infrastructure, quality of ingredients in food, safety of food and water, local/state/federal fiscal responsibility, healthcare, etc etc etc.

As I said, I believe all these issues contribute to national social issues. An African-American or Latino youth in the inner city may not have access to safe (i.e. healthy) food or water; they may not have access to thorough or affordable healthcare; may not have access to a proper education; may not be able to walk down their street without ducking for cover from errant bullets. All of this contributes to the average inner-city's kid growing up to not give a shit because nothing changes or gets better for them. Indeed, they don't try to get the education or healthy food or healthcare or to demand better from those around them and in their governments because they grew up with people in their lives who didn't give a shit.

There is no magic band aid solution to solve this. What it does require is the people AND the government to make conscientious decisions. It requires the people to take a vested interest in their community and who is running their government. It requires the top (well-to-do and governments) and bottom (middle, working and poor classes) to better what they can and work towards each other and a better America.
Summary
At the end of the day, I don't really care who wins the presidential election. All I care about is keeping my job, paying for my house, raising my children and hoping that my fellow Americans can do the same things as I; free from apathy, government stupidity, and grossly unhealthy foods. I'm not looking for Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood or utopia, what I am looking for is people to start giving a shit. I'm looking for a leader who can actually lead and I believe that a second term President is free to do all that. I'm not willing to wait another four years for someone to be in that position again.

You Are What You Eat

I am a lot like the rest of you: I wake up, shower, eat, work and play. About 7 years ago, while I was in the Navy, I heard a rumor that the enlisted crew was getting "Grade D but edible" meat (animal skin, testicles, intestines etc). This rumor turned about to be false, but it did get me to pay attention to what I was eating. At the time, I discovered high fructose corn syrup (hfcs) and ultra high temperature processing (UHT). We all know about the damage of too much corn syrup, but UHT is relatively new to the American market.

UHT, when found as the primary or secondary ingredient in creamers and milk products, essentially allows the creamer or milk to be transported without refrigeration for several weeks. In fact, the main milk provided aboard Navy ships is UHT. On my ship we ran an experiment: we left a 5 gallon bladder of UHT out on the flight deck for two weeks then brought it in and drank it (after 30 minutes of chilling). It tasted fresh (as fresh as processed milk can taste) and the only problem came later in the form of loose stool (which is the most common side effect of consuming UHT).

But on a normal day, we wake up and start our day before work. If your sheets, pillow covers or sleeping clothes are newer, they have a trace of formaldehyde and more than a trace if you had not washed them before use. In case you didn't know, formaldehyde is what dead people are injected with during the embalming process for preservation.

So next, you might shower. What you may not know is that a chemical from your shampoo called phthalates (the plasticizing agents from shampoos and pesticides and vinyl shower curtains), go down the drain and to the sewage processing plants where they do not break down. Once the sewage dries out, those soap chemicals (along with chemicals from medicine and pills flushed down the drain) hang out with the processed poo in sewage sludge, which is then left out to dry in a field. After it is dried out for a few months, farmers buy said sludge and put it on their corn fields as fertilizer. Thankfully, the FDA does not allow corn for human consumption to be fertilized with our own waste. However, they do allow cows to eat the corn. Next time you drink a glass of real milk or eat a hamburger, you may be taking in the soap from your shower last year or taking in the xanax or anti-depressants your neighbor got rid of down the toilet. Phthalate exposure, even in small amounts, has been linked to behavioral problems in children, allergies and asthma, eczema, and unhealthy changes in our hormonal systems.

Well, you've done a proper wash and now you are ready for breakfast. But have you had your beaver anal gland juice yet today? Perhaps you have. It's a bitter, smelly, orange-brown substance known as castoreum. In nature, it's combined with the beaver's urine and used to mark its territory. For us, it's used extensively in processed food and beverages, typically as vanilla or raspberry flavoring. This gross ingredient won't show up on the label. Instead, companies use it in making processed food list it as "natural flavoring." This poses a dilemma for vegans and vegetarians—and anyone who wants to avoid eating any creature's anal excretions.

Do you find Golden Grahams or Cinnamon Toast Crunch tasty? Or perhaps you might chew some Orbit Gum after lunch? Then you are taking in Butylated Hydroxyanisole (BHA) and Butylated Hydroxytoluene (BHT). These are petroleum derived anti-oxidants and preservatives. The Department of Health and Human Services says BHA is “reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen," yet the FDA allows it to be used anyway. BHT is considered less dangerous, but in animal research, it too has resulted in cancer. Oddly, the chemicals aren’t even always necessary; in most cases they can be replaced with vitamin E.

On to lunch time and perhaps a white bread sandwich. Most of your white breads or other processed grain products contain an additive called L-cysteine, which is a non-essential amino acid. Most often this additive comes from China in the form of dissolved human hair or other places in the form of duck feathers. Food manufacturers use the ingredient as a commercial dough conditioner, meant to improve the texture of breads and baked goods. Eating something derived from the human body violates the religious and ethical beliefs of Muslims and vegans.

If you are having just a salad with ranch dressing or perhaps a piece of cake with vanilla frosting, I'm sure you're eating it for the titanium dioxide. Big food corporations often add titanium dioxide—commonly found in paints and sunscreens—to processed foods like salad dressing, coffee creamers, and canned icing to make them appear whiter. Titanium dioxide is a component of the metallic element titanium (plus two oxygens), but more importantly, mining companies typically use lead in their extraction and purification process. If you are using that ranch dressing for the lead, you might as well just chew on an old pipe.

Perhaps you've fasted the entire day to have a nice juicy aged steak with some mushrooms for flavoring. The FDA legally allows 19 maggots—tiny, rice-shaped fly larvae that feast on rotting foods—and 74 mites in every 3.5-ounce can of mushrooms. So when you order an "aged steak" or pop open a can of mushrooms, this is what you are getting. While maggots do have their place in the medical world, most of us would agree that they don’t have a place in our mouths. Opt for fresh mushrooms instead, and if you need another reason to ditch canned goods, consider this: most are lined with bisphenol A (or BPA), a plastic chemical that causes unnatural hormonal changes linked to heart attacks, obesity, and certain cancers

If you think dessert is the prime meal of the day, you might consider one of my favorites: carrot cake. Most store bought carrot cake mixes, and indeed most cereals, contain artificial food dyes. Many artificial food dyes—found in hundreds of everyday foods—are made from petroleum-derived materials. Food producers use these chemical dyes in cereals and candy to make them more “fun” for kids, in pickles to make them appear fresher, and in place of real ingredients in a variety of other packaged foods. For example, Betty Crocker Carrot Cake Mix, is actually a carrot-free product with “carrot flavored pieces” cooked up from corn syrup and artificial colors Yellow 6 and Red 40. Orange and purple food dyes have been shown to impair brain function, and other dyes have been linked to ADHD and behavioral problems in kids, as well as brain-cell toxicity. And not only are these additives potentially hazardous, but they’re also a rip-off! It’s cheaper for food companies to use fake dyes in place of real ingredients, so you end up with food frauds like Tropicana Twister Cherry Berry Blast, a “juice” product without a trace of cherry or berry juice.

By now, I sense you might be disgusted in what you are consuming, so imagine this: a hot summer day in July. It's sunny, the sky is blue and in the distance you hear the ice cream man coming. You pony up to the truck and get a cold and tasty Creamsicle. Or, perhaps if you are watching your figure, you might indulge in a Weight Watchers Giant Chocolate Fudge Ice Cream Bar. Well, I'm sure you are eating it for the Carrageenan. It is a seaweed byproduct (waste product more accurately, until they found a use for it in ice cream) that is used as a thickener and emulsifier. Through animal studies, it has been linked to cancer, colon trouble, and ulcers.

At this point, I'm kind of disgusted with foods so I may fall back to a comfort food. In this case, it is a drink from my local Cold Stone Creamery called a Peanut Butter and Chocolate Shake ... large of course. But wait, what does CSC's page list the nutritional information as: 1,750 calories, 118 g fat (64 g saturated, 2 g trans) and 140 g sugars. This one drink does pack more calories than a dozen ice cream sandwiches and more saturated fat than nearly 20 large orders of McDonald's French fries

At the end of the day, it is up to YOU to know what you are putting in your body. Take responsibility for you, your children and loved ones. Know what you are eating and know what it will do to you. Do not overload you or your children with high fructose drinks and then wonder why your asses are so fat or why your waist line looks like a freshly baked muffin as it spills over your belt.

Take action to know what you are eating, but more importantly, take responsibility for your health and safety. Essentially abusing your body with food choices that kill you slowly means you'll die a horrible, drawn out death where your body gradually fails you. Actually, never mind the slow death; your choices are making the rest of our health insurance premiums go up. Normally I wouldn't presume to tell anyone what to eat or drink, but now it comes down to money. I'm not willing to pay more money so you can be stupid,

Greek Catastrophe and American Gridlock

The latest budget proposal by President Obama is more of a political maneuver than anything. He knows Congress will not pass it. If we were to leave the federal budget where it is for 10 years, our total debt would rise from $15.3 trillion to $28.4 trillion. Under the Obama plan (tax hikes on the rich coupled with tighter defense spending {spending already being wound down with troop withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan!!!}) our total debt in 10 years would ONLY be about $26 trillion. I'm not sure about the rest of you, but I'd rather actually lower the debt vice choose either unacceptable poisons.

So that leaves it to the GOP to solve the problem, right? Wrong. I'd love to say the GOP have a plan to cut through the gridlock and idiocracy to drive these big debt numbers down, but they do not. Unfortunately, the GOP are as stubborn about opposing any tax increases (specifically on the rich) as the Democrats are about expanding government hand outs in our daily lives (i.e. more entitlement programs).

Just recently, Congress struggled to reach consensus on giving the average American an extension of the Bush era tax cut ($20 a week extra in their paycheck). The likely effects of this tax break will further weaken Social Security entitlements, which rely on this tax, and make taxpayers borrow themselves even further into debt in order to pay for their own tax break. Both parties know this is an unaffordable tax cut and ending it might offend voters who care more about an extra $20 a week than the financial burden they put upon their future selves and future generations.

Offend voters? In an election year?!? They can't have that.

So that means, effectively, our federal legislative and executive branches have stopped governing until the day after elections in November. Both parties are now on automatic pilot; more worried about storing mud to sling whilst campaigning than they are about talking with their constituents and looking for new ideas to stave off our future economic collapse. They are looking for a voter mandate (party with a clear majority) before tackling big government, our antiquated and convoluted tax code, executive branch agencies that answer to no one except the President (I'm looking at you FDA and FCC), and government hand outs <cough> I mean, Social Security.

The future we are facing by keeping the status quo is almost unfathomable for most Americans, though they already are seeing it on news programs on TV: Greece and other indebted Euro countries. The scenes from abroad with rock throwing youths and riot police meeting them head on is yet too distant for Washington to take notice of. Rest assured that Washington can be relied upon to roll up their sleeves and do one of two things: completely ignore the problem or completely run a good/bad idea into the ground.

There is a third option: action. It is clear that those in the majority and minority in Washington are not able or willing to act. It is clear that our federal shepherds are failing us. This is where the common man can help by talking to their state and federal representatives and senators. We can wait for the youths of this country to clash with riot police amidst flames and rock throwing. Or we can lead our politicians in the direction we want this country to go in.

Religion and Birth Control

The Obama Administration recently issued an Executive Order stating that church affiliated employers must cover birth control regardless of their religious princples.

For religious-affiliated employers, the requirement will take effect Aug. 1, 2013, and their workers in most cases will have access to coverage starting Jan. 1, 2014. Women working for secular enterprises, from profit-making companies to government, will have access to the new coverage starting Jan. 1, 2013, in most cases.

Workplace health plans will have to cover all forms of contraception approved by the Food and Drug Administration, ranging from the pill to implantable devices to sterilization. Also covered is the morning-after pill, which can prevent pregnancy after unprotected sex and is considered tantamount to an abortion drug by some religious conservatives.

As expected, there was publich outrage from all sectors.

House Speaker John Boehner (Ohio - R) - "I think this mandate violates our Constitution. I think it violates the rights of these religious organizations. And I would hope that the administration would back up and take another look."

Rep. Joe Walsh (IL 8th District - R) - "This is a slap in the face of every U.S. employer and religious institution. The president seems to have forgotten that this country was founded on religious freedom. This decision goes against that and everything this country stands for."

Bishop William Murphy of Rockville Centre, N.Y., called the requirement “a radical incursion on the part of our government into freedom of conscience.”

Bishop David Zubik of Pittsburgh wrote that “the Obama administration was essentially saying `to hell with you,’ particularly to the Catholic community by dismissing our beliefs, our religious freedom and our freedom of conscience.”

Next, we have a quote from Kristen Day, the Executive Director for Democrats for Life of America (the pro-life Democrat congressional members and a key swing vote in approving Obama-care). "Forcing religious institutions to provide insurance coverage for services that are directly in opposition to their moral beliefs is very clearly wrong."

I'm not even sure where to begin with all this. On reflection, I do know where to start: with the Constitution and ratified Amendments. In the Constitution, the only reference to religion is that no religious test shall be required for office. In the Bill of Rights and subsequent amendments, there is only one mention of religion and it is in the First Amendment, which reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ..."

So, is a religious test being required for public office? No. Is Congress making a law about the establishment of religion or prohibiting anyone from practicing the religion of their choice. No.

Speaker Boehner, on this issue, is incorrect in saying that this goes against the Constitution. Rep. Walsh is incorrect in saying this decision goes against religious freedom. But again, they are from the opposition in the two party system our country enjoys.

Now we get into the rhetoric filled middle ground or, as I like to call it, the rhetor-ground. Obviously, Bishop Murphy and Zubik are toeing the religious line spouting all kinds of charged rhetoric. Besides being filled with line toers, this ground is also filled with people giving tidy sound bites that don't really say anything and, quite often, is done so in language that exudes arrogance. As if their position is, quite obviously (to them), the correct one, they use language like "radical incursion" or "very clearly" coupled with phrases like "dismissing our beliefs" or "freedom of conscience." For example, a rhetor-grounder might say, "this is a radical incursion on our freedom of conscience and, very clearly, he is dismissing our beliefs." The rhetor-ground uses charged language with no actual facts other than a decision was made that hurt someone's feelings..

So let's get to the facts. This country was founded on freedom of religion. You, me and everyone else here can practice any religion they want to and, for tax purposes, can even be a clergy member and start a church. Regardless of your opinion on Obama-care (I oppose it), it will be in effect soon, and this executive order is in line with previously passed and signed into law legislation. If you (the proverbial "you") are a church or direct religious insitution, you are exempt from this mandate. If you are a church-run soup kitchen or youth group, then you must provide health insurance that offers birth control to females.

In my opinion, this country was founded also on liberty, or a freedom of choice. That is to say, to have all options available and none, save the most extreme, denied to you.

Just beause there is freedom of religion and freedom to use as much or as little health care as an individual sees fit, does not mean that religion has the freedom to dictate how much or little health care it can provide to its employees. The religious organizations, in voicing their opposition, are showing little faith in their employees and members practicing their doctrines. Just because birth control is mandatory coverage does not neccessarily mean the employees will choose to use it. The conservatives and church groups always say "you gotta have faith." Well, show a little faith in your followers for once by letting them choose the the "right" path instead of giving them only one path. If you want to claim the protection of freedom of religion, then remember to also allow your people some liberty.