Full Disclosure : I am a Rick Perry supporter and I will be voting for the Republican Nominee in 2012 to defeat Barack Obama.

America may still be the greatest nation on Earth but, we are in serious trouble. Our candidates are naive enough to believe that our economy just has a bad case of the flu. Tax and budget cuts are little more than vitamin C and bed rest. The grim reality is that our economic condition more resembles metastatic cancer.  Our economy is riddled with tumors known as debt. Nearly every household, business, and every level of government is in debt.  This issue is by far the most important economic issue we have. We must solve this problem. Only a radical solution can cure our economy.

Unfortunately, our candidates do not even get close to balancing their first budget. Paying down our national debt is not even part of the conversation. However, eliminating the debt can be done fairly easily. Congress can monetize the debt. The reason they will not is the fact that monetizing our debt will create hyperinflation. That of course is a good reason but, it is not the only way to do this. We can monetize the debt and minimize inflation by thinking outside the box.

Congress must monetize both the public and private debt of the nation.  At the same time the reserve requirement must be raised from its current standard level of 10% to 100% or full-reserves.  The inflation caused by monetizing the debt would be offset by both the reserve requirement and the increased disposable income of those once burdened with servicing that debt.  The burden of taxation would also be reduced by the elimination of government debt-servicing. It would be wise to pass a constitutional ban on this debt sequestering technique to prevent its abuse.

Now that the public and private debt of the nation is gone, we now would need to prevent our nation ever getting so entrenched in debt again. I would propose that immediately after we increase the reserve requirements on the banks that we abolish the poisonous and useless Federal Reserve. Interest rates should be determined by the market alone, not a board of bureaucrats or plutocrats. After we end the Fed, as so many Ron Paul supporters cheer, we should establish a new debt-free banking system.  Banks would no longer be permitted to commit usury. Instead, the banks would invest their depositors’ savings into securities. The interest earned in a savings account will be earned from the returns on these investments after the bank takes their portion to run their business and earn a profit.  This thrift based economy would replace our credit-based economy. An economy based on the values of thrift, merit, and craft would certainly be far more productive and innovative.

While we are at it, we should probably transition to a gold standard. As soon as we have coined our usable gold reserves, we can transition to a gold standard. This would be able to be done in a fairly rapid fashion if we implement a bank holiday. Prior to the bank holiday all holders of our current fiat money, Federal Reserve Notes and coins, would be deposited in the nation’s banks. During the holiday, only debit cards will be used for transactions and the various vending machines will likely be out of order for a period of time until they can be transitioned to the gold standard.  All prices will be frozen during the bank holiday to prevent economic disruptions. Our gold reserves and fiat reserves will then be contrasted to determine the real price of gold in the fiat currency and then the gold will distributed to each bank accordingly. When all the fiat currency has been replaced, the U.S. treasury would make an official announcement informing the merchants and general public the new value of the Gold Dollar in order to make any necessary adjustments.

Finally, our trade policies need to be adjusted to stop the outsourcing of our industries overseas. We are the most productive and innovative economy in the world. Our industries and companies should dominate the world economy. Unfortunately, many nations fraudulently pretend to be free traders when they are actually mercantilists of the worst order. We have many nations that have high tariffs despite calls for free trade, other nations use value-added taxes as de-facto high tariff, others use regulations to restrict our exports, other subsidize their exports to our country or subsidize their companies, and others still use the currency as a extremely effective tariff.  China uses their weak Yuan policy as an effective over 600% tariff on our exports and an over 80% subsidy on the cost of their exports.

Therefore, we should have three types of tariffs. All tariffs must be reflexive, meaning they should adjust to counter foreign policies depending on the tariff series. A Series 1 Tariff would counter weak currencies like the Yuan (and stronger currencies). This series would not take effect until 18 months after becoming law to allow other nations to adjust the exchange rates of their currencies, creating a de-facto US Dollar or even a global gold standard. Therefore, aside from a few foolish holdouts this tariff should never generate revenue for the treasury. Series 2 Tariffs would counter foreign tariff rates on our exports and value added taxes. The rate would be reflexive to counter all adjustments in real time. This tariff would be immediately implemented and would only generate revenue if other nations continue their protectionism (continuing their greed). Finally, the Series 3 Tariff would be tagged on the goods produced by foreign firms, regardless of the location of production, to counter government subsidies the firm receives in their home country such as nationalized healthcare or subsidies like those firms such as Airbus (of course it would also help our firms by abolishing the Wagner Act).

To clarify these tariffs

Series 1 Tariff Rate = (Units of the Foreign Currency per 1 US Dollar) * 100%

Or

Series 1 Tariff Rate = (US Dollars per 1 unit of the Foreign Currency) * 100%

Series 2 Tariff Rate = Foreign Tariff Rate + Foreign Value Added Tax Rate

Series 3 Tariff Rate = (Foreign Firm’s Government Subsidies in Home Market / Foreign Firm’s Total Revenue in their Domestic Market)

Well, now that I established myself as an economic radical on the debt, the Fed, the Gold Standard, and Trade policies. Should I pack up shop and leave this site or do my insane ideas make more sense than the garbage coming out of Washington?  I am willing to further explain some details of this plan if given a specific question. I may criticize our candidates on not knowing how to really fix this economy but, we all must vote for the one that gets the nomination. It’s better to have the status quo than an economic illiterate who is running this country into a ditch and parrots the Marxist drivel of his ignorant associates. Just Saying!

So far in this nomination process we have seen the rise and decline of Rick Perry. Governor Rick Perry deserved the Presidency due to his record in Texas and in the Air Force. I believe that he never expected to run this year if at all, due to his planned back surgery. However, he felt compelled by a vast array of supporters and decided it was his duty to run. Like him or not, he is a man of conviction.

Governor Perry’s difficulties are largely related to his back surgery. If his surgery was far more significant than his campaign has led on, than he may still be in a great deal of pain. This level of pain would still be quite high until he fully recovers. His medication and pain levels likely make it difficult to concentrate when put on the spot at the debates. At speeches, his passion for his message allows him to focus on the task at hand. Since nobody is there to trip him up, he does quite well. In interviews, he is sitting down so he is relaxed and able to take tougher questions. Add in that Perry may just not be the best debater and this explains our frustrations with his faltering campaign. As I watched Perry last night on Letterman, he showed clear signs of severe back pain as he winced walking awkwardly on stage. I know this because; a family friend has severe back pain and walks like that.

Governor Perry cannot yet be counted out. He does still have a good ground game and the money to go all the way. His campaign has attempted to turn his memory lapse into a jovial PR stunt. We shall see if this pays off and allows his reboot to continue as it was. Perry did well on the rest of the debate and he must not have any significant gaffes from now on in future debates. Perry is known for making strong comebacks. So, anything is possible. His has the record and the ideas to become our next President. Those that support him, myself included, can only hope and pray, that he is able to make a comeback and that he regains his full health. Governor Perry deserves our prayers and respect. Regardless of who wins the nomination next year, Governor Perry is a good man that has done a lot of good in his service to this country. God bless you Governor and may God bless America with a better President in 2013!

GOP nomination races typically follow a particular pattern. There are usually two basic components taken into consideration, political experience, and conservative principles. Republicans do best in general elections when you can contrast conservative verses liberal/progressive ideologies. However, in nomination races often political experience trumps conservative principles. Let’s look at some races to see. In modern GOP nomination races, political experience beat conservative principles in 1976, 1980, 1988, 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2008. Also, it should be noted that Presidents beat Governors, Governors beat Senators, and Senators beat other government officials and those with successful business experience.

In 2012, once again there is a large field that is still largely in flux. There is an established pattern of the parade of Anti-Romney candidates. First, there was Michelle Bachmann. Then, there was Rick Perry. Now there is Herman Cain. It appears that Newt Gingrich is the next in line to be the Anti-Romney when conservatives inevitable find a fault in Cain. Based on the historical preference for experience in GOP nomination races we should analyze our current top four to see who would fit this mold.

Herman Cain currently leads in the polls and has a very enticing “9-9-9 plan”. Since he has not been vetted, I doubt he will have a lasting lead in the race. Cain not only faces the Icarus effect established in this race, he lacks political experience. Business experience is admirable but, this has never secured a nomination before. Only political experience matters. Therefore, even though I may eat my words, Herman Cain will not be the GOP Nominee for President in 2012.

Mitt Romney has been the default thus far in this race. He has consistently held his own against Bachmann, Perry, and now Cain. Nobody ever was able to challenge him in a way that sank his campaign. Mitt Romney’s strong suit is business experience yet as with Cain this means little by historical precedent. Mitt Romney’s administration of Massachusetts as Governor was short-lived and his legacy fundamentally lacks solid, reliable conservative credentials. Therefore, I believe Mitt Romney will not be the GOP Nominee in 2012 despite his massive war chest.

Rick Perry has fallen from grace but, can rebound since he has a mighty war chest and has yet to establish a full policy plan to restore prosperity. Thus far his energy plan sounds like a winner and very feasible if there is targeted deregulation in the energy sector. Rumors of a possible flat tax and major entitlement reforms look promising. Rick Perry has been in public office since the 1980s and has more than a decade of executive experience as Lieutenant Governor and Governor of Texas. This clearly gives Rick Perry an historical edge over Mitt Romney or Herman Cain, assuming Perry can revive his campaign.

Newt Gingrich had a hard start and has had a gradual growth in the polls over the last several months. If Herman Cain does falter, as I expect, Speaker Gingrich will be the only choice for conservatives to turn to in order to find an Anti-Romney. Newt will be rocketed to first place and he will be in either first or second place going into the first primaries. Speaker Gingrich’s extensive and long congressional career and his leadership in the House as minority whip and Speaker of the House certainly give him an edge over Cain and Romney in experience. However, his experience as Speaker may rival Perry’s experience.

By December there will be a fairly close four way race between (a range of 15-25%) Perry, Gingrich, Romney, and Cain. Herman Cain will drop to fourth place after a harsh vetting takes hold in the media and in conservative circles. By December, Cain’s “9-9-9 Plan” will become a liability except for his most loyal supporters due to this major scrutiny. Mitt Romney will drop to third place behind Rick Perry. Rick Perry will get a bump as his plan gains support and he regains his footing in the campaign, he will be either a close second or first in December. Finally, Newt Gingrich will get a major bump as Cain supporters defect. The Speaker will be in a close first or second place in December. Remember that my predictions are premised on the decline Cain and Romney giving Gingrich and Perry a bump.

It remains to be seen what the voters will think of these candidates. All I know is that only Romney and Perry can weather the race until Super Tuesday. Since Gingrich and Cain will not be able to survive long without a major influx of campaign donations.  I predict Cain dropping out to back Perry despite the ridiculous comments he’s made about Perry. Gingrich will also drop out and back Perry. Perry would win the nomination in a long race against Romney. I would love to see Newt Gingrich, Eric Cantor, John Thune, or Paul Ryan as VP, hint hint, I hope somebody is listening!  Of course this is all conjecture but, stranger things have happened.  At this point I’m confident that we will easily defeat Obama next year. That’s the goal don’t get distracted ladies and gentlemen!

I hope to be proven incorrect in my assumptions about the 9-9-9 plan. I like the bold idea of a 9% flat tax on personal and business income.  My concern stems from the 9% sales tax. I believe the plan  may cause an increase in prices overall.

Let’s use $1 worth of iron as an example. Considering that 23% of the cost of goods in the US is an embedded tax burden. The final price of $1 worth of iron in a car will today be sold at about $1.29. Under the 9% sales tax alone, assuming no imbedded business costs at each level I believe the following would occur. An Iron Ore Mining Firm sells the iron ore to a steel mill for about $1.09. The steel mill then sells the iron in the steel to an automaker for about $1.19. The automaker then sells the iron in the car to a car dealer for about $1.30. The car dealer then sells the iron in the car to a buyer for about $1.41.

Compare that to the current imbedded 29% increase over the real price of goods. Remember that there will still be an imbedded cost of the two flat 9% income taxes in the 9-9-9 plan. Let’s assume that the imbedded cost of the income taxes is 10% of the current cost instead of the current 23%. That would reduce the current price of goods to about 87% of today’s prices. That would mean about a 23% increase in prices from the 9-9-9 plan.

Assuming I’m correct about the impact of the sales tax, this price hike would hit struggling families and those on fixed incomes hard in a time of already high inflation due to failed fiscal and monetary policies. Not to mention that businesses will try to reduce their tax burden by outsourcing each stage of production outside the US. I can imagine manufacturers closing up American factories to move elsewhere. By 2015, you will be able to buy you Chinese-built Vizio TV on Amazon.com tax-free instead of wasting time and gas money driving to a Wal-Mart. Your local Ford dealer will be closed but don’t fret. Your Mexican made Ford Fusion can be bought at Ford.com tax-free. The 9-9-9 plan may just finish off our manufacturing sector and the sales tax will mean the end to all brick and mortar retail stores in favor of the ease and tax-free online purchase experience.

I like Herman Cain and I think his plan is bold and I like that he ultimately wants the Fair tax. However, I think we need more details on the sales tax. The info I got so far makes it sound like a disaster. Please, please! Somebody refute this and give me comfort enough to vote for Herman Cain! Otherwise, my vote will go elsewhere. I’m only considering Gingrich or Perry at this point. Unless Romney proves that his previous liberal iterations were actually his evil twin and arch-nemesis Chip Romney, whom had been impersonating him until this morning.

On that jovial note, I look forward to your thoughts. See I can disagree with a candidate without a hostile attack. I hope that the discussion in this thread can maintain this civil and light-hearted attitude. Remember in the end we are all on the same side. Do not let the nomination process undermine the unity we need as conservatives and Republicans in the 2012 Election.

My Immigration Policy-

For the sake of brevity, I have chosen to outline my points instead of posting my 6 page essay on this policy idea.

Illegal Immigration

1)      Secure the Border

2)      Require proven legal status or US citizenship for all legal contracts

• Such as Employment, Lease, Loan, and other legal contracts
• Utilizes systems similar to E-Verify

3)      Make violations a felony and go after all violators

4)      Deport criminal illegal aliens after bringing them to justice

Legal Immigration

1)      All immigrants must pass all medical, criminal, or psychological tests

2)      All immigrants require full financial sponsorship until they become US citizens

3)      Cap Annual Legal Immigration to 1/2,000^th the total US population as of the most recent Census (154,373)) with no concerns about diversity or national origin

4)      Create three visas categories V1 ,V2, & V3

5)      V1 – Family Visas

• Sponsored by US Citizens or Legal Residents
• Only for spouses and minor children of US Citizens or legal residents
• Cap at 60% annual cap per year

6)      V2 – Talent Visas

• Sponsored by Employers
• Cap at 30% annual cap per year
• Restricted to the elite of the world’s Engineers and Physicians
• All applicants are ranked by aptitude with the smartest given priority

7)      V3 – Charity Visas

• Refugees and those seeking Asylum
• Sponsored by Charities
• Cap at 10% annual cap per year

What do you think? Too harsh, too lenient?