THE ECONOMIC STIMULUS THAT WASN’T
By Bob Confer

Confer Plastics is doing relatively well right now. Custom molding sales are up. Employment is up. And, we’re buying one of the largest blow molding machines in North America.

If the Obama administration knew this I could only imagine the outcome. Without a doubt, one of their public relations gurus would attribute this growth to the $787 billion stimulus package introduced earlier this year. I’d hate to burst their bubble, but Confer Plastics is succeeding not because of the stimulus. We’re succeeding in spite of it.

The company is healthy because we do what any other business does when the going gets tough (or even when the times are good): You dig in your heels against the economic situation, streamline your operations, develop new products or services and leverage the strengths of your people and assets to attract new customers.

We didn’t sit back and hope that a poorly misguided use of government intervention would make consumers open their pocketbooks. Frankly, we knew that the stimulus would do nothing to excite the average consumer and, truthfully, it hasn’t.

I can say that with confidence by analyzing the various components of our client base. Despite our successes, most all of our pre-existing lines are down in revenues, mirroring the continued decline in the economy. Swimming pool ladders and steps, for example, which have long been a mainstay of our business, are down by almost 30 percent since 2006. It’s a product line that indicates how much discretionary income families do or do not have. Homeowners just don’t have the money available to buy swimming pools anymore. In this recession they’ve been transformed from a relatively common purchase to a luxury item. It’s a change in buying behavior that consumers are applying to countless goods and services. Had they truly been stimulated, they would have abandoned this practice.

We’re not alone in this distrust of the stimulus. Most small businesses like ours have seen no benefit whatsoever from it. Many surveys point to this fact. In July’s Empire State Manufacturing Survey – one of the key economic indicators issued by the Federal Reserve – only 10 percent of respondents said that the stimulus had a positive effect on their revenues. That number is lower in a July survey conducted by the National Small Business Association. Only 3 percent of their participants saw an up tick in business activity because of Obama’s plan. Worse yet, in that very same survey, 42 percent of the respondents have no confidence in their business’ financial future. Surveys like those reflect the harsh reality of the continued decay of the economy (a 3.9 percent shrinkage in the last twelve months) and escalation in unemployment (it’s a smidge under 10 percent nationally).

It’s obvious that the estimated impact of stimulus – that it will create or save 3.5 million jobs – was a pipedream, at least in the business world. Government employment is the only job sector that has seen an increase in activity as numerous teaching, road construction, police and administrative jobs have been created or retained in local and state governments throughout the country, averaging over 10,000 new jobs a month.

It should be noted that there is no good news to be found in that. The government is a drain on the private sector, stifling innovation and consumer and business spending by taking-away usable assets through taxation and decreasing the value of money through inflation while redirecting those funds into the public sector where innovation and advancement of our society and technology does not occur.

This vast transfer of wealth – one that will only grow with government health care and a potential second stimulus package - will only lengthen the recession because it will guarantee that money will not be put to its best use. If vast government spending and a bureaucratic control of the economy were the keys to economic prosperity, the USSR would have become the greatest society this world has ever known. Instead, it flamed out in a hurry and left millions of people in despair.

We can’t follow that same path. We need to stop putting blind faith in our government. It cannot and will not bring us out of the recession. What can and will save us are the same things that took our economy to its great heights and made ours the greatest society ever -- the timeless American values of ingenuity and work ethic being applied in a free marketplace. It’s something called “capitalism”…and it’s the real economic stimulus!   

THE MILITARY: COMING TO A NEIGHBORHOOD NEAR YOU

By Bob Confer

The July 25, 2009 edition of the New York Times dropped a bombshell about the war on terror and its subsequent war on the Constitution. The Times reported that then vice-president Cheney and Defense Department executives pushed hard for the use of military force to bring in the Lackawanna Six in 2002. This use of force was ultimately denied by President Bush who exercised some sense and utilized, instead, the FBI.      

We here in Western New York are at what would have been ground zero for the invasion. But, you wouldn’t know it. There has been little public outcry over the Times’ story. There haven’t been any follow-up stories in the local radio, television and print news outlets. The blogosphere has been unusually tame. Even the talk at water coolers and diners hasn’t addressed the issue as one would have assumed. It’s almost as if people don’t care.

Maybe that indifference can be chalked-up to the fact that the military occupation never happened, that it was only an idea being discussed by the Bush Administration. Chances are good, too, that the disinterest can be attributed to the new mindset of the American citizen, the belief by many that it’s perfectly fine for liberty to be forsaken for the (perceived) sense of security. They might be comforted by the thought of the armed forces busting the terrorists and “teaching them a lesson.”

This topic does deserve discussion and an ongoing one at that. It may have been just an idea, but it was so very close to becoming a reality, one that wasn’t carried out in 2002 but could easily be carried out now and in the future. 

Had the army actually visited the Buffalo suburb I think things would have been quite different. People would have been pretty upset. Imagine the tranquility of a typical September day in suburban New York being upset by the rumbling of tanks and Humvees making their way down Main Street. Imagine the horror of the Lackawanna residents, wondering why their sidewalks and lawns were teeming with armed soldiers. Imagine the nightmare that could have occurred had the Lackawanna Six saw the troops coming, instead of being caught off-guard by the more clandestine FBI: It might have been the second coming of Waco, but only in a more populated area, putting thousands of citizens in harm’s way.  

I have nothing but the utmost respect for our men and women in the military, but their responsibilities and duties have their place and Downtown USA is not it. It’s illogical to roll out the forces to arrest a handful of individuals. Worse yet, it’s highly illegal.

For starters, an arrest carried out as military action on American soil sullies the Fourth Amendment. The Fourth protects every one of us – guilty or not – from unabated government intrusion. It notes, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

The capture of the Lackawanna cell would have broken every component of the Amendment. Many would say that they were terrorists – enemies of the USA – and not worthy of the same rights that we all share. That sort of logic is misguided. The terrorists were, at the time, still suspects (they had not yet been found guilty) and breaking the rules for one class of citizen or crime can set a precedent whereby law-abiding citizens can be subjected to the same sort of seizure and arrest. Refer to the definitions of terrorists issued in numerous federal reports this year. Any one of us could be labeled an enemy of the state.

Beyond the Constitution itself, law was instituted in 1878 to prevent such an exercise of force. The Posse Comitatus Act limits military action on non-federal property in the United States and excludes them from carrying out arrests and other police-like activity unless authorized by the Constitution or an act of Congress.

The Lackawanna arrest would not have met those criteria, making the military action illegal.

Or so we thought.

Aiding Cheney in his cause were members of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel who wrote that the President could do what he wanted, regardless of the Constitution or Posse Comitatus, because he was granted special powers to tackle September 11-era terror threats anywhere on Earth, whether abroad or on American soil.   

Basically, the puppeteers in administrations past, present and future believe that laws and rights mean nothing to the government and they can contort them to satisfy any need they might have, as long as the majority of the population can be made willing. So, be careful, the military might one day come to a neighborhood near you.   

THE SUMMER OF ’09: WHAT GLOBAL WARMING?
By Bob Confer

The family and I were supposed to go on vacation in northern Saskatchewan in mid-June. A few days before we were to fly out we received a phone call from the camp’s owner who said we’d have to postpone the trip. The lake was covered by four feet of ice!

So, we went there a couple of weeks back. Not surprisingly, the lake still had mammoth sheets of ice floating on it on July 11. Mind you, this was not the tundra. It’s a lake that’s normally ice-free by the end of May.

That delay to the start to the summer is reminiscent of what has happened on the home front. After a lengthy, very cold winter, most Western New Yorkers were suffering from cabin fever and looking forward to getting outside and enjoying those oh-so-few months of sun and warmth. For many, 2009 has been a real letdown. Our summer has often seemed nonexistent and just a run-off of our spring. By any standard it has been unusually cool with nippy nights and temperate days.

Personally, you won’t hear me complaining about 50-degree sleeping weather or daytime highs around 70, but most folks don’t dig that. Professionally, though, I don’t either; it’s hurting my business. Those who find it a little too frigid haven’t opened their swimming pools or invested in a hot tub, which in turn has prevented Confer Plastics from selling the products they need to enter those watery retreats from the summer heat. Day-in and day-out we hear from pool and spa professionals in the Northeast and Midwest that this has been one of the coldest summers in recent memory. Because of that, our pool/spa-related sales are down about 7 percent versus last year. 

Our industry is not alone in a loss that is independent of the slow economy. Outdoor-dining venues have taken a beating. Summer retail sales hit such lows that stores began discounting weeks earlier than they normally would.

These are not just anecdotal references about the state of the environment. The statistics can back them up.

The Buffalo-Niagara region had only 6 days of 80-degree heat by mid-July when almost 20 of them are typical by that point in time. Atlantic City had its third-wettest June ever, which was the Northeast’s coldest in 27 years. Even the usually-balmy Southwest had its coldest June in 42 years.

This trend hasn’t ended, either. July weekly temps in the upper Midwest were 10 degrees below average. Canada’s temperatures have been well below normal since December and gardeners and farmers in central Alberta actually had to deal with frost a week and a half ago.   

This weather is definitely not normal.

The press, the environmentalists, the Left, Al Gore…they all knew it would be abnormal. But, even so, they were wrong. Dead wrong. This year’s climate trend has been the exact opposite of what the global warming alarmists have been calling for. We were supposed to be facing deadly heat and droughts. Instead, we’re looking at lower temps and lots of rainfall throughout North America.

This year’s cool weather hasn’t been the only tell-tale sign of their errors. Remember Hurricane Katrina? Wasn’t that storm supposed to usher in a new era of relentless and deadly storms? Hurricane seasons have been downright tame since then.

This general cooling is comforting in a way. For starters, it’s nice to know the environment isn’t taking a beating and heading down a never-ending path of overheating and absolute destruction. And, secondly, it has shown that I and other naysayers (often deemed “idiots” by the Green people) have been right all along: Global Warming is not the gospel, it’s a flawed belief.  

Most people in Middle America are practical souls and have never fully believed in the nonsense and fear mongering of the Inconvenient Truth and its zombie-like following in academia and the media. But, sadly, policy-makers aren’t so logical and have tuned-out the not-so-hot real world. They continue to believe in the questionable science of Gore’s doomsday prophecy while pushing for equally-cartoonish and oppressive regulations such as CAFE and Cap-and-Trade.

I think that before they go any further with such laws they need to get out of the Capitol Building and spend some time in the great outdoors. Then, we’ll see what they really think about global warming.

THE FEDERAL ASSAULT ON FARMS
By Bob Confer

As the recession presses on, in conjunction with the overblown fear of global warming, we witness the government continually changing the rules of the game to doing business. It has instituted - and will continue to institute - rigid controls over banking and finance in an effort to suppress risk-tasking while, at the same time, extending oversight on manufacturers and consumers who might be putting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. 

It seemed that the only business sector that was safe from Big Brother’s meddling hand was one of Mankind’s oldest pursuits: agriculture. But, things have changed. Farming is now in the sights of Uncle Sam. Once again using fear as a tactic to claim control over our day-to-day lives, Congress has introduced bill HR 2749 (the Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009) that it says will prevent the spread of E coli, Mad Cow and the like by empowering the Food and Drug Administration to regulate farms of all sizes. As with anything the federal government is wont to do, it’s not the threat of the disease we should fear but rather the government itself. HR 2749 would give the FDA almost unlimited power that would touch on every facet of a farm’s operation.

It starts, like all federal activities do, with registration. Any facility that holds, processes, or manufactures food would have to register on annual basis with the government to the tune of $500. This regulation would extend to any person or small enterprise selling their “manufactured” foods (which include breads and cheeses) at a local farmers market. That is a burdensome fee, especially to all the small vendors who would consider themselves lucky to surpass $500 in sales during a bountiful season. The fee will put many folks, especially the roadside stands, out of business.

The next step in the federal takeover is tracking. This bill would establish a food tracing system that would require farms and food producers, large and small, to track the origins of their food, whether they grew it or it was previously distributed. Extensive records would need to be maintained that show exactly where the fruits and vegetables came from, how they were grown, how they were stored and just who they were sold to. Based on that, all registered farms would be subject to warrantless searches whereby the FDA would have carte blanche to analyze all of their private records to verify appropriate tracking.

That same FDA also thinks that it knows farming better than the farmers do, so the Act would allow the agency to regulate how crops are raised and harvested. Many believe that the FDA would follow standards introduced by the World Trade Organization which, among other things, would ban manure use and require the chemical enhancement of crops and cattle. Farmers would be forced to abandon practices that have been safely used to feed people for generations.

If by chance the FDA did discover a contamination, the bill would empower the government to create a police state to suppress an outbreak. They would have the ability to quarantine an entire geographic region and prevent the movement of produce in and out of the designated area. If one farm in a given town was shown to provide tainted foods all other farms in that town would need to cease operations while the government’s investigation takes place. If that happens during that small and crucial window of time when crops need to be harvested or food producers need to be supplied the farmers will lose out on their livelihood.

To the farmer, the Act amounts to a massive loss of rights. It’s comparable to the Patriot Act of agriculture. It looks at what they do with a fine-toothed comb and demands that they conform to a set of practices laid out by an oppressive federal agency.

To the consumer, the Act means higher prices at the grocery store. The new rules and regulations will only add to the cost of doing business. And, don’t forget, the government has already forced food prices through the roof in recent years thanks to inflation caused by bad monetary policy and the ill-advised pursuit of ethanol which caused corn, corn products, and everything that eats corn (chicken, swine and cattle) to go up in value.

HR 2749 is just another in a long line of attacks on capitalism and freedom in the United States of America. But, there’s still a chance to stop it. You must write or call your congressperson and ask him or her to vote against the Act. If they don’t, farmers – and consumers – everywhere will suffer.   

THE EPA VS. BOATS, MOWERS AND JOBS
By Bob Confer

We’ve been told time and time again that the exhaust from gas-powered engines used in our vehicles contributes to the degradation of the environment. In the 1970’s we were told that the excessive fumes would cool the Earth and bring on a new ice age. In the 1990’s and 2000’s the tune switched: The carbon dioxide would warm the Earth, melt the polar ice caps and bring on mass starvation.

With Al Gore and similar Chicken Littles relentlessly driving that point home, regulatory agencies tend to overact. After all, if they don’t do something, that one-degree difference in air temperature might condemn a billion people to death. That’s where folks like the California Air Resource Board come in to devise some truly-ridiculous regulations.

CARB somehow got it in their heads that your fuel tanks and powered-equipment not only contribute to global warming when they’re running, but also when they are not. They believe that the plastic tanks and hoses used on your lawn tractor and boat breathe incredible amounts of gas fumes to the air on a non-stop basis. Sure, they might pass some gas through a vented cap or a loose-fitting hose but that’s not what CARB focused on. Instead, they analyzed the gas molecules that gradually work their way through the walls of the tanks or the bodies of the hose. It sounds too nutty to be true, but the CARB people became adamant that those ultra-microscopic particles are killing the atmosphere and, in turn, polar bears. So, laws were devised in California that would stop this fiendish assault on the environment.

Sadly, the Environmental Protection Agency ate-up this tripe and decided to introduce similar standards at the federal level for mowers and watercraft, beginning in 2011. That means pricy changes to the products themselves, both to the manufacturer and the consumer. 

Manufacturers like Biggs & Stratton must offer products that do not lend themselves to diurnal emissions, requiring significant changes to the make-up of the goods. It could mean new fuel tanks. To do that, they and their suppliers will have to ditch the basic technology that’s been used for decades. Most tanks will need to be manufactured in a multi-layer manufacturing process, much like a ketchup bottle but in a larger scale.

Because of the investment in manufacturing equipment, most of their suppliers will no longer make fuel tanks. You can see that locally…right here at my company. We’ve been making gas tanks since the 1970’s. 2010 will be the last year we do that. The new-fangled machines necessary to mold what the EPA wants would cost us over $4 million. In comparison, the machine that makes them as they are right now would cost less than a million. It doesn’t take an accountant to see that purchasing the new machine is a poor investment. The payback would occur well after a dozen years. Because of that, we will lose that portion of the business and a few Western New Yorkers will lose their job thanks to the EPA. Other manufacturers will follow suit and only those willing to go out on a limb and buy a new line will be making tanks any more, that is, if their finances, already affected by the recession, can assume the risk for the long-term.

But enough about me and the business world. What about you?

The new tanks and hoses (in conjunction with catalytic converters, which represent another way to meet the standard) will add significantly to the cost of lawnmower. CARB says the law will make a push mower $50 more expensive. The EPA says a riding mower will be $100 more expensive.

Chances are, when you’re done mowing the lawn you want to get out on the water and relax. That’s when the new law really kicks you. It will make a portable marine fuel tank twice as costly or add $280 to the cost of an outboard engine and $360 to a jet ski.

If you don’t find that to be bothersome enough, realize that if the mower manufacturers go to catalytic converters they might make the environment even worse. The EPA’s proponents state that those engines run hotter, so they increase the risk of fire when cutting near lawn debris (like dead grass or leaves) or in a dry place (like California).

Sometimes, with laws like this, you just need to sit back and see how oppressive – and stupid – our government has become. You could beat them at their own game, though, and buy your next mower, boat, or fuel tank this year or next. Not only will you be stimulating the economy, but you’ll be stimulating the atmosphere, too.

HOW TO SHRINK OUR GOVERNMENT
By Bob Confer

The New York State Senate has been at a standstill since June 8. Lost amidst all the well-deserved bad press surrounding the coup is the fact that just a few days earlier the Assembly and Senate had passed a bill that is one of the best of this session if not of all sessions of recent memory. The bill, penned not by a legislator but by attorney general Andrew Cuomo, is called the New York Reorganization and Empowerment Act and it makes it easier to consolidate or dissolve local governments in the Empire State. It has since been signed into being by Governor David Paterson and it goes into effect in late-March of 2010.

The bill addresses one of the greatest problems facing NY residents…local governments that are many and redundant, creating undue tax burdens. According to Cuomo’s office there are 10,521 local government entities in the state, representing towns, villages and special districts (such as water and refuse) many of them offering the very same services as a neighboring community, some better than others. Highlighting this duplication of efforts, there are 6,900 town special districts across the state while there are only 932 towns. According to a commission that was created by former Governor Eliot Spitzer to look into this, some $1 billion in annual savings could be had through a wide variety of consolidation measures. That’s $1 billion in property tax payments, the same mammoth tax bills that make real estate a poor investment in NY and drive people from our borders.

Unlike most state laws, this one is not a mandate. It’s not the State coming down on towns telling them they should dissolve and combine. No, this is something rather refreshing. It’s an old-school bill that recognizes that the real power comes from the people and not from the top down. It allows everyday average citizens to initiate the change necessary to make living in New York a little more palatable.

How does it work?

Suppose you live in Hartland and you wonder why you can’t share services with the town of Royalton, a similarly-rural and undeveloped town. They share a school-district, so why couldn’t these two towns that already have a common bond become one? To go about starting the process, you could ask the towns’ councils to pursue the process, during which they would have to ask for voter approval.

If the councilmen and women found your idea to be a little harebrained (or a threat to their power) and did not advance the discussion, you could advance it on your own. To do so, you would need to start a petition drive. You would need to collect signatures from 10 percent of those living in Royalton and 10 percent of those living in Hartland. Once that task is done, it goes to the polls. If a majority of the electors vote in favor of dissolution and consolidation, the town leaders must create a plan to move ahead with the cause.

Similarly, you can apply this effort to special districts as well and eliminate them within your towns. Due to special district dissolution being less threatening than town dissolution, there is one difference between the processes: If it has been initiated by the governing body, a voter referendum is not necessary. 

It sounds easy enough, but, realize it has been a long time coming. When the Reorganization and Empowerment Act becomes law in 2010 it will have been 75 years since the State’s Mastick Commission first noted there were far too many local governments in New York. Think about that: State leaders have known about this problem since the Great Depression and up until now, no one had done a thing about it. But, things have changed and so have our people. In this day and age of Tea Parties, irate taxpayers, and a generally-disgusted electorate, there are plenty of individuals chomping at the bit to use this great tool by which they can put a little bit of power back into our hands. Understand, though, that it’s not a perfect bill. It doesn’t allow us to act on the elimination or combination of cities, counties, or school districts, the latter being the largest portion of our property tax bills. But, it’s a start nonetheless.

RANDOM THOUGHTS FROM BOB CONFER
By Bob Confer

Here are a few things that have been on my mind….

A few weeks ago President Obama visited Nellis Air Force Base where he applauded their 140-acre solar array. He said we need more solar energy systems just like that one. Don’t the green energy and environmentalist crowds realize that every gigantic solar array, whether it’s as large as Nellis’ or one-tenth that size, will destroy and replace that many acres of the environment, be it forest, grassland, field, or desert?

*****

How many of the hundreds of Wheatfield residents who vehemently opposed housing for low-income earners in 2006 and 2007 have now become, as a direct result of the recession, the very kind of individual they did not welcome to their neighborhood? 

****

Am I the only one who finds humor in the hypocrisy of the two-party system when it comes to human life? The Republicans like war and the death penalty while bemoaning abortion. The Democrats hate war and the death penalty yet like abortion.

****

In the past 100-plus years not a single president or member of congress has followed the Constitution. Federal organizations like the Department of Education and the EPA are totally unconstitutional, as are activities like surveillance of innocent civilians, pork barrel spending and the bailing out of banks and auto companies. That said, why don’t we charge federal elected officials with treason for failure to uphold their oath of office, one which asks them to support and defend the Constitution?

****

Is reality TV so successful because Americans enjoy watching people fail?

****

If the government can force employers to collect income taxes and garnishments why can’t the employer charge a fee to the government for the services of that debt collection?

****

Why is Americorps considered “service” or “volunteerism” if people are getting paid to do it?

****

Some veterans have recently come up ill with blood-borne diseases like hepatitis and HIV because VA hospitals and clinics did not properly clean their colonoscopy equipment. That begs two questions. One, is this the best care that we can offer our vets? And, two, does government-run health care (which is what the VA’s are) still look attractive to you?

****

When businesses expand or come to the area, people go out of their way to thank the elected officials for all the new jobs. Last I knew, politicians don’t create jobs, the private sector does. As a matter of fact, many will argue that politicians stifle job growth. That said, has anyone ever gone out of their way to thank the entrepreneurs for the new jobs?

*****

If my company had a known carcinogen in the workplace’s air, we’d have to outfit all of our coworkers with masks and respirators. My question is: Prior to the smoking ban, why weren’t bars required to outfit their bartenders and wait staff with masks and respirators since there were extremely high levels of a known carcinogen (cigarette smoke) in their air?

****

If China’s currency manipulation is so evil, why is it OK for the United States and the Federal Reserve to manipulate our money supply?

****

We know that people have been leaving Western New York in droves, so why does it seem that new complexes and developments are always being built?

****

Why don’t taxpayers get an interest payment from the government when they receive their tax refund? Shouldn’t Uncle Sam pay for borrowing your money, just like a bank or debtor would?

YOUR CELL PHONE AS INCOME
By Bob Confer, www.BobConfer.net

Cell phones have become a ubiquitous part of the workday. Many businesses give them to their sales and service personnel so they can be in constant contact with their coworkers and customers.  Cells have become as equally popular in the public sector as many municipalities use them to deploy and keep tabs on their work crews. Recent estimates show that more than 6 million Americans are provided cell phones by their employers.

According to the Internal Revenue Service, that’s 6 million people who should be paying an income tax for that work tool. A law on the books since 1989 empowers the IRS to collect income taxes on cell phones, putting them in the listed property category along with the likes of company-provided vehicles. In their eyes, a cell phone easily lends itself to personal use so a portion of its cost should be designated as a perk for that employee.

Back in the early-1990’s it was a tax that was relatively-easy to enforce because, back then, cellular phones were clunky, expensive luxury items that few small businesses or the self-employed could afford. But the times have changed. Developments in technology have made the phones truly portable and affordable so, now, a great many employers issue them to their workers. Some have even abandoned landlines entirely.

Despite that explosion in cellular usage, tax collections have been lethargic. Most employers are unaware that a portion of a work-related cell phone is taxable, so the IRS has not seen the revenues that should be expected. The agency has been making it a point to change that of late, motivated by the almighty dollar. Since the start of the recession the federal government has brought in less money due to job cuts and shortened workweeks. To make up for that loss of income, the IRS has directed its staff to focus on fraud and lesser-known taxes like this one. So, they have been looking at cell phone policies of businesses, universities, and municipalities with a fine-tooted comb since late-2007 and made examples of some well-known entities including UCLA (which they charged $240,000 for back taxes) and the city of Columbus, Ohio which settled with the IRS for $400,000.

This recent venture has proven to be problematic for both the IRS and those it hopes to collect from. Most employers and employees are ill-prepared to track cell phone use (and, quite frankly, there are more important things to do) and the modern way of billing – the all-inclusive, unlimited packages provided by Verizon, Sprint and the like – makes cost segregation near impossible.

The IRS has some ideas for addressing those problems. Two weeks ago they opened a public comment period (running until September 4) for individuals to offer their two cents about three distinct tax recording and collecting methods the IRS thinks might work. Under the first scenario, your cell phone can be fully-designated as a work phone and therefore non-taxable to you only if you can provide substantial evidence that shows you have a second phone for personal use and that you have not used the work phone to place a personal call. The second concept would assume that anyone who has a work phone must use it at home, too, so they would be charged a rate equal to 25 percent of the phone’s fees, regardless of how true the assumption may be. The third IRS plan would force the employer to use statistical sampling to calculate the billable rate for the employee. 

It is suggested that you not engage the IRS in this discussion. Unless you like paying taxes you should instead train your public comments upon Congress. Last Tuesday, following the outcry over the IRS’s announcement, the Obama Administration, through IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman nonetheless (can you sense the irony and hypocrisy?), asked that the law be repealed because the way we communicate has changed significantly making the law outdated and almost unenforceable. Some in Congress agree with the President and bills have been introduced by John Kerry in the Senate (S.144) and by Sam Johnson in the House (H.R.690) asking for the removal of cell phones from the listed property category.

Take the time to write your senator or congressperson about this simple issue that could become a complex one if the IRS focuses on your and your employer’s pocketbooks. Not only will you have to pay taxes for the phone, but you and your employer will have to waste time (that probably costs more than the taxes paid) on recordkeeping for this law. It’s a headache financially, and philosophically, too: Why pay an income tax on something you need to do your job?

MONSERRATE AND ESPADA: THE GOP’S NEW BEST FRIENDS
By Bob Confer

I’d like you to meet Hiram Monserrate and Pedro Espada, Jr. They are the new faces of the Republican senate in New York State, Democrat turncoats who were adopted by the GOP to help flip the balance of power in the legislature.

It tells us a great deal about the current state of the Republican Party that these faces -- more fitting for mug shots or “wanted” posters – have become heroes to a party that tries to pass itself off as one possessed of character. It’s something that these men lack. You can’t help but question their character upon selling-out to a billionaire businessman who proved more important to them than their own constituents or to the Republican senate leadership who gave them financially-rewarding positions in that house. But, as offensive as that may be, it pales in comparison to what they did prior to this politics-as-usual move.

Let’s go back to the night of December 19. On that fateful evening Monserrate showed us that he is the very worst of men, a woman-beater. The hot-tempered wretch was caught on surveillance cameras abusively dragging his petite girlfriend Karla Giraldo from her apartment building as she grabbed onto a stair rail in a physical tug-of-war for her safety. The same cameras then showed her running to a neighbor’s door, pounding on it and screaming for help.

That sounds scary enough, but it’s what happened prior to that, inside the apartment, that was the most offensive. The hot-headed Monserrate slashed Giraldo’s face with a broken glass. It was such a brutal act that she’s now scarred for life, needing more than 20 stitches to close the gash over her left eye. When Giraldo arrived at the hospital she told the medical attendants that Monserrate cut her during an argument. Later, she did as many frightened and intimidated abuse victims do and changed her story to say that Monserrate tripped while bringing her a glass of water. That’s a little too unbelievable, so the first story (in conjunction with the video tapes) carries considerably more weight.

Monserrate is awaiting trial for three counts of felony assault and another three for misdemeanor assault. If found guilty he could face seven years behind bars, nowhere near enough for such a disgusting crime.  

Espada is as equally repulsive an individual. He has a long track record of breaking – or being accused of breaking – all sorts of campaign laws. Back in 2005, three employees who worked at Soundview Health Center (a clinic Espada runs) pleaded guilty to forcing the clinic’s employees to run Espada’s campaign on company time, giving food donations intended for their patients to campaign workers instead, and diverting $30,000 of public funds dedicated for family and AIDS care into his campaign’s treasury. Four years earlier, Espada was fined $62,000 by New York City for separate incidents of campaign fraud. For the piece de resistance, back in 2002 he was busted for using his senate office to put $745,000 of state pork-barrel money into his business, one from which he collected a $200,000 salary. On top of all that theft, he’s under investigation for more fraud: There is considerable evidence that he lives in Mamaroneck, not the Bronx he was elected to represent.

Yes, folks, those are the guys who Republican voters, movers-and-shakers and elected officials alike are now tickled pink to call their allies. I suppose that in their minds, when it’s politically-expedient to do so, it’s okay to ignore the Republican Party’s rallying cry, that they are the party of timeless values, one devoted to Christian morals, the sanctity of the family, and conservative practices. Monserrate and Espada don’t fit that mold and they never will. 

But, we’re told that giving-in like this to the criminal element is best for the State. With the Republicans back in control of the Senate we’ll see a better tomorrow in New York. Really? It never happened like that before. Let’s not forget that while Joe Bruno ran the senate for 13 years (most of them with a Republican governor at his side) the state budget grew from $61.9 billion to $121 billion.

This mess in Albany perfectly shows why the GOP is a party in struggle, a dinosaur ready for extinction. In recent years it lost control of the presidency, Congress and governorships and houses in many states because it has lost its identity. What it once stood for is long gone. The thing that it has become rings hollow for most and resonates powerfully with only a very few, those who blindly pledge allegiance to something that is Republican by name only. 

SAVE MONEY AND PEOPLE WITH SHARED WORK

By Bob Confer

Throughout this recession employers have been looking for any way possible to cut costs and stay afloat as their sales tank and their profits go with them. Typically, the first thing to go is the workforce. We’ve seen this in plenty with the unemployment rate climbing near 9 percent nationally and 11 percent locally.

Cutting a company’s employment is a double-edged sword. The business can save plenty of money by doing so, but it ends up creating a great deal of problems in that company, our economy, and our homes.

Any time that a company lets people go during a slow period – be it a recession or a slowdown specific to that business or industry – the short term savings can easily evaporate over the long term. When things pick back up the company will have to replenish its troops. If their one-time employees, unable to hold out on the unemployment rolls any longer, went on to find new jobs, which is the case more often than not, the company would be forced to replace them with new workers. That is a costly endeavor because the managers will have to weed through resumes, conduct interviews, train new hires, and, in many cases, hire and fire until they’ve found the right people. Those efforts can quickly add up to the thousands of dollars in direct and indirect costs.

Singularly, a lay-off can hurt a company in the long run. Collectively, it hurts all of us immediately. Only a few months into an economic downturn it seems that a vast majority of companies start to lay-off their workers. When you have hundreds of thousands of businesses doing this, from small mom-and-pops to gigantic corporations, the ranks of the unemployed rise dramatically. Since the start of the recession over 5.7 million people have become jobless and no longer have the income available to spend on discretionary goods, leisure, and, most unfortunately, the basic needs of food, clothing, and housing. In essence, the lay-offs may, at the micro level, help save the day, but at the macro level they remove active participants from the marketplace which in turn sets off a domino effect that only prolongs the downturn.

But, lay-offs are more than dollars and cents. There’s a human side to them as well. Every individual who is let go was a breadwinner for his or her family. He helped put a roof over their heads. She helped put food on the table. He put away for their retirement. She saved for their kids’ college educations. You take away their income, even if it’s just one out of a two-income household, and that family is hurt. Their quality of life is lessened and their plans for the future become questionable. It’s stressful and painful, something you wouldn’t want to put your worst enemy through. Many employers understand this and letting someone go remains at the top of the list of the things that affect them the most in the workings of their job.

So, how does a businessperson go about beating the recession and saving labor expenses without assuming the countless negatives that come with casting-away a valued employee?

I strongly suggest that before they pull the termination trigger they first give New York’s Shared Work Program a try. My company participated in the program for 5 months that began in the Fall. I’m glad I did so. And, so are my coworkers. We all won.

This inventive program allows a business to cut back on its employees’ hours and wages by 20 to 60 percent (typically 1 to 3 workdays). The affected worker then collects his paycheck and receives an unemployment check from the State for the days he did not work (but normally would have) during that week. The company can be in the Shared Work program for a period of 53 weeks. Normally, during the 53 week period an employee can collect up to 20 weeks (5 months) of Shared Work benefits. Thanks to the Federal Extended Benefits Plan workers are now eligible for an extra 20 weeks in that period, meaning that a cost-conscious company could stay leaner and meaner for ten months out of the year. 

The primary goal of the program is that it exists in lieu of an equal percentage of full layoffs. Therefore, rather than eliminating 20 percent of the workforce the employer instead cuts back on everyone’s workweek by that same percentage. By doing so, the company saves money and everyone remains employed. With only a slight and temporary decrease in income they all remain active in our economy and their households remain relatively vibrant.

The State’s tagline for Shared Work is “the layoff alternative”. And, what a great alternative it is…it saves money and people!

NEW YORK’S GREEN LANDSCAPE
By Bob Confer

Governor David Paterson paid a visit to the National Solar Conference that was held in Buffalo two weeks ago. It was the perfect venue for him to once again tout his goal – and, by association, our goal – of 45 by 15. Paterson spoke of the vision that he shares with his cohorts in New York’s various agencies and authorities in which the Empire State would by 2015 meet 45 percent of its electrical demand with clean renewable energy.

Achieving the goal in the next 6 years is totally impossible. Truthfully, 2025 is probably more realistic because we need to see some serious advances in technological efficiencies. Nevertheless, 6 or 16 years from now, New York won’t look the same. Wind and solar farms will dominate the scenery. You need to prepare yourself for that because, by today’s standards, tomorrow’s New York will look completely foreign if not alien.

It’s all because we New Yorkers are huge consumers of energy. Last year we used an average of 16.44 gigawatts of electricity. Even though people have been leaving the state in droves, demand grows every year. As a matter of fact, by that magical 2015 date demand will be 11% higher than it is today. You can chalk that up to our ever-growing love affair with all things electronic.

Simple math shows that NY will be an 18.25 GW behemoth in six years. In order to satisfy Paterson’s goal we’ll need to produce 8.22 GW of renewable energy. 2.5 GW of that is already accounted for (over 80 percent of which is produced at hydro plants in Niagara Falls and Massena). So, we need to produce “only” 5.71 GW of new, clean energy.

That will never be achieved through hydroelectric plants. The chances of seeing any new ones are slim to none...they are the bane of environmentalists everywhere. That means that all the electricity will have to come from solar and wind farms and plenty of them.

How many, you ask?

Let’s start with solar energy. Home improvement and green-friendly cable television shows would have us believe that solar systems are affordable options for the average home or business. That’s far from the truth. Granted, they may become affordable in a few years as technologies improve, driving down costs, but right now they are cost prohibitive. As an example, I was looking into a solar system for my warehouse in Wheatfield. The cost was going to be $340,200, which quickly turned me off considering it would have met only 8 percent of our demand which, in that building, is only for lights and heat. The return on investment would have been 2 decades.

Since the average person will not or cannot buy solar panels for home or business, solar farms will spring up across the state funded by a combination of private and public dollars (the latter, ironically, is your money being spent on solar energy anyways). Solar projects quite similar to the one NYPA plans to build at the University at Buffalo will become the norm. That sprawling system will feature 5,000 panels and cover 5 acres of land yet it will produce only 1 MW at full capacity. The Power Authority’s ultimate goal is 150 MW of solar energy though a public/private partnership, equating to more than 150 of these across New York.  

With solar energy essentially minimized by the State and the people, the remainder, some 5.56 GW of power, will have to come from wind energy. Windmills, like solar panels, are little too expensive for the average business or resident, but it’s nothing for investors to see benefit in them, hence the wind farms cropping up, or being applied for, all over the state. Commercial windmills can vary in theoretical output from a third of a MW to just over 3 MW. Due to a variety of factors like wind and the laws of science, most windmills will see efficiency of no better than 20 to 40 percent. Therefore, your “typical” windmill, like the 1.5 MW windmills you see in Wyoming County, can only produce an average of 500 kilowatts (half of a megawatt). In order to meet the state’s wishes, 11,000 windmills using today’s technology would need to be built across the state. There are 75 in the town of Sheldon. Just imagine another 150 wind farms of that size.  

I’ve heard a mix of opinions about our changing landscape. I know people who find the windmills and their dancing blades to be soothing and attractive. I also know others who find solace in solar and wind projects and their positive impact on the environment. Yet, I know just as many who consider them to be eyesores and even detrimental to the environment. Like everything associated with the Green Movement, beauty, truth and acceptance are in the eyes of the beholder.          

THE UN AND THE LAW OF THE SEA
By Bob Confer, www.BobConfer.net

Earlier this month one-time presidential candidate and influential senator John Kerry announced to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the very committee that he chairs, that one of his goals for 2009 is getting the United States to sign on to the United Nation’s Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST).

LOST was first introduced by the UN in 1982 and since then 157 nations have joined the pact. The treaty gives the UN oversight of the open seas which account for over 70 percent of the world’s surface. Under ratification, the affected nations are at the mercy of the UN when it comes to economic development, environmental issues and commercial, recreational and naval navigation on the oceans.

To those who live in fear of Somali pirates or melting polar ice caps there may be some comfort in that. But, LOST is more horrific than it sounds; it is a monster, one of nautical omnipotence. The treaty features some pretty powerful language and there is one little three-letter word (“all”) that makes the greatest impact. It is used throughout the document as the UN claims that it has the right to regulate all activities on all ocean space, which includes everything on, under, and above the water.

That means that were the US to sign on, we’d be giving-up our sovereignty, becoming subjects of the UN, which is not something in our best interests. No longer could our navy freely sail the oceans. It would first need authorization from an external higher power that is neither our Congress nor our Commander-In-Chief. The same would hold true for our private fleets: By ratifying the treaty we would allow ourselves to be regulated and taxed by a non-representative entity, as the UN would be able to dictate what US commercial activity is allowed on the seas, and at the same time, reap tax revenues from that activity.   

Not only would our sovereignty be cast aside abroad, it would also take a serious hit right here on the home front. Under LOST, the United States would have to give up the rights to our territorial waters, a border so very important to our national defense and well-being. What we can and cannot do in that region would be dictated solely by the UN. On top of that, the treaty’s power over everything that affects the oceans would allow the UN to manage all the waters that flow into seas, be it the St. Lawrence, the Mississippi or the run-off from a coastal home or farm. Yes, we would give up our rights not just on the water, but on land as well!   

Despite the significant flaws with LOST it’s foreseeable that Senator Kerry will make his agenda come to fruition this year because he has an alliance of like-minded, globalism-loving individuals on his side. In past attempts to force the United States into the agreement the lone hurdle has always been the small-government, anti-UN conservatives who were able to force a procedural impasse. But, now that the Democrats control the Senate it’s a different story. It would take only 67 votes to ratify the treaty and, if partisanship held true, Kerry would need to bring only 8 Republicans over to his side. Looking at all the various supporters of LOST that will be an easy task: Joining Kerry in his cause are President Barack Obama, Vice-President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, seven coastal governors and that bastion of Republican cronyism, the US Chamber of Commerce. 

It’s disheartening to see such a list of influential people and organizations behind LOST, knowing full well that the treaty will eliminate plenty of our rights and a good amount of American power. It makes you wonder what they’re thinking. Why would they want our naval superiority to become a thing of the past? Why would they want our border waters to be under the control of a multinational organization? Why would they want to stifle commercial trade and fishing? Whose side are they on, that of the US or the UN?

With questions like that, it’s important that you call and write your US senator and even those senators who don’t count you as a constituent. Let them know that you won’t stand for the reckless giveaway of our rights, rights that millions of men and women have fought and died for. Remember, active public uproar worked with the border issue a couple years ago. So, there’s no reason why it couldn’t help prevent our involvement in LOST.           

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF SCOUTING

By Bob Confer

What do Gerald Ford, Neil Armstrong, Walter Cronkite, and William DeVries have in common?

All of them were members of the Boy Scouts of America who achieved the rank of Eagle Scout and went on to do great things.

That begs the question: Would they have contributed to society as much as they did were they not scouts? Would they have led our nation, walked on the moon, spoke to a people, or transplanted hearts? Maybe. Maybe not.

What can be said with some certainty, though, is that the BSA had a significant impact on their lives and is partially responsible for what drove them to greatness. It taught them the values of community, work ethic and leadership which cannot be found in our schools or in many homes. It has done the same for millions of young men since its inception in 1910, inspiring, if not creating, yesterday’s, today’s and tomorrow’s leaders.

The Scouting program is just as important now as it was nearly a century ago. It could even be argued that it might have greater significance today. It’s the perfect outlet for today’s youth and it can help them overcome some of the obstacles in their paths. There’s a lot missing in their lives: Their outdoor pursuits have taken a back seat to new-fangled electronics, they don’t share the same bond with their real-world communities that they do with their trivial Internet communities, their schools have totally lost sight of civic education, and they struggle to find continuity in broken homes which, sadly, have become the norm.

The BSA addresses all those issues and then some. Camping and other outdoor activities are the cornerstone of the Scouting program, using the struggles and successes of pastoral adventure as a source of experiential learning, teaching the boys a wide variety of skills accompanied by a powerful mix of leadership, teamwork, self-reliance and self-confidence. Scouting also gets them out and about in their towns and villages, fostering a sense of community pride and a desire to help make better the world around them. It is all of this - in combination with the guidance provided by peers and scoutmasters - that can give today’s youth the support needed to survive a broken home or beat a broken community.

Not only does this help the boy, it also helps the parent. Many mothers and fathers struggle to help their son find his voice, his calling, in any number of activities, be they sports, bands or other extracurricular activities.  Quite often these families find themselves with a void, unable to satisfy their desire to better their sons. Scouting is the one-stop source that can alleviate that stress. It combines the best of everything else into an all-encompassing program, one guaranteed to keep a boy’s attention and interest and one destined to make him a better man. For today’s busy parents, it’s a convenient option for those who feel spread thin: It’s one meeting a week, one campout a month, and one week-long trip a year. That small investment of time can create a lifetime of memories and, more importantly, a lifetime of success. Scouting accounts for better students, better citizens, and a better America by instilling timeless values and character into young men.

Take it from someone who was a Boy Scout and who himself achieved the rank of Eagle. I know I would not be the man I am now had it not been for Scouting. I never would have been a columnist or activist without its inspiring ways. Secondary schools and colleges spend so little time on civic and community responsibility that to most folks it’s an afterthought. Scouting’s lessons more than made up for that and created the drive behind these columns, not to mention the values that I apply in my day-to-day decisions. The BSA was so important to me that I place its importance on my upbringing second behind my family and far ahead of schooling at a distant third. It’s that significant.

It can have that same effect on your son, too. I strongly suggest that he give it a try. Visit www.scouting.org to find a local scout council near you that can assist in finding a troop in your hometown. Joining the Boy Scouts of America is a decision you – and your son - won’t regret.  

COYOTES, PIRATES AND THE CONSTITUTION
By Bob Confer

The Walt Disney Effect has been out in full force lately.

Thanks to the plethora of movies that show animals having anthropomorphic tendencies – that is, they talk and act like humans – people tend to think even the wildest of beasts are cute and cuddly and just dying to be friendly with Mankind. The thing is, they’re not. As we’ve seen with the recent close encounters with foxes and coyotes (some of which were purposeful thanks to the Effect), wild animals are, well, wild and they’ll attack. They really don’t like us at all.

That same dangerous Walt Disney Effect can be seen on the Seven Seas. Over the past decade or so piracy has become extremely popular in the waters off the Somali and Nigerian coasts. This increase in nautical crime has been reported in the press throughout the world but indifference has been cast its way (especially in the United States) because our society is guilty of giving these animals some anthropomorphic traits of their own. Hollywood has always granted pirates a respectable air and many of the on-screen scoundrels – like Walt Disney’s Jack Sparrow, for one – are downright likeable. Reality is anything but. Much like the aforementioned wild canines, they are bloodthirsty curs who you would not want to count as your friends. They are carnivores of the open seas and they should be treated as such.

But, they haven’t been. Very few Americans raised an eyebrow about piracy until one of their own, Captain Richard Phillips, was captured by and subsequently rescued from a band of Somali water thugs. Because of the crisis finally hitting home, we’ve all come to the conclusion that pirates are a real threat.

So, what do we do about it? How do we prevent future attacks? How do we ensure that we never see a hostage situation again? How do we guarantee that no innocent mariners die?

We could follow the same tactic that was used on the troublesome urban coyote and its friends. It was killed by the police and efforts are in place to institute a nuisance control plan that will rid the area of others.

Yes, I’ve just called for the spilling of pirate blood…if not the capture of the animals.  

It doesn’t make sense, though, to put naval fleets into waters the world over. We didn’t put a policeman or game control officer at every corner to catch the coyote. It’s impractical, it’s costly and, above all, it’s not the best thing for community relations. Just as a good many citizens feel threatened by a heightened police presence in their neighborhood, so do other countries when they see increased military activity in their neighboring waters. The US and Russia have both contributed naval craft to policing the seas, much to the chagrin of others.

It makes the most sense to empower the private craft to protect themselves. Not only is it the most cost-effective and diplomatically-friendly method, but it’s the one most befitting the situation. These craft are the ones coming into contact with the pirates and they are the ones who must fight for survival. Survival is a natural right and, believe it or not, having armed sailors is our Constitutional right.

It’s a little-known fact that the US Constitution allows Congress to essentially deputize private individuals to protect American interests on international waters. Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution says, “The Congress shall have power… To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water…” It is those letters, contracts of sort, which would authorize a seafarer to take the law into his own hands and engage the pirates in gun play when threatened. Without such legal authorization, the mariner – who was trying to protect the safety of crew and cargo – could theoretically be looked at as a pirate under international law.

Letters of marque and reprisal are long overdue. They have been used only once since the War of 1812 (by the submarine hunter the Resolute during World War II). It’s a little dumbfounding that shippers haven’t been granted their right sooner. Most of these boats have navigated into pirate-laden waters without the weaponry necessary to protect themselves. That means that every minute of every day is a gamble for them. If Congress signed-off on their ability to act in a defensive/offensive manner the gamble would be gone. The first cargo ship that stops a potential takeover by blasting at pirate craft with 7.62 mm machine guns and short range explosives will make a statement that will resonate throughout the African shores: Private boats will no longer be easy prey of those animals.

That’s how you stop piracy. Sometimes, a bullet is the only way to handle a pest.

TAX FREEDOM DAY
By Bob Confer

Last Saturday, April 25, was a big day for the workingperson. A holiday of sorts, it was Tax Freedom Day in New York. That was the day in 2009 that you could finally go about working for your own interests like feeding your family, saving for your retirement, or helping to put your kid get through college. Prior to that, every day that you worked this year was dedicated only to the government. 

Tax Freedom Day is the brainchild of the Tax Foundation, a nonpartisan educational organization that focuses on tax policy and the burdens they impose on Americans. It is an annual study that determines when personal financial freedom is achieved. The Foundation analyzes the entire federal and state tax load fronted by a state’s residents, looking at all of them, big and small, from income to property to sales to excise taxes. That bundle is then applied to the average wage for that state and from there the number of workdays required to meet that burden is calculated.

The study is a good gauge for the competitiveness and quality of life for each state. New Yorkers, long known as some of the highest-taxed in the US, have the third-latest Tax Freedom Day in the US. The only two that fall later are New Jersey (April 29) and Connecticut (April 30). The average American spends less time working for the government than we do and, not surprisingly, some states have nearly a month on us. Alaska is the best-performer, seeing freedom on March 23. Three other states (Louisiana, Mississippi, and South Dakota) have the chains removed prior to April. This perfectly exemplifies what we’ve been saying for years, that New York’s status as “the Empire State” is long gone. 

To some (specifically government officials) the Tax Foundation’s study may be a gimmick. It’s not. It’s a rather unique way of demonstrating just how much effort goes into making one’s annual payments to the government. With payroll deductions, escrow, and the brainwashing gimmick know as tax returns, very few people really know how much they pay into the system. There’s a lot of numbers for them to contend with and track. This helpful study makes it easy for the layman to understand his contribution.

Think about its findings. For the past four months, every hour that you’ve spent at work, sweating or stressing while dealing with customers, coworkers, or machines - not to mention the economy – has not been for to the money that you need to pay the bills or set aside as discretionary income. Every one of those hours, 640 of them if you work a 40 hour week, 800 of them if you work 50 hours, has been dedicated to the bureaucracies that manage your town, your school, your state, and your nation, and who, more often than not, recklessly spend your hard-earned dollars on social and corporate welfare, bloated public-sector payrolls, low-return infrastructure, and wasteful pork. Nearly four months of your life were toiled away, just to make sure you paid the price of being a “good citizen” in 2009, four months spent working not for you and your family but for everybody else, whether they deserved it or not.    

Four months is bad enough, but if it weren’t for the recession Tax Freedom Day would be even later in the year for us. Back in 2007, when the economy was still relatively strong, it fell on May 16. With incomes shrinking, homes foreclosing, and purchases decreasing, the tax burden on a per capita basis has become significantly less, because we have failed to pull the trigger on things that create tax obligations. But, there’s a very good chance that 2010’s study will show a return to mid-May for New Yorkers, even with a deepening recession, because the state legislature has introduced countless new taxes and user fees – while strengthening existing ones – at the same time municipalities and schools have been spending like it’s 2007. And, there’s the issue of the growing national debt and higher federal spending that we’ll have to contend with.

For now, with a third of the year behind us, you can find what comfort you can in knowing that you’re finally done working for the government this year. Your next 8 months on the job can be dedicated to you and your family. But then, the vicious cycle starts all over again. It kind of make you hunger for real tax freedom, doesn’t it?