Racism has many different definitions. Historically, it has been defined as the belief that race is the primary determinant of human capacities, that a certain race is inherently superior or inferior to others, and/or that individuals should be treated differently according to their racial designation. Sometimes racism means beliefs, practices, and institutions that discriminate against people based on their perceived or ascribed race. ...

Racism is one of the forbidden topics for white people like me to discuss in our society. If you are black you can talk about it whenever you like but white people must be silenced. There is plenty of evidence suggesting racism still exists but most of this evidence supports black people are racists too.

After the Colts beat the Patriots in the AFC Championship game, the racist comments started about two black coaches being in the Superbowl. Who cares? We are taught to separate people’s actions from their race. You cannot hold an entire race responsible for the failures of the few; likewise, you cannot credit an entire race for the successes of the few either.

Could you imagine the outrage last year if we would have celebrated Bill Cowher winning the Superbowl; NOT because he was the winning coach but because he was a WHITE winning coach? Can you imagine talk shows discussing the topic about how great white coaches are? There would have been lawsuits filed all over the place. People would have been fired; the whole thing would have been very ugly. So why do we tolerate this behavior from black people?

Stephen I. Cohen is a Democratic Representative from Tennessee who recently tried to join the black caucus. His membership was refused because he was white. Rep. William Lacy Clay Sr., D-Mo., a co-founder of the caucus, had circulated a memo telling members it was "critical" that the group remain "exclusively African- American." Other members, including the new chairwoman, Rep. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, D-Mich., and Clay's son, Rep. William Lacy Clay, D-Mo., agreed.

I thought we were all equal? I thought we could no longer have private clubs excluding people based upon race? Can you imagine what would happen if Stephen Cohen tried to start a white caucus or any other federally funded group which excluded blacks? I’ll tell you what would happen to him; he would be kicked out of the House and probably ostracized from our society. He would be labeled a racist and never be allowed to hold a position of leadership again. So why are we tolerating this same behavior from Rep. William Clay?

What is with this whole “African-American” label? Are any of these people actually from Africa? My ancestors were from Germany but I am an American, NOT a “German-American”. I cannot imagine being so consumed with my race that I had to label myself as such. Aren’t people who are this consumed with race a racist?

If I spent time introducing myself as a German-American and joined exclusively German clubs which only allowed Germans, isn’t that a racist? What I just described is Nazism who are notorious racists. A racist organization is one which seeks to instill power in one race while excluding other races. This just defined the NAACP, the Black Caucus, Neo-Nazi’s and a host of other groups. The only difference is the Neo-Nazis preach violence but they all have similar intentions. Groups should exist to help all mankind and not focus on any one particular race. In a “racially neutral” society where we are all equal, we are not supposed to notice or care about race or the advancement of one race over another. If we do then we truly ARE racist. Right?

Should institutions like these be considered racist?

• A college scholarship fund which only helps one race.
• A society which only accepts one race as members.
• A caucus which seeks to help only one race while excluding all other races.
• A person who only helps people of one race.

These should all be defined as racist. Yet these examples are accepted in our society when they only contribute and seek to further the causes of racism.

We are naïve if we believe racism will ever be completely eliminated. The best we can achieve is a majority of people who are NOT racist. This becomes very difficult when the very people who are complaining about being mistreated because of their race, continue to condone racism within their own ranks.

At some point we have to ask ourselves what does a society free from racism look like? The answer is simply a society where people and organizations help all people and do NOT give precedence over any one race. When somebody fails or succeeds, it is seen as a failure or success of that individual and has nothing to do with their race. When we look at someone we should not even see their heritage but we should notice their personal charisma, accomplishments and failures and judge them accordingly. Even if we do raise our children properly and teach them these values, as long as we allow racism organizations like the Black Caucus or the NAACP to endure, we will continuously fail.

Unless we learn to separate race from individual achievements and failures, and we learn we are all Americans regardless of our heritage, we will never be rid of racism. So don’t celebrate the fact that two black coaches going to the Superbowl, just celebrate the fact that two incredibly talented and intelligent coaches are going to the Superbowl. If you notice their race, then YOU are the racist.

Five years ago the ownership group of the Cardinals approached St. Louis wanting a new stadium. One of the reasons they gave was they claimed this would give them the ability to remain competitive so money would not be an obstacle to signing higher priced players. Since the opening of the new stadium the Cardinals have brought no new significant free agents to the Cardinals organization. Losing Jeff Weaver for a measly three million dollars was the final straw. Isn’t the three million dollars in the Jeff Weaver contract exactly what you promised would be there when the new ballpark was built?

This ownership group does not care about winning. They dangled the hope of signing better talent in front of the St. Louis fans to get their stadium built and have now abandoned them to count their money. Instead of AJ Burnett we got Josh Hancock. Instead of Jason Schmidt we got Kip Wells. Now both Jeff Suppan and Jeff Weaver have gone elsewhere, leaving the Cardinals with only one healthy, bonafide starting pitcher for the season.

Winning the World Series last year was a surprise but it had nothing to do with ownership bringing in talent. We won because Walt Jockety, Tony LaRussa and Dave Duncan have continued to work miracles with absolutely no help from above. They pulled a St. Louis miracle by winning with guys on the scrap heap. Jeff Weaver, Ronnie Belliard, and Preston Wilson all contributed to the post season but were throw-away players other teams did not want.

During the first day Cardinals tickets went on sale a record 250,000 were sold but the ownership rewarded the fans by letting three of the five starting pitchers leave a championship team. The two guys you should have let go were Marquis and Mulder and then kept Suppan and Weaver. I suspect if Mulder was healthy he would have left too because you wouldn’t have paid him either. Facing the possibility of selling out all the home games for another season was not incentive for you get at least one more pitcher? Or are you hoping to keep Cardinals fans happy by letting them catch a barrage of home run balls from opposing hitters?

What do the fans have to do to get a decent payroll increase to bring in more talent? We sell out every home game, we follow the team on the road and increase attendance in those parks, and we purchase every piece of Cardinal merchandise you throw at us. We pay the highest ticket prices and highest concession stand prices in the league. Tell us what more can we do? Do you want our rent money? How many millions do you have to steal from the pockets of fans before you give some back?

The Cardinals have a talented group of core players which have dominated their division for a decade. But only having one championship to show for it is disturbing. Cardinal fans stepped up and sold out every home game last season and it is realistic to think that it will happen again this year. But the ownership group is again slapping the fans in the face by not signing any free agent pitchers for the second season in a row. Now the Cardinals are faced with the reality of Kip Wells being their number two starter. Kip Wells being another player claimed from the scrap heap.

I listen to the Rush Limbaugh radio show just about every day. I am not a fan; I just like to listen to political talk radio. However, I realize this show is not meant to be a political talk show, but an avenue to enlist people into the conservative camp by belittling differing opinions into agreeing with the conservative agenda. For example, if you think America should pull out of Iraq then Rush believes you are in favor of terrorists winning the war. Therefore, you are a traitor and should be treated as such.

Since Rush is a fundamentalist, he fails to understand the principles of a democracy. In a democracy, it is alright to disagree. In fact, disagreements, compromise and differing opinions are what makes democracies so great. In a democracy when two-thirds of the people disagree with an agenda, then the agenda should be abandoned.

When President Bush flew the helicopter onto the aircraft carrier with the "Mission Accomplished" banner flying in the breeze, the war was declared a victory at that point. Bush declared victory, case closed. So why can’t Rush accept this? Our goal in Iraq was to remove the Saddam Hussein regime, which was accomplished. Now there is a civil war in which we should not get involved. Therefore the war is won, now it is time to pull the troops out and come home. Let the Iraqis settled their own internal disputes.

So the majority of people who want to pull out of Iraq are not traitors and they not defeatists. They are people who already believe the war has been won and want to get our troops out of a completely different civil war, which has nothing to do with terrorism, but which could claim many innocent American lives.

Rush is a fundamentalist and we all know fundamentalists only see in black and white. You are either with them or against them; there is no middle ground. They must accept every item on an agenda and cannot pick and choose. Most people are neither liberal nor conservative but someplace in the middle. They pick and choose which ideas to support from both the liberal and conservative camps based upon their own morals and beliefs. Fundamentalists do not think this way, because again, it is an all or nothing approach with them.

Another term Rush loves to use is “flip-flop”. Conservatives in general loved to say this about John Kerry during the elections of 2004. Most intelligent people are “flip-floppers”. A "flip-flopper" learns new facts and then adapts new ideas as a result. This is the definition of learning and intelligence. When you hear a set of facts, you form an opinion, but when you learn new factors, you then form different opinions. Most fundamentalists cannot think this way. No matter what new facts surface they must adhere to their “stone age” style of intelligence and allow the agenda to be more important than the set of circumstances. This is true of all fundamentalists whether they are liberal or conservative.

If anything, this radio show is a determent to society as it seeks to divide not unite the country. Rush does not believe in compromise because if you compromise then you lose. He is in favor of gridlock and partisanship. He gives the agenda of his affiliation priority over everything else; whether the topic is civil rights, murder, torture or destruction. They are all necessary if the agenda of the conservatives is at stake. This is the definition of a traitor, not someone who changes based upon new evidence. A traitor puts their needs above the needs of the country.

I would love to have an open debate with Rush Limbaugh to show him just how little he thinks. Instead of thinking about a situation and forming his own opinion, he allows the agenda of some other group to dictate his opinion. This is a robot and not thinking, learning and intelligent individual. It is hard for me to believe that some like this can have their own radio show for as long as he has, when he has so little to offer the American people.

A couple of weeks ago I posted my thoughts regarding the state of religion in today’s society and entitled it The Dangers of Literal Meanings. Well, someone posted a very good anonymous comment which I responded to. After many edits I decided to post the final version on the front page for everybody to see and debate. I put much time and thought into this response to make it as accurate as possible.

Please keep in mind, I am not trying to offend anybody but only trying to debate a topic which is very sensitive. It might be a good idea to ready part one before proceeding.

Anonymous said...
How about, "If you were God would you be able to make sure the bible was written exactly like you wanted it?" That's a good question worth asking too.

My Response...
You have uncovered one of the many of the many logical flaws within the Bible. I have thought about that but it is a flawed question. If God wanted to make sure the Bible was accurately depicted then why not just give us copy already written by Him? Wouldn’t that seem more logical than the alternative?

There so are many other important logical flaws within the Bible which are too easily dismissed by fundamentalists. These logical breakdowns are irrefutable evidence the Bible was not written by God but by man because God would not have made such obvious mistakes. At the very least we should believe that He probably gave us better explanations and reasons at the time which have long since been lost through man’s translations and storytelling. Since man did not have or most likely lost those logical explanations provided by God, we embellished, which might have seemed logical at the time but today most of those embellishments are almost laughable.

There are actually people who believe in the Old Testament that Noah actually gathered two of every animal in the world and loaded them onto his arc. By today’s standards imagine doing that? It would probably take you a lifetime just to gather up half of all the animals and this is if you had modern technology like planes and trucks to assist.

Let’s give the whole story about the Ten Commandments a quick reality check. Moses goes up the mountain to pray and ask God for help because an army led by a dictator is bearing down on his people to enslave them or worse kill them all. What is the first thing God says, “I am your God accept no others!” or something like that. If I was Moses I would have responded with, “Yea God that’s cool and all but how about something disallowing slavery? How about something against rich people dominating or controlling everybody’s life?” Nope. God responds with, “Go to Church on Sunday.”

When Moses comes down from Mount Sinai instead of being concerned with where the people were going to eat, or sleep or live, or even the disappointment about no commandment forbidding slavery. The first thing which angers him is the golden calf and the people are partying. That should have been the least of his worries.

Another example, after Jesus rose from the dead why not go back to Pontius Pilate and the other crucifiers. Walk right up to him in front of all of his men and say, “Look at me, I was crucified but I am not dead.” If that would have happened there would be absolutely no questions by any doubters. Jesus should have shown everybody His resurrected body but why did He show only a few believers? That does not make sense to me at all. If you are proclaiming yourself as a God who can defy death and forgive century old sins, then show everybody. There should be no mystery or questions at all; just, “I am God and here I am, period.”

Another logical inaccuracy is the crucifixion. Why did He have to be crucified to forgive our sins? Why not just forgive them? After all, He is God so He could have done that without going through the whole torture and death sequence. It doesn’t make logical sense to me. Now if He would have used the crucifixion to proclaim He defeated death and to prove He was God in front of millions of people and the leaders at the time, like I stated in the paragraph above, then it makes sense. Otherwise, we are left with illogical reasoning which does not make much sense at all. Why be tortured and crucified, then rise from the dead and NOT show yourself to the people who killed you? It doesn’t make sense.

The whole book of Revelations also seems very flawed. It was written by The Prophet John during his exile on Patmos. It has been written that he was nearing madness during this period of his life. So why would God choose an exiled man near madness to deliver these important messages? Don’t you think He would have chosen someone more credible? Let’s put that decision in perspective in today’s world. It would be almost like God choosing David Koresh (or insert any other cultist whacko here) to deliver a similar message.

There are so many more hundreds of logical flaws within the Bible but the most compelling argument in my favor is the more than 2,000 years of silence. With all the turmoil and all of the radical splits the Church has endured why not make another appearance to clear up these misunderstandings. After all, we are honestly tying to get it right and a little help would be appreciated.

There is more we DON’T know about God than we do know, so enlighten us. If He is telling us that we are going to be punished with eternal damnation if we do not believe in Him, then at least give us the courtesy of a follow up visit every millennium or so. Especially since we are intelligent beings and our theories in science are becoming more advanced; that seems the least He could do. Or are we to believe He is just sitting up there in heaven watching us screw up time and time again without any leadership, knowledge or advice?

These faults within the Bible simply cannot be dismissed; they must be dealt with using the brain-power God gave us. All of these logical flaws point to human misquotes and misinterpretations of events. As intelligence beings, we must evaluate things using logic and common sense and then determine our beliefs and conclusions. These laws of logic are one of the primary ways law enforcement detects lies while questioning a suspect or a judge uses in court while listening to testimony. There are other ways too but if the laws of logic are broken then we are left with inaccuracies and falsehoods.

I do not claim to have all of the answers but I don’t think the correct questions are being asked by theologians either. They are the ones with the knowledge of the Bible but they are in too deep to answer any of these questions because they have already accepted these flaws and are able to look beyond them. I’m not a theologian but just a man trying to solve the mysteries of life, while asking what I believe to be the correct and proper questions to these theologians, who assume the Bible is 100% accurate regardless of what common sense, logic and science dictates.

Unfortunately, many of the theologians are also the fundamentalists which I have written about many times in this blog. Fundamentalists only see “black and white” and can never see any “grey areas”. In their minds the whole thing must be correct or the whole thing is wrong. Since they have already placed a high emotional value on the Bible being 100% correct, they cannot emotionally deal with these questions being asked, much less being able to have an intelligent conversation about them.

The one thing religion does is put limitations on imagination, creativity and ingenuity. Whenever science discovers something which conflicts with religious dogma, the scientists are met with hostility. So we were given this mind with endless abilities but we are expected to keep it closed and only accept certain teachings which have existed for thousands of years. This makes no logical sense to me at all.

I don’t believe a true God would have a problem with people not believing in Him. It sounds too egotistical and masochistic to be believable. Why would He care if these simple mortals believe in Him; if He exists then He exists, why punish the ignorant. But all religions believe the most important thing is to believe in their God above all other Gods regardless of the implications or the rationality. And if you do not believe then you will be endlessly tortured or damned for eternity. But then when You were here on Earth You left us with a bunch of riddles and stories which do not add up to modern theories.

Shouldn't God be more concerned with humanity and people treating the other living creatures with dignity, respect and care rather than who believes in Him? Here is a short list of things that are more important than believing in one God over another God: genocide, war, rape, murder, slavery, world hunger, education (or lack of), poverty, healthcare, and torture. Doesn’t it seem logical a true God would give priority over those things?

Tragically, many people have been tortured, killed and imprisoned through the years because of the Bible’s literal meanings or quotes supposedly flowing from the tongue of God. Fundamentalists are now trying to take over our Country and dictate rules based upon these writings. This is wrong.

If you are a theologian which questions common sense, logic and science, then I would have to say to you, why would God gives us this brain with these abilities and expect us not to use it?

Thanks for your comment.

“In substance, the court holds that the Sixteenth Amendment did not empower the Federal Government to levy a new tax.” New York Times on January 25, 1916.

So you were taught the 16th Amendment gave the government the power to collect an income tax on the people. Well I’m here to tell you we were taught wrong. The 16th Amendment only allows for corporate income taxes to be collected and not personal income taxes. I will explain how Income Tax is only for corporate America and how the Supreme Court has ruled several times supporting that. I will also explain that filing a tax return is defined as voluntary by the IRS code but illegal as defined by the Constitution. I will also tell you how the IRS operates out of fear and intimidation outside the boundaries of the law.

“If you examined the 16th Amendment carefully, you would find that a sufficient number of states never ratified that Amendment,” US District Court Judge James C. Fox, 2003.

Before we begin it is important to realize the federal income tax does not fund government. The primary purpose of the federal income tax is NOT to raise revenue for government but to redistribute wealth and control society. 100% of all income taxes collected goes directly to the Federal Reserve Bank as payment on the national debt. Not one nickel goes to the Federal Government or back to the taxpayer for any social programs or federal services.

“Give me control of a nation’s money supply and I care not who makes its laws,” Mayer Rothschild, FRB.

What is the Federal Reserve Bank? The FRB is a privately held corporation which steals money directly from the American people. The government has the power to print money and distribute it. Although the government has this power they allow this privately held corporation to print money and then pay interest to them on all of the money printed. The interest on this money is called the Federal Deficit. It’s not really a deficit at all but an elaborate hoax for the FRB to get all of the income tax money. This is the primary way in which the rich stay richer.

When President Woodrow Wilson served his last term he knew that the Federal Reserve Bank laws that he signed into law were a big mistake. He later said, “I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is now controlled by its system of credit. We are no longer a government of free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.”

Woodrow Wilson was so unhappy because the government had the power to print its own money and not pay interest on it but he gave this power to someone else; a small group of dominant men known as the FRB. They would now take over and become the true owners of our Country. Today, they own Washington and can create any law they wish and can even prevent the Constitution from being enforced.

“The government should create, issue and circulate all the currency. Creating and issuing money is the supreme prerogative of government and its greatest creative opportunity. Adopting these principles will save the taxpayers immense sums of interest and money will cease to be the master and become the servant of humanity.” Abraham Lincoln

This is why the federal government will never provide us with any financial statements telling us where the income tax money goes. If the American people ever found out that all of this money goes to corporate American and NOT to fund any federal programs, they might take action. (Doubtfully, but you never know).

When you understand the majority of Americans spend most of their income on taxes, inflation and interest. You will then understand all of this money goes to the richest people in the Country; this is what keeps them rich. All of this money goes to the cartel known as the FRB and the government agency known as the IRS is the “mob” enforcer making sure everybody pays.

Without any federal laws giving the government the power to collect income taxes, they have resorted to common thugery and fear to collect this money from the American citizens. The lower courts are also to blame because they know about this scam but will not allow Supreme Court rulings to be admitted as evidence into trials involving taxes.

In fiscal year 1999 the department of defense had 1.1 trillion dollars in undocumentable adjustments. In fiscal year 2000 they had 2.3 trillion in undocumentable adjustments. Undocumentable adjustments mean the money is missing. All of this cash went directly to the FRB as a form of corporate welfare. Evidence of this corruption is known by many within the federal Government.

“Your income tax is a 100% voluntary tax, and your liquor is a 100% enforced tax. The situation is a different as night and day.” Dwight E. Avis, Head of the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Division Bureau of Internal Revenue.

Think about the law requiring us to file a tax return. It is unconstitutional. Under the Fifth Amendment no one is required to provide answers that might incriminate oneself but if your tax return is faulty you can be fined or put in jail. Also, the IRS Code specifically states the filing of an income tax return is voluntary. So why are people put in jail for not filing?

The Constitution allows only for two forms of taxation: direct and indirect. An income tax is neither one. The Constitution states a direct tax must be apportioned, which means it must be divided equally amongst all the people. The income tax cannot be a direct tax because it is not apportioned. An indirect tax is an excise tax like the ones collected on cigarettes or gasoline.

The 16th Amendment did not give the government the power to collect an income tax on the citizens of America. It only allowed a taxing on the earnings of corporate profits. In Stanton vs. Baltic Mining the Supreme Court explicitly states that the provisions of the 16th Amendment allows no new power of taxation. Income tax is being collected illegally by our government. They wield the IRS like a mob boss uses a cajole. People pay out of fear NOT because the law requires it.

There are several other Supreme Court rulings from the same time period stating the federal government does NOT have the power to collect an income tax on individuals or defining the term “income” as money earned by corporate America and NOT its citizens: Straton Independence vs. Hobarth, Peck vs. Lowe, Burnett vs. Harmel, Doyle vs. Mitchell to name only a few. In a letter by Daniel Inoway’s office of the United States Senate, he writes “Based on research by the Congressional Research Service, there is no provisions which require an individual to pay an income tax.”

The definition of income was given by the Supreme Court in the Eisner vs. Macomber and the Doyle vs. Mitchell cases. Income is defined as gains or profits resulting from corporate activity NOT wages or labor. The Supreme Court also said that your labor is your private property. In 2005 the illegal taxes collected on our labor added up to $927.2 billion. The legal corporate taxes collected were $278.3 billion.

There is nothing in the IRS provisions creating an income tax evasion crime or allowing them to seize property. These laws do not exist yet people are unjustly prosecuted and fined or jailed every year. This is illegal activity perpetrated by the government to scare people into submission. This is a form of judicial blackmail. If the IRS seizes all of your property and assets you can’t even get a lawyer because all of your cash was taken by the government. How can you mount a proper defense without any money?

You have to understand that an agency which imposes an illegal tax does not care about your rights NOR will they allow you to use the law for your protection. The IRS operates outside the boundaries set up by the Supreme Court. Lower Courts also operate outside the boundaries of the Supreme Court by putting people in jail for not complying with an illegal tax but since your assets are taken you can never mount a proper defense in court.

The Constitution freed our society by creating certain unalienable rights. The IRS tax codes have enslaved our society by illegally overstating its boundaries and trumping the most important document ever written, the Constitution. I think it is funny how we are in Iraq fighting for their “democracy” and helping them draft a Constitution when we won’t even defend our own.

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Already they have raised up a monied aristocracy that has set the government at defiance. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs." Thomas Jefferson

I am preparing another post showing you how they plan to control the entire population of the United States within the next 50 years. In the name of terrorism they will will brush the constitution aside like and old dirty sock. They are working on a plan impose a new system of "protections" on us to deliver us from Al Qaeda. Some of the laws have already been passed but many more are to come. Stay tuned for more. I am taking my time with these posts to get them as accurate as I can.

We would all be better off if the FRB were disbanded. We can either choose to do something about this, or choose to go back to sleep within the Matrix. Which will you choose?

Actually, there is not much we can do about this. The income tax is garnished from our pay checks before we ever get a chance to protest. The system is set up so we don’t even have a voice. The FRB is the richest, most powerful corporation in the world. Not even our government has the power to defend itself against them.

Ahh! The New Year is finally here. Out with the old and in with the new but in our case it’s out with the old and in the old again. It just seems like that anyway because I don’t make any stupid promises to myself. Oh sure, I would love to make a New Year’s resolution to win the lottery, lose about 10 pounds, grow more hair and screw Kate Beckinsale but that will not happen (maybe next year though, LOL).

People are flocking to join gyms to lose weight quickly to fulfill their empty-headed attempt at a New Year’s resolution. But the reality is, they will go the first couple of weeks and then pay the gym for nothing but sitting at home (or at the bar) on their asses. How foolish is this? If there is something you should be doing then you should be doing it already. Why do you need a new year to start?

I never have understood this stupid ritual. People think, “I gotta do this but I’ll put it off until next year, do it for a few weeks and then back to the same old shit. But at least I tried.” Yea right. Everybody eats a little more cake, cookies and pie during the holidays because it’s there. It’s usually not there the other months. But we should not need a new year to start eating right again; you should just do it.

A New Year’s resolution is one of those empty promises like the “American Dream”. What is the American Dream? To most people or if you listen to what the media tells us, it’s simply obtaining a mortgage. So you find a house, give it to a bank and then work the rest of your life trying to pay it off. So now you are a slave to the bank working for them. And then when the house is finally paid you’ll be paying at least triple of the original price on the house. That sounds more like an American Nightmare to me. The American Dream should be at least to OWN the home. (NOTE: owning means not paying for it or having paid it off.)

My idea of the American Dream is a little different from everyone else’s. I want to work less while earning more. If I average 50 hours of work for $50,000 last year, then I want to average 40 hours of work for $55,000 this year, and so on. That is my goal every year and if I do that, then everything else will work itself out.

I am one of the lucky ones. I have no debt other than my mortgage: no credit card, no car payments, no child support or alimony; just the house. I do use the credit card but at the end of the month it is always paid in full. Also, 10% of our total salary goes into a 401k and 25% into an interest bearing savings account. You should always pay yourself first before paying your bills. But then you have to make sure to keep your bills at an affordable level. This translates into living within your means. Translation, you cannot live like a rock star on a janitor’s salary.

I read someplace the average American carries $10,000 of credit card debt (at 12% or higher interest). They also spent $1.10 for every $1 they earn. How stupid is that? Living the way I do requires discipline but it is worth it not to be a slave to the creditors. I can’t imagine paying a $10,000 loan at 15% interest or higher.

Most people get themselves in financial trouble by buying a home they cannot afford. They think, “Well the bank says I can afford this and they wouldn’t lie to me, would they?” Yes they would. I remember shopping for a loan on the new house a few years back and the creditors telling me I could afford this enormo-house payment. I remember them saying, “Darth! You should buy a bigger house than that, you can afford it.” To which I would reply, “Just give me the freakin’ loan for this amount…..idiot!”

According to their calculations you can afford a house payment which is 25% of your salary. Well you can do that but its financial suicide. You still got to have money to live and you can’t do that when 25% of your gross income goes to the mortgage company. Our house payment is less than 10% of our salary.

For those of your shopping for a loan for a first-time home remember this. Do not listen to the bank or the real estate agent. Do your budget and buy a home based upon your calculations, not theirs. They aren’t the one who must pay off that enormo-loan. The only thing the real estate agent cares about is making their commission and the bigger the commission, the better. The only thing the bank cares about is getting those payments every month and the bigger those payments, the better. They don’t really care about you at all. And they don’t care about you at all with a BIG smile on their face.