So … is there a stimulus plan that could work?  Is there an idea that could put an immediate cash infusion into the American economy?  Could we, with one or two quick decisions, take action to put our economy on the fast-track again, while costing no more than the estimated one to three-and-a-half trillion dollars that Obama and the Democrat-controlled Congress have allocated so far?

Yes.

Before I get into the solution, I’d like to tell a short story.  Not so long ago, I operated a small business in my hometown in North Carolina.  The business was located in a small, rustic little downtown Main Street area that needed some stimulus.  A bunch of the business-owners started a group to try to improve the area, and we began meeting regularly.  It didn’t take long for ideas to start flowing, and one of them was beautification.

It seems that the city had a beautification program that we could take advantage of.  If we would purchase the cement planters to place around our little downtown area, the city would fill them with flowers, and take care of the upkeep.  Not a bad deal, all in all.  We all thought it was a great idea, so the next question was, how to get the planters, and pay for them.  The head of the group, a Republican, was pushing for a special tax district for our area, with a small additional tax being paid by the building-owners that would go into the coffers of our group, the designated business association.  The tax money could then be used to purchase planters, as a first project.

The tax-district idea had been put forth in multiple meetings.  It wasn’t popular.  Honestly, I did my part to make sure I talked to everyone that hated the idea, and make sure it couldn’t be pushed through.  When it was brought up yet again, in reference to the planters, I stood up to say exactly how stupid I thought the idea was, and where I thought the district lines should be drawn so that I was excluded.

The leader of our group looked at me, and asked a simple question.  “Without the tax district, and the money we would get from it, how would we pay for the planters?”

I stood my ground, and presented my idea.  It was simple.  We call around, and find suppliers of the planters.  We find the best price, and any business owner that would like a planter can buy one, two, or however many they need.  We just collect the money, and go pick them up on a truck.

You would have thought I had slapped the guy’s sister.  While others in the room nodded at my suggestion, our leader blustered something about how not everyone would buy them, and we would have planters in front of some stores, but not others.

My response to his objection was, yet again, simple.  If everyone doesn’t buy planters, then not everyone gets planters.  Those who don’t get them will see them appear in front of the other stores, and they’ll want them too.  Before much time passes, a second order will need to be made for those that don’t buy-in the first time.

Well, my idea won, and his idea lost.  Money was collected, planters were purchased, and flowers were planted.  The tiny improvement made a huge difference, and lots of people talked about how nice the planters looked.  Those that didn’t buy on the first round saw the benefit, and a second round of planters had to be purchased.

The point of the story is that we could have gone the tax route.  Money could have been taken from profits to pay the tax.  The tax money could have gone to the city, until the time came to pay the business owner’s group the proceeds (100% of the tax would have gone to the group).  The group would have had to pay costs of accounting, and decide how to spend the money.  Some day, perhaps months down the road, we would have been able to purchase planters for everyone.  Instead, we simply allowed those who wanted the benefit of the planters to buy-in, and we got a good deal.  Peer-pressure worked on the stragglers, and they soon paid for planters as well.  No taxes, and great benefit in two weeks, rather than months.

How does this story apply to today’s economic issues?

Right now, our government is taking taxes at every level.  They take a personal income-tax, which you pay out of your paycheck.  They take a corporate income-tax, which you pay in the price of the goods and services you receive.  They take tax in tariffs, duties, and licensing fees, all of which increase the cost of goods and services you receive, and so you’re the one paying them in the end.

Looking at the bills Congress is passing, and Obama is signing, that tax money isn’t being spent well.  It’s paying for streetscaping, trollies, libraries, museums, sidewalks, “Totally Teen Zone,” fairgrounds, ferries, a swamp canal, a water-taxi service, a Historic Jazz Association, aircraft displays, lobster research, catfish research, and many, MANY, more non-stimulus items. For the record, there’s even at least one downtown revitalization project in there.

All this, and Obama is talking about tax increases “for the rich.”

What if we took a little different path.  What if we cut out the middleman.  It seems to be a good idea for business to cut out the middleman, and passing the savings on to the customer.  The customer pays the money, and the customer gets the benefit of the purchase.  YOU are the customer.  YOU pay the taxes, and YOU are supposed to be the beneficiary of all the good that government does. The government is the middleman.

Let’s do something simple.  Let’s go back and cancel the “Porkulus” bill, that is disguised as stimulus.  Let’s cancel the spending bill with 9000 earmarks.  Let’s replace them with a simple, effective stimulus plan that we can agree on.

Here’s the plan.  We cut the 2008 personal income tax to zero.

That’s it.

I can’t take credit for the idea.  Rush Limbaugh is the one I heard mention the idea, but as I keep thinking about it, it sounds better and better.  Here’s how it would work.

Starting as soon as possible, all federal income-tax withholding would be stopped from your paycheck.  This would result in an immediate boost in available cash to every working person in America.  How much of your paycheck each payment period goes to federal income taxes? Is it 25%?   Let’s just take that as an easy number to work with.

If 25% of your check goes to federal income taxes, and your tax rate is cut to zero, your $1000 in take-home pay will rise to approximately $1330.  That’s enough for a payment on an affordable car. $330 per week for a year is over $17,000.  That’s enough for a nice downpayment on a house, or a full purchase on a slightly-less-affordable car.

In April, anything you’ve paid into the federal income tax withholding before the wittholding was stopped would be refunded to you. If the plan went into action on April 1, then your refund would be almost $4000 based on the numbers above.

What’s the cost to the government?  It would cost one trillion dollars.  That, conveniently enough, would be offset by the cancellation of the last spending bill.  What’s more, unlike the spending bill, the tax cut would actually stimulate the economy.

What would YOU do with your federal income-tax money back?

I won’t bother with advising on interactions with the palestinians, since Obama has ties to the palestinians; already. Likewise, he seems to have good ties with Kenya. Heck, some think Obama was born in Kenya, including his own grandmother who says she was in the hospital at the time.

I’d like to talk about some of the other international connections that need to be addressed.

Afghanistan

You’ve talked about increasing the efforts in Afghanistan.  Since President Bush made a point of giving the military the resources they needed, it’s obvious that the military doesn’t know what they need.  You’ll want to give them more.

The forces in Afghanistan at the moment include troops of many types.  On the hunt for Bin Laden, for instance, we have many special forces working throughout the country.  You’ll want to increase that number.  This may extend deployments, cause a reduction in training, an increase in divorce rates, and a general lowering of effectiveness, but you can’t let that affect you.  You made a campaign promise, and you have to keep it.

After all, if Bin Laden actually puts his head up out of his secure hideaway long enough to be seen, you might get lucky where Bush has not.  If you can actually find him, you can take credit for doing something Bush couldn’t.

Capturing Bin Laden won’t actually do much to stop islamic terrorism in the long run, but it can be a feather in your own cap.

Iraq

It is very important that you continue the liberal story on Iraq.  Repeatedly refer to Bush’s “lie” that Iraq was involved in the 9/11 attacks.  Whatever you do, don’t tell the truth that Bush specifically said that there was no evidence of such involvement. Don’t let on that things have improved in Iraq so much that military vehicles no longer demand the right-of-way in the streets, but now follow the same traffic rules as the rest of society.

Keep telling the story that Iraqis don’t want us there.  Don’t point out that the fighting against us is primarily by militants and terrorists that came to Iraq from other countries to fight both the US and the new Iraqi government.  Since you’re determined that they don’t want us, and that we must pull out, it is VERY important that you avoid mentioning that the Iraqi government has asked us to stay at least 3 more years.

Keep selling Iraq as a failure.  Keep saying it was based on a lie. Keep your story just as it is, and pull our troops out as fast as you can.  When the foreign militants increase their efforts in the vacuum, you can point to it as an example of our failure, rather than a result of your own actions. 

Don’t worry, your supporters won’t question you.

France

France has, in the past, opposed the multi-lateral actions that the US led in Iraq.  When the US , Britain, and other countries acted in Iraq, France was vocal in standing against us.  They painted our actions as unilateral (meaning we did it alone) and misguided.  It is very important that you understand that France sees unilateral military action against enemies in the Middle East, Africa, and Asia as its own job.  When we took action, it wasn’t so much that we did anything wrong, as it was stepping on their toes.

Things have changed now in France.  The tide has changed a bit, and opposition to our actions has reduced.  Sarkozy’s election was a natural outgrowth of this change.  Part of this has been because of France’s own problems with militant Islam within their borders.

I left France for last, because it is the lynchpin of my foreign policy advice.  In recent years, France’s support has been the key judgement on US foreign policy.  You have to continue this trend.   For that reason, I give you my #1 rule for your foreign policy.

France is the foremost promoter of US interests in the world.  It is imperative that you listen to their advice, and get french approval for any actions taken outside our borders.  If you don’t, then the Democrats will oppose you.

Oh wait… no they won’t.  Who’ll tell them?

Today’s advice is this.  Take credit for anything good that happens during your presidency.  Add to that the following corollary.  Give blame for anything bad to George Bush and the Republicans.

On its face, this advice seems pretty simple.  After all, if the jobless rate falls, You can take credit for it during your term.  If the economy improves, you can take credit for it.  This, though, isn’t quite to the level that I mean.

When I say “take credit for everything,”  I mean EVERYTHING.  As the new messiah, it is important that everything good that happens in the world be credited to you, Mr. President-Elect. This means, if a research laboratory attached to NC State University discovers a way to convery spent uranium into non-radioactive, non-toxic, and rather tasty chocolate treats, you have to announce it from the White House.

If medical science somehow proves, once and for all, that a child in the womb is merely a mass of cells up until the moment it is delivered into the air and becomes a human life, you have to announce it from the White House.

When the truth starts to become clear about how the Earth has been cooling since 1998, thus placing us in a period of “global cooling,” you have to annouce it in the White House.  I suggest using words like, “Due to my policies of carbon-dioxide reduction, a move to more fuel-efficient transportation, and increased regulation of industrial pollutants, we have turned the tide against the global warming threat.”  Don’t harp too much on how the cooling started two presidencies ago, or how the actual climate scientists would never actually conclude that carbon dioxide caused global warming.  Don’t say anything about how global average  measured temperatures rose at a rate that could  be explained by the closure of measuring stations in colder regions such as Siberia.  Just leave the truth out of it.  If the people wanted truth they’d have elected… well, I’m not sure who they’d have elected this time, but it wouldn’t have been a Democrat.

At any rate, you have to take credit for any good news (meaning cooling in this case, which may not be better than warming overall) that happens.  It’s your job as the new messiah.  You just can’t go letting people believe that the old messiah’s Dad had anything to do with it.

The people are looking to you, Mr. President-Elect, to BE that new messiah.  YOU  have to be the source of all that is good in this world.  YOU have to make the rose garden speech announcing new technological innovations from IBM.  YOU have to speak from the oval office if science ever finds a single, solitary use for embryonic stem cells after all these years of trying. YOU announce the results of scientific studies that have gone on for years, if they publish during your presidency.  YOU announce that GSK or Merck have discovered a new treatment for cancer, after decades of research.  Heck, if you can announce that Baby Jessica has been rescued from the well, do it.

Don’t let the fact that the work on these things has gone on for years, or even been completed for a decade or more.  Annouce them as if YOU were the visionary who made it happen.

You’re going to need a short press conference (no questions from the gallery) every weekday for four years to say something positive.  How you handle these daily briefings will determine if you get another four years.

Oh, and the bad news?  Either ignore it, release it on a Friday afternoon (after 3:30 means missing Limbaugh and the deadline for the 6pm evening newscasts) or blame the Republicans.

I know you can do this.  It’s so important that you do this. You have an image to maintain.  That’s more important than the economy, or the country, or those little people clinging to guns and faith.  It’s more important than the police officers you had removed from your sight while they protected you during the campaign.  It’s important, because without the image you are nothing.  Without the image, you have no power.  Your image got you elected, and it’s your image that can get you re-elected.  Protect and enhance that image, and you get to grow, and keep your power.

Hey, if you can handle this advice properly, yesterday’s advice on the middle-class tax cut should be easy enough to handle.

Daniel 11:36-37

First, you’ll have to set the stage for what is to come. Over the next few weeks, you’ll be giving speeches on a variety of topics. Make references to the current economic client. Use phrases like “researching to determine what we can afford,” and “economic realities.” Make it clear that, while your tax plan represented an “ideal plan based in the realities of the moment,” the “current realities” will require that all options be placed on the table.
Now, the tax cut plan you laid forth has three basic brackets.
* _The Poor _- Their “tax cut” amounted to receiving money that they never paid. Giving money for nothing is the best way to buy votes for a re-election, so this “tax cut” is a must.
* The Rich – You never promised this group a tax cut anyway. In fact, you promised to raise their taxes. Keeping this promise will prevent, or at least slow, economic recovery. Keeping this promise will cause job loss, or at best a slowing of job creation. Nonetheless, a promise is a promise, so taxes on the rich will have to go up. The top 25% currently pay 86% of taxes. With tax increases, and the impact on the economy to go with it, this percentage may be about to fall. That leads to:
* The Middle Class – Let’s face it. This block is the hardest to deal with in writing a tax plan. They actually make enough money to pay taxes, unlike the poor. Unlike the rich, they only pay a small portion of the total tax burden. The 86% of the tax burden paid by the top 25% of taxpayers would be higher if we could just make them richer, but higher tax rates will do the opposite. That places the burden on the middle class to make up the difference. You’ll say how sorry you are to do it, but then as President, you’ll drop the middle-class tax cut just like you always planned.
The important aspect of this is that you must create the image that you’re fighting for that tax cut. Tell the middle-class how important they are. That’s what they want to hear. All the way to inauguration day, you’ve got to tell the american people how important these tax cuts are, especially to the middle-class.
Be careful, though. While you have 100 days to show how much you can get done, you don’t want to drop the idea of the middle-class tax cut in the first 30. Two months in should be enough time to wait before dropping the bomb.
Clinton moved too quickly in telling the truth about his middle-class tax cut plan. He talked about “revisiting” the plans, and how he was “mystified” that the media somehow believed the middle-class tax cut to be a part of his “big plans” after he had talked about it the entire campaign
You’ve got to slow down. After the first 30 days, you’ll have some positives to build on, and you can drop the news of there being no tax cut for the middle-class at 5:30pm on a Friday. That way, the news media will have a hard time reporting on it until it is old news. Most of the weekend shows will already be taped by then.
I know you can do it. Heck, it’s not like you don’t already plan to drop the middle-class tax cut from your plan already. It’s the implementation of this move that’s important, if you want to solidify yourself into America’s future as a great President. Unlike Bill Clinton, you have to lie to the people without them calling you a liar.
Hey, with how well you hid your past during the election, this should be a breeze.