My Journey to Millions
  • Investments
    • Dividend Investment Portfolio
  • Personal Finance
  • Estate Planning
  • Life Insurance
  • Personal Situation
  • About
  • Archives
  • Contact / Advertise
  • Disclaimer
My Journey to Millions
  • Investments
    • Dividend Investment Portfolio
  • Personal Finance
  • Estate Planning
  • Life Insurance
  • Personal Situation
Tag:

Libertarian

Politics

Presidential Republican Candidates Need to Stay Away from “Social Issues”

by Evan August 10, 2015

Politically, I identify mostly with the idea of libertarianism.  The definition of which defers person to person (much like “right” and “left”) but the the tiny political party claiming to represent the ideology, provides a pretty good baseline definition,

Libertarians believe in, and pursue, personal freedom while maintaining personal responsibility.

***

Libertarians strongly oppose any government interfering in their personal, family and business decisions.  Essentially, we believe all Americans should be free to live their lives and pursue their interests as they see fit as long as they do no harm to another.

In a nutshell, we are advocates for a smaller government, lower taxes and more freedom.

Are Libertarians liberal or conservative?

Libertarians are neither. Unlike liberals or conservatives, Libertarians advocate a high degree of both personal and economic liberty. For example, Libertarians advocate freedom in economic matters, so we’re in favor of lowering taxes, slashing bureaucratic regulation of business, and charitable — rather than government — welfare. But Libertarians are also socially tolerant.  We won’t demand laws or restrictions on other people who we may not agree because of personal actions or lifestyles.

Think of us as a group of people with a “live and let live” mentality and a balanced checkbook.

In a sense, Libertarians “borrow” from both sides to come up with a logical and consistent whole — but without the exceptions and broken promises of Republican and Democratic politicians. That’s why we call ourselves the Party of Principle.

Notwithstanding, my self imposed and loose label, I find that I much more closely relate with/to the Republican party rather than the Democrat party.  As such, I found myself watching the train wreck that was the first republican primary debate last week.  It felt like the first few episodes of a reality show where you know that in a few weeks most of these people are going to be “voted off” and you can really emotionally invest later on.

Republicans Need to Bail on What are Traditional Social Issues

In my opinion, in 2015 there are two “main” social issues:

  • Same-sex Marriage otherwise known as Marriage Equality
  • Abortions

My personal feelings are not all that important to the discussion, and they are complicated at best regarding both of those issues (Very long story short, I end up on the side that all people should have the right to marry whomever they want and I am pro-choice). The reason the Republicans should bail on these two issues is simple – they just don’t matter when it comes to running for executive branch, and all they do is alienate the middle of the ground people which may or may not have voted for a Republican President.

First and foremost, the fight against same-sex marriage is over.  Conservatives lost. Period.  The Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that,

…the fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples by both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

In November 2014, following a lengthy series of appeal court rulings for the Fourth, Seventh, Ninth, and Tenth Circuits that such state bans were unconstitutional, the Sixth Circuit ruled that it was bound by Baker v. Nelson and found them constitutional, creating a split between circuits and leading to an almost inevitable Supreme Court hearing.

Decided on June 26, 2015, Obergefell overturned Baker and requires all states to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples and to recognize same-sex marriages validly performed in other jurisdictions.[4] This legalized same-sex marriage throughout the United States, its possessions and territories. The ruling examined the nature of fundamental (constitutional) rights guaranteed to all by the constitution and which are harmed by waiting and therefore need not wait for legislative processes to be remedied, and the evolving understanding of discrimination and inequality which has developed greatly since the court last visited this question.

So at this point there is literally nothing that could be done by an incoming Republican President – so why is it even being brought up?  You have to be absolutely delusional if you think that an incoming President is going to use any and all of his (or her) new political clot to overturn marriage equality.  So Republicans lets stop alienating those middle of the line voters on this issue!

The second issue often referred to as a “Social Issue” is the political third rail of pro-life vs pro-choice.  Regardless of where you fall on the political spectrum – the President has absolutely no power to do anything about this issue!  Regardless of the president who is elected they won’t effect change when it comes to abortion.  Why?

  • The President doesn’t write the law (so he would need to get something through Congress for him or her to sign – not happening)
  • The President can’t “de-fund” programs – Congress has the power to spend money

I guess the President could try to “Pack the Court” (appoint federal judges that agree with the same stance) but that would take a ridiculous amount of time for the issue to be heard in and ruled upon in the Federal Court System.

Soooooo, since these are two issues which can’t be changed lets stop alienating swayable voters!

August 10, 2015 6 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Politics

The Fundamental Difference Between Conservatives and Liberals When it Comes to Equality

by Evan July 15, 2011

Every morning while getting ready for work I have CNBC on as background noise, and I saw a commercial the other morning that really got me to thinking about something other than money and personal finance.  It was some MSNBC anchor talking about he just wants, “equality” and I immediately thought to myself, “who besides those crazy KKK guys doesn’t want equality?”  Then as I am brushing teeth it hit me, if me and this guy want the same thing (i.e. equality) why do I consistently want to tear the TV off the wall every time I stop on MSNBC?

Prior to providing an answer a little about Evan.  While I have discussed it in the past, it should be noted that I am for the most part a Libertarian.  When asked I usually sum up a Libertarian as a person who is fiscally conservative (low taxes/low government interference) but who is socially progressive (pro choice / pro gay marriage) but for a more complete understanding you may want to check out the LP’s platform page.  The introduction to that preamble reads,

As Libertarians, we seek a world of liberty; a world in which all individuals are sovereign over their own lives and no one is forced to sacrifice his or her values for the benefit of others (emphasis added).

We believe that respect for individual rights is the essential precondition for a free and prosperous world, that force and fraud must be banished from human relationships, and that only through freedom can peace and prosperity be realized (emphasis added).

Consequently, we defend each person’s right to engage in any activity that is peaceful and honest, and welcome the diversity that freedom brings. The world we seek to build is one where individuals are free to follow their own dreams in their own ways, without interference from government or any authoritarian power (emphasis added).

I have an entire category political posts, but some of my favorites include:

  • Affirmative Action Takes a Well Deserved Blow by The Supreme Court of the United States
  • Socialism is Not the Answer
  • What Did African Americans Think Obama Was Going to Do?

What is Equality and How do We Reach it?

I think the questions of What and How are what politically divides people  when it comes to equality.  I don’t think I can be clearer than the preceding emphasized portions:

  • No one is forced to sacrifice his or her values for the benefit of others
  • Only through freedom can peace and prosperity be realized
  • Where individuals are free to follow their own dreams in their own ways, without interference from government or any authoritarian power

Or, said succinctly, If I am personally being disadvantaged or having my rights impeded for the benefit of another then all is NOT equal.

When the United States Government decides to help a certain class, race or sex they are doing it at the direct detriment of another.  Should there be exceptions? Of course, The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was the Federal Government attempting to fight de jur racial and gender discrimination.  Similarly, the American with Disability Act has provided an attempt to level the playing field for those with mental or physical special needs.

However, all is not equal when the only thing that separates two candidates is the color of their skin 0r the fact that one lost the sperm lottery and grew up in particular neighbor and the Federal Government or State Government provides extra points on a test that could lead to a profitable career.

This discussion has been going on since the beginning of this Country, and I am sure well before that, so I have no grand illusion that it will be solved in this 500 word post.  Notwithstanding, it is the What and the How that puts a divide between social conservatives and social liberals.

July 15, 2011 19 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Taxes

What is a Sin Tax?

by Evan July 12, 2010

Sin Tax cartoon

I generally have a problem with most so called sin taxes.  I think my main problem with sin taxes have to do with politicians purporting them to be anything other than a way to raise money.

What are Sin Taxes?

Sin taxes can be defined as

A state-sponsored tax that is added to products or services that are seen as vices, such as alcohol, tobacco and gambling. These type of taxes are levied by governments to discourage individuals from partaking in such activities without making the use of the products illegal. These taxes also provide a source of government revenue.

Pros and Cons of Sin Taxes

The pros are pretty easy to understand:

  • The whole ‘sin’ part! Meaning that if the government taxes (and thus people reduce their amount of activity) an immoral act then society can become more moral
  • Often the activities they are taxing (tobacco and alcohol) lead to increased medical costs and this is a way to try and move society towards a healthier position.
  • Similarly, those costs are often born by government sponsored health care, so this is a way to collect on those costs early on.

Likewise, the cons are also easy to understand:

  • Sin taxes are regressive in that the amount paid is always the same (i.e. New York’s Increase in Cigarette Tax is an absolute number, ~$5.00/pack) so those with lower incomes are affected more
  • Sin taxes could cause a black market situation or rebellion
  • Some argue that Sin taxes don’t work
  • Lastly, who the hell is in charge to determine what is moral or immoral (answer: legislature, but is that a good answer?)

Like any mix of tax and society there is no easy answer.  While I disagree with charging a sin tax on soda, but would be ok with legalized prostitution with a high sin tax.  Thoughts?

July 12, 2010 21 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Politics

How Does this Quote from The Fountainhead Make you Feel?

by Evan June 16, 2010

After way too long I finally finished The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand.  It took me forever since I only really read when on vacation, and the book clocks in at over 700 pages.  I really liked the book and plan on re-reading it one day, but closing in on the last 100 pages or so I came across a diatribe by the main character, Howard Roark that I felt should be shared.

Howard Roark Talks about Government Housing Projects

A little background about the lengthy quote: In this ‘scene’ one main character Howard Roark, an architect, is talking to another main character, Peter Keating.  Howard Roark is accepting Peter’s plea to help him design a public housing unit,

‘what architect isn’t interested in housing?’ I hate the whole blasted idea of it.  I think it’s a worthy undertaking – to provide a decent apartment for a man who earns fifteen dollars a week.  But not at the expense of other men.  Not if it raises the taxes, raises all the othe rrents and makes the man who earns forty live in a rat hole.  That’s what’s hapening in New York.  Nobody can afford a modern apartment – except the very rich and the paupers.

Have you seen the converted brownstones in which the average self-supporting couple has to live?  Have you seen their closet kitchens and their plumbing? They’re forced to live that – because they’re not incompetent enough.  They make forty dollars a week and wouldn’t be allowed into a housing project. But they’re the ones who provide the money for the damn project.  They pay the taxes.  And the taxes raise their own rent. And they have to move from a converted brownstone into an uncoverted one and from that into a railroad flat.

I’d have no desire to penalize a man because he’s worth only fifteen dollars a week.  But I’ll be damned if I can see why a man worth forty must be penalized – and penalized in favor of the one who’s less competent.

I added the paragraph splits to make it easier to read online.

It shouldn’t be terribly surprising that I more or less agree with Howard Roark, but forget me the quote has to illicit some sort of emotion out of you, I’d I love to hear it!

June 16, 2010 16 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Personal Finance

Same Sex Financial Planning is Important and Necessary

by Evan May 27, 2010

Not only do Same Sex Couples have to deal with the relationships problems we “straighties” do same sex couple have another level of problems associated with Financial and Estate Planning.  Oh by the way, I just made up the word Straighties, I hope it gets picked up.

Before we start, I will let you know right off the bat, I am for the legalization of same sex marriages.  So any of the hurdles we are going to talk about are not hurdles I think should be there, but in 2010 America, are there.

What is DOMA? and how Does it Affect Same Sex Couples?

DOMA is an acronym for, Defense of Marriage Act – before you continue reading and think the evil President Bush signed into law…it wasn’t!  It was signed into law by President Clinton.  Yup your liberal dream executed the bill…oh also the same guy who more or less abolished welfare.  DOMA has two main parts, and wikipedia provides simple explanations of them,

    1. No state (or other political subdivision within the United States) needs to treat a relationship between persons of the same sex as a marriage, even if the relationship is considered a marriage in another state.
    2. The federal government defines marriage as a legal union exclusively between one man and one woman.

The first problem is obvious and creates a lot of problems.  In a recent article that I read, “Considerations, Pitfalls and Opportunities that Arise when Advising Same-Sex Couples” by Raymond Prather (American Bar Association Membership required) sums up this problem perfectly,

…if a couple is married in Massachusetts and the moves to Rhode Island, which does not recognize same-sex marriage, then Rhode Island will not provide a forum for divorce…Most States allowing same-sex couples to divorce have residency requirements for jurisdiction over the divorce.  The only way a couple in this situation can divorce is for one person to move to a state recognizing the marriage

Problem Number 2 is easier to understand…none of that jurisdiction garbage.  According to that same article by Mr. Prather, there are 1,138 federal benefits of marriage, ONE THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY-EIGHT BENEFITS! Wow.

Now that we understand DOMA and its two sections how does it affect Same Sex Financial Planning?

Same Sex Couple Financial Planning

I truly believe the basics of financial of planning are always the same.  Spend less than you earn, keep good records, etc. etc. and I don’t think it matters if you are two Mr., two Mrs., or somewhere in between.  But what about when it comes to two topics, Life Insurance and Retirement Accounts?

Same Sex Couples and Qualified Retirement Plans

Retirement plans can get tricky with same sex couples.  When a ‘surviving spouse’ inherits most retirement accounts they actually can roll over that amount into their own IRA and then still delay requirement minimum distributions until 70 and 1/2.  This is could lead to a problem since under DOMA a same sex couple can’t have a surviving spouse.  So what do we do?

We make sure they are set up in the best way possible.  So we would make sure each surviving same sex spouse is named as a beneficiary (or a trust for the benefit of that surviving same sex spouse) this way the surviving same sex spouse can at least stretch it over his or her lifetime.

Same Sex Couples and Life Insurance

Life Insurance for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Couples can get very complicated very quickly if you aren’t working with someone who understands the issues.  Since in the eyes of most states and the federal government these couples aren’t married then where is the insurable interest?

The easiest way to fix this is to use an Irrevocable Life Insurance Trust (ILIT).  An ILIT, very simply put, is a trust which is used to hold life insurance.  This may or may not work depending if the insurance company reads the trust document closely.  Another option would be to have one spouse purchase the policy on themselves and then transfer the policy to the partner, but this could have gifting issues as well as insurance issues associated with transferring the policy soon after it was created.

Thoughts?

May 27, 2010 8 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
  • 1
  • 2

Follow on Twitter

Tweets by MJTM

Sign Up to Receive Posts

Subscribe our Newsletter for new blog posts, tips & new photos. Let's stay updated!

Popular Posts

  • 1

    What Can John Wooden Teach us about Stock Analysis?

    June 14, 2010
  • 2

    10 Year Anniversary at Work

    May 18, 2017
  • 3

    Three Common Qualities of High Net Worth Individual’s Balance Sheets

    January 31, 2010
  • 4

    Top 5 Finance Sites

    August 22, 2008
  • 5

    The Best Kept Secrets of the World’s Most Successful Self-Made Millionaires

    September 19, 2019

Back To Top