Bentzen’s Blog

DownsizeDC.org
by Brian Bentzen

After listening to last week’s Freedom Watch, I visited one of the featured websites, DownsizeDC.org.  This website is run by a group of individuals who believe in smaller government and believe the best way to save our country from its current downward spiral is to change the behavior of currently elected politicians.  They don’t work to elect the best candidates, because good candidates can become better politicians.  Instead they provide a means for concerned citizens to easily email their Representative and both Senators in a single step regarding current issues and possible new legislation.

After signing up for their site, I received an email update.  They send out 3 to 6 updates a week, each day focusing on one of their current campaigns.  These campaigns range from topics like “Federal Deficit Causes Congressional Pay Cut” to “Make Congress Read the Bills Before Voting” to “Repeal the REAL ID Act.”  Today the featured campaign was  ”Cap and Trade is Not the Way.”  By clicking on a link in the update, I was able to find out that my Representative Tim Holden (D-PA) voted against the recent cap and trade law.  I was then able to send a message to my Pennsylvania Senators, urging them to vote against cap and trade.  They provide a mandatory lead in sentence so you can’t violate the intended use of their site that began, “I think the cap and trade legislation is bad policy.”  From that beginning I wrote my own short and concise message regarding my thoughts on cap and trade.  I immediately received a confirmatory email and later in the day, received an automated response from Senator Casey say that my email would be read by his staff.

I urge everyone to look into this site and explore their campaigns.

Hey Mr. Taxman
by Brian Bentzen

“Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it.  If it keeps moving, regulate it.  And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” — Ronald Reagan

This is my pledge.  I will pay as little tax as possible.  This will be my mission for the rest of my life.  I will endeavor to contribute as little as I can to my government’s coffers while creating as much value as possible in the real world.  This year, I will max out my retirement account and live frugally.  I will donate my old stuff to charity.

Unfortunately, I can’t avoid FICA or state and local tax, or real estate tax, and my share of corporate tax, and the taxes on the gas used to transport my goods and so forth.  And I can’t get into the 0% tax rate unless I refuse to pay altogether.  This would put me in prison and cost taxpayers $50,000 a year.  I don’t want to contribute to the problem.  I just want to not contribute more than required.

But what about going one step further?  What if I were to go after tax credits?  I could install solar panels on the roof for $25,000.  Uncle Sam would give me 30% and Pennsylvania 35%.  That’s quite a tax credit.  The solar power would reduce my bill to approximately $0 a month, and PPL would pay me for any excess power generation at the retail rate.  With rate caps expiring this seems like quite a deal.  But there are some problems.

In a free society, government does not interfere with the free market capitalist economy.  Solar incentives, like all tax incentives, help the government to control the economy.  In this case, the solar subsidy will increase the supply of energy while decreasing demand.  The cost of electricity should theoretically decrease.  Demand for solar panels should increase and supply should increase as well in response to the increase in demand.  What does this accomplish?  The goal may be to make more green energy.  It might be to reduce dependence on foreign oil or coal.  It might be to decrease greenhouse emissions.  The result, however, is a solar industry that is artificially inflated.  When the subsidy goes away, if the subsidy goes away, what will happen?  The solar producers will have lower demand, increased supply and as a result they may have difficulty turning a profit.  Meanwhile, your tax dollars are being invested in businesses that should be investing in themselves.  Your money is being spent on my rooftop accessory.

While I agree that a new set of solar panels on my roof would be likely to greatly increase my cashflow, why should you give that to me?  I would like to increase my cashflow, but everyone who doesn’t have solar panels will have decreased cashflow due to my desire to save a few bucks.  Likewise, your tax dollars might go to the development of a solar power plant.  The cost of this power plant may already be less than the cost of providing electricity from a coal burning plant.  The solar technology is sitting on the edge of profitability now.  At $1/w production cost, solar energy becomes cheaper than coal.  Nanosolar and First Solar are among the few companies who can produce cost efficient solar paneling.  Nanosolar reports that it has already sold its next 12 months worth of production and is working to increase production capacity.  If the electric company can already make a greater profit from buying solar panels, why should the government subsidize their investment?

The free market best allocates resources.  When government intervenes, resources are redistributed according to those who are sitting in power.  In this case taxpayer resources are being transferred to me and to electric companies.  The system is designed so I can get solar panels on my roof at your expense.  The programs are designed so your electric company can increase their profits at your expense.  If this is just, why is it so repugnant?

The American Car Company
by Brian Bentzen

The Age of the American car company has not passed.  Chrysler is leaving the US, and wrecking havoc with bankrupty law in the process.  GM will soon be owned by the government and its own unions, which will make for interesting contract negotiations.  Ford has stood alone, refusing government intervention but still hasn’t made an annual profit since 2005.  As these automakers struggle to turn a profit, it seems to me like the perfect time to start a new car company.  Henrik Fisker beat me to it.  Fisker Automotive, will release it’s first vehicle, an $88,000 sporty plug in hybrid called the Karma, later this year.

The Karma is beautiful.  Fisker made his name as a designer and his company’s first offering lives up to expectations aesthetically.  The vehicle offers two driving modes:  Stealth (high efficiency) and Sport (0-60 in 5.8 s).  The first 50 miles of range are powered by a lithium ion battery.  After that, the GM supplied gasoline engine kicks in and powers the battery, giving the car an unlimited range as opposed to electric only cars like the Tesla.  The only problem with this car is that it is actually manufactured in Finland and thus not the new American car company that is begging to be created.

The World’s Smallest Political Quiz
by Brian Bentzen

For the past 10 years I’ve been unaffiliated with a political party because I can’t agree with the economic stance of liberals and I can’t agree with the social stance of conservatives.  Then I found The World’s Smallest Political Quiz, and found my calling as a true blue Libertarian.  The quiz asks 10 questions about your views on economic and personal issues and then assigns you a position on a 3-dimensional grid.  The 3rd dimension removes the artificial categories of Left and Right, and leaves a place for Statists, Centrists and Libertarians.  The quiz was written in 1969 and in most cases is accurate.  Take 5 minutes to do the quiz and find your location on the political map!