Appraisers' Free Forum

Permit me to volunteer a top down solution. Since the executive, legislative and even judicial branches get their hands into the economy every chance they get, it only makes sense to make sure it is in their best economic interest that things go well with the country.

I would like a political party to put it's arms around the following policy initiative. It is far bolder than the Contract With America. In fact, the solution can be claimed by any party.

This would apply to all elected federal officials, all elected and appointed to Federal Judiciary functions. Benchmarks must be established for pay, retirement and medical benefits linked to economic indicators of prosperity. The country does well, they all do well. The country doesn't do so well, they are stake holders in that result as well.

Who among us would say that it is unfair? It's not like there will be a shortage politicians running for the offices.

This relatively small change would unleash clear thinking legislation, rulings and regulations. We will eventually have our needs met simply by saying "tea, Earl Grey" into the synthesizer. If economic principles were applied to politicians and the courts we could save the World.

Mentor wrote:Mako, have you ever tried to quit smoking? Coffee? I have seen someone overdosed on narcotics ( a presumed accident) to relieve pain. It isn't going to be pretty whenever the government stops preventing market forces to establish a sustainable supply-demand.

I know this batch we have in office right now will not put the crack pipe down until there is some sort of intervention, most likely, a supply disruption caused by a revolt of investors around the World where they refuse to buy USA treasuries at any price!
The way this economic hand is being played out, we are going to lose the country as we know it. The whole darned thing will have to be renegotiated, from retirement to medicare to welfare to state aid to foreign policy.

Good bye public employee unions, good bye teachers union, and the whole legal profession will get a memorable tort reform snuggie, if they even are permitted a seat back at the table. They may go the way of previously designated appraisers after T-11 & have to reapply under new standards I said that mostly, because Edd can't help but read this stuff .

I'd like to see a little common sense applied during these trying times.

These idiots (led by Reid) are acting like they don't know their asses from their elbows Tell me NOT ONE of their dipshit advisors doesn't realize their bosses bill will end the tax credit @ the exact same time the Fed quits buying MBS's. It's like watching the Keystone Cops

Maybe they're smarter than I give them credit for and maybe they're more corrupt than I thought Maybe I should take their lead & start shorting builder stocks short Home Depot Lowe's and every other publically traded company that has even a remote connection to housing.

Regarding your 2nd post...

Take a great big breath & hold it.

These corrupt pukes have destroyed the country & the economy. Since Clinton...it's been like watching Idiocracy!

The Future of America;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0yQunhOaU0

Mako, I watched the film.

I really don't see one political side being much smarter than the other. Some supply siders take that position by chance.
What I see is political manipulation and a sufficient number of voters that think they are net winners when their guy does the manipulating.

We need some team players that win when America wins. They need to be rewarded and/or punished dependent upon how well things go economically. There probably should be a 5 year hold over from the time they resign, tapering off, perhaps 20% per year. That way when they pass public option BS, there is a greater chance that it will at least wing their retirement benefits the last year or two of the 5 year holdover.

Rather than just rely on the goodness of their heart to do the right thing, the rules of compensation should be a reinforcement.

Mentor wrote:Mako, I watched the film.

I really don't see one political side being much smarter than the other. Some supply siders take that position by chance.
What I see is political manipulation and a sufficient number of voters that think they are net winners when their guy does the manipulating.

We need some team players that win when America wins. They need to be rewarded and/or punished dependent upon how well things go economically. There probably should be a 5 year hold over from the time they resign, tapering off, perhaps 20% per year. That way when they pass public option BS, there is a greater chance that it will at least wing their retirement benefits the last year or two of the 5 year holdover.

Rather than just rely on the goodness of their heart to do the right thing, the rules of compensation should be a reinforcement.

OK

You asked for it

I nominate you as Plante's VP.

"When good people (you & Jim) do nothing...evil wins!"

Well, I say the NAR stays, but the legal profession has to be disbanded and reorganized.

There have just been too many skippy attorneys over the decades that couldn't or wouldn't follow the constitution and the amendment process. They are all going to have to retest to new standards, plus give a loyalty oath to the Constitution.

No USPAP like document for them. Just simple rules to follow, such as:

1. Follow the Constitution, without making anything up

2. In drafting legal documents, the legal documents will be null and void if they cannot be understood by the peers of the parties to the agreement or those of legal age and of sound mind affected by said documents.

3. People in the new legal profession can work for politicians, but they cannot themselves hold public office without permanently renouncing their status as an attorney.

4. If the attorney so much as suggests that these new rules to follow are living, breathing guidelines, it's up against the wall, MoFo

Mentor wrote:4. If the attorney so much as suggests that these new rules to follow are living, breathing guidelines, it's up against the wall, MoFo

The Supreme Court long ago held that it had the exclusive jurisdiction to interpret the Constitution. So in your efforts to emasculate the legal profession don't forget to reverse that ruling. Then you will be appointed to figure out what the rules are and when they apply and when they don't. That should be simple and we'll have a monarchy. Once you are in place then you can do away with those pesky checks and balances and politicians wasting their time deliberating and creating all of these governmental screw ups.

I think you are mis-interpreting the significance of that ruling. It does not prevent the average joe-Legislator from saying to him/her-self "Ya know, I think this would be unconstitutional... let's not pass it."

Steve Owen wrote:I think you are mis-interpreting the significance of that ruling. It does not prevent the average joe-Legislator from saying to him/her-self "Ya know, I think this would be unconstitutional... let's not pass it."

Think again.

Edd, Steve, no need to argue the point. Apparently I didn't sufficiently flesh out in my brief outline that all members of the judiciary had to start over with a loyalty oath, etc. Among them the spirit of Skippy past and present was to be renounced.

Think of it all as a favorable outcome of a Constitutional Convention. At some point, a Constitutional Convention may be worth the risk. It would be better than a sure thing blood in the street civil war, for example.

Edd Gillespie wrote:Once you are in place then you can do away with those pesky checks and balances and politicians wasting their time deliberating and creating all of these governmental screw ups.

You mean those pesky checks and balances the lib's (pardon me progressives) are ignoring over this health care B.S.

Lib's DO LOVE to change names when they're unpopular don't they Progressive > Liberal > Socialist > Communist. Public Option > Consumer Option

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/10/27 ... 6933.shtml

Tell me where in the Constitution does it mandate that the government is responsible for my health care.

These Communist scum just do as they damn well please and leave it up to the courts to decide whether their actions are Constitutional or not.

Mentor wrote:Think of it all as a favorable outcome of a Constitutional Convention. At some point, a Constitutional Convention may be worth the risk. It would be better than a sure thing blood in the street civil war, for example.

Judging by Pelosi & Reid's numbers...their careers may very well be over. However, they don't seem very concerned. Their idealology seems far more important to them than their careers. Apparently they take a Nakita oath when they join the team - "for the greater cause."