The "Great Reset" - Are You and Your Family At Risk?

 

Anyone who is not financially secure within the next 2-4 years is apt to find themselves in a very, very bad place as the globalist elite make their final push to their New World Order - the "Great Reset."

You may not believe that is possible, but history is replete with instances where tyrants gained control and destroyed even the strongest civilizations in their quest for domination. It is a fact of life - power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Today, in liberal, blue states and cities we can see examples of how it begins.

Look at the places where dictatorial mayors and governors have shuttered small businesses and crippled their cities and states. Those who already had financial independence are relatively safe and unaffected. But everyone else suffers terribly, even to the point of suicide. If ever there was a time to become financially secure in order to survive, that time is now. Not next year, next month or even next week - NOW! Those who wait will suffer.

A lot of people will just give up, believing there is no avenue for them to achieve financial security, but such a belief is unfounded. There are ways for virtually anyone to create more wealth for themselves - all it takes are two things, neither of which requires a college degree nor a pile of cash:

1) desire, determination and a little effort, and
2) knowledge - knowing what the options are, and knowing how to make them work

So, just what are the best options for people who are limited by circumstances that, so far, have kept them from getting ahead? There are two options. One is risky -- buying into cryptocurrency or, as some are doing now, jumping on shorted stocks like many did with GameStop. Such methods are very volatile and while you can make big money, it can be lost just as quickly. And crypto plays into the hands of those same globalist elites that do NOT want your genes in their pool - the push for a cashless society. You would be feeding the very monster that is coming for you.

The other option that anyone can succeed with, and involves minimal risk is real estate. And before you say you cannot afford it, or that it is too complicated, or that it takes too long, know right now that it does not require cash, it need not be at all complicated and profits can be made in as little as two weeks. As long as you can take a few hours to learn how, and you have someone to mentor you, to take you by the hand and guide you, you can do this. There are many "gurus" who will help you do that - some good, others not so good. One of the most popular is FortuneBuilders by Than Merrill - but the cost for his "Mastery" program is roughly $35,000 - far beyond the means of most people.

On the other end of the spectrum we find "The Simple Man's Guide to Real Estate", a program that teaches all 24 methods of investing and provides everything necessary for success - including unlimited mentoring. The investor who created this program has over 50 years experience. And because it is offered on a non-profit basis and all the mentors (actual investors) are volunteers, they can offer the entire course for under $100 - well within the means of everyone.

Whatever route you take (or do not), the point remains the same - if you are not financially secure in the next couple of years, you may very well find yourself at the hard bottom and with no other options left.

/

How To Win Elections in 2022

 

Brought to you by IntelliBiz

 

We are living in troubled and dangerous times, made all the more dangerous by the left instituting a frontal assault on free speech, making if very difficult to oppose them and their narrative - which is, of course, the point. Which means we must try harder, and go "low tech", since they control most of the high tech. And here is a plan...

For the next two years the end game is to retake the House of Representatives, disabling the arm of government that writes bills with the intent of passing laws. At the same time we need to try and regain a majority in the Senate. By doing this, we would completely neuter the Biden administration. And while that seems like a tough hill to climb, it is far from insurmountable.

Some of the angrier people on the right are so ticked off at the Republicans in the GOP that they are calling to start a 3rd party. But that would be self-defeating - we only have two years, and we need half of that to run candidates. That leaves little time (and money) to build an effective, powerful infrastructure. And a third party means competing not with one powerful party, but against two. We would be dead in the water before we even get this tugboat away from the pier.

Here's the only viable option: we RETAKE the GOP, and remake it into the party that serves us, not the establishment. If we do our job well, we can do that rather easily, simply because we have the numbers - there are at least 75 million of us which represents the majority of Republicans in the country. And as the left continues their purge tactics, our numbers are sure to grow. The GOP has the infrastructure and mega-donors, but none of that will do them any good if they do not have We, the People to vote - we have the power. Therefore, our FIRST task is to display that power. To accomplish that, we must unify; work as a unit. We need to find and elevate "generals", people who can pull our movement together, quickly. This, then, is the first and most important task.

Once we have unified, much like the Tea Party did but with a lot more people, we would put the GOP on notice that the power is ours, not theirs, as we have the numbers. Roughly 31% of Americans are Republican, 33% Democrat and 36% are Independents or "other". As of February 2020, there were roughly 45.7 million registered Democrats, 33.3 million Republicans, 33.5 million Independents, 600,000 Libertarians and a handful of Green and other parties. So, what does that tell us?

A strong majority of Independents end up voting Republican as do the majority of Libertarians and the 100,000+ Constitutionalists. Those people are more closely tied to Republican ideals, but chose to separate because thev GOP has failed them. It is safe to assume that, with the right message and presenting it in a convincing and memorable manner, we could amass a majority of voters nationwide.

While we would work to spread our message far and wide, there are specific seats we should set our sights on for 2022 - the most vulnerable seats now held by Democrats and some Republicans who empower the left. Thirty-six Democrat House seats are particularly vulnerable along with (6) vulnerable Democrat Senate seats up for grabs in 2022, all listed at the American Patriot Party website, here. Also listed in that site are the names of "RINO's" that need to be primaried.

As soon as possible upon organizing in a unified movement, we need to identify patriots who, like Donald Trump and Ronald Reagan (who won 49 states), are populists and constitutionalists, and then strongarm the GOP to embrace them. They will have little choice since we would be financially supporting each candidates' individual campaign, and not contributing to the GOP. For example, Virginia Republicans would contribute directly to the individual campaigns of Virginia candidates. If the GOP wants money from us, they would need to support OUR candidates. In this manner we retake and reshape the GOP to our standards, and eliminate RINO's.

Even before we choose and support candidates (which we have vetted extremely well) we need to build a policy platform and form the messages we will be putting forth. It is critical that the platform be simple and attractive to the majority of the general population - ideally it would be a platform that 80% of the country would find appealing.  The "messages" that sell the platform would be tailored independently for each candidate based on the needs and desires of their specific constituents - voters in farm country would have different needs and desires than people in industrial areas, for example. We are talking salesmanship, folks! That is how messages get sold.

We cannot be all things to all people, but we CAN be MOST things to MOST people. In fact, it is conceivable that we can "borrow" portions of the Democrat platform that can be remodeled and reshaped to conservative standards which would take fuel away from Democrat candidates.

As an example, take health care. Democrats beat us up on that subject not because they have a better plan, but because we don't even have a plan. We could add health care to our platform and sell a better plan - instead of a "one size fits all" government health plan, we could offer several individual plans that, combined, fix the system, as Donald Trump started to do with lower drug costs and price transparency. His mistake was that he did not message it well, and the media did not tell people. We should have a policy plan to reduce the cost of medical insurance by capping lawsuits for medical errors; a plan that reduces health care needs by promoting and subsidizing certain industries such as fitness centers, and rebates on fitness equipment. A plan to defeat unhealthy lifestyle choices by increasing costs of junk foods and applying that extra money to lower costs of healthy whole foods. And another plan to reduce the revolving door of referrals and excessive testing currently mandated to reduce lawsuits and pump up profits. In this manner we can come up with a combination of mini-plans that, together, make health care not only more affordable, but also make the population healthier, requiring less health care. You can find a series of these health care ideas here...

In short, we need a platform designed to attract the greatest number of voters, which means co-opting parts of the Democrat platform in ways that change the narrative, providing different and better solutions than socialism offers. We can get lousy healthcare via government control, or great health care via the free market and ingenuity.

We can do the same with other parts of the Democrat platform such as education by creating a message that convinces people that school choice will provide their kids with better education (feature) that results in greater success in life (benefit).

Now that we have a coalition with good leaders and have begun the search for great candidates, we need to enlist people experienced in advertising to help craft our messages for each platform policy - how to sell it to the greatest number of people. For the most part the Republican party has tried to succeed by stating facts and logic because conservatives are "left brain" thinkers while liberals tend to be "right brain" thinkers (emotion and sensory stimulation). Jesus, Aesop and Ronnie Reagan all understood that you simply cannot win people over with facts or logic because as the best salesmen know, people do NOT buy "features". They buy "benefits" that arise from those features. If you want to sell more steaks, throw one on the grill and let people smell it. Instead of trying to sell the steak, sell the SIZZLE.

People do not react to mere facts or features. They react to sensory input (the smell of fresh-baked brownies, the sound of patriotic music) and respond to their emotions which is why Democrats beat us to death - they sell the imagery (pushing granny over a cliff) and whip up emotions. We have to get great salesmen to craft such messages for us. After all, you cannot win over a person by preaching to them - you must first gain their attention by entertaining them, then use the entertaining message to point out the truth in the message, like the parables of Jesus and Aesop, or the humorous stories of Reagan. Those are the messages people react to and remember - and they vote accordingly.

Think about it - do you remember the facts and logic that republicans have used to sell health care? Probably not. Yet you likely recall the simple Democrat ad of a Republican pushing granny over a cliff. Therein lies the difference between winning and losing. We need to sell our platform with messages that are entertaining, funny and memorable. Appeal to people's emotions and sensory perceptions. To this last point, we should make it a point to highlight that all the violence, loss of businesses and income was at the hands of people on the left, and we will reverse that and restore peace in the land. Play on those emotions to win over non-socialist democrats and independents, showing how Republicans will restore law, order, stability, fairness, family.

This, then, is how we win:
1. Coalesce, become a single, unified army and enlist good leaders, "generals" to lead the way
2. Create a solid platform that appeals the at least 80% of the public to a large degree
3. Create messages that concentrate on law and order for safety; economics, liberty, independence and power to the people to drive the policies home
 4. As the new driving force of the party we convince the GOP through strength of numbers, great platform and super messaging  to restructure or get out of our way
5. Choose and support great candidates that are charismatic and smart, like Reagan & Trump

If we stick to such a plan, we will retake the House and Senate in 2022, and stifle the socialist agenda of the Biden administration. We can then concentrate on 2024, and the new "great reset" will be a strong, independent nation as a beacon to the world instead of the reset planned by the destructive "Illuminati" globalists that want everything for themselves.

Economics for Dummies - Left vs Right

There is a growing misconception in America concerning economics. On one side you have people like Bernie Sanders and others on the left who believe the economy is a sum total thing that needs to support all people equally, and on the other side you have people like Donald Trump and others on the right who believe the economy is not sum total - that it can be expanded to "raise all boats". The simple, glaring fact that the American economy has expanded exponentially since the Declaration of Independence only proves that capitalism is the economic engine that works. During that same time period, countless socialist and communist economies - in fact, every one -  have failed miserably.


Think of the economy as if it were a pie, and everyone grabs a piece. Some people only get a small piece while others get larger pieces,  determined primarily upon ones education and personal effort. The left sees this as unfair to those with a small piece, so they want to take from those with bigger pieces and redistribute it among the less fortunate, in an effort to create "equality". The left equates equality with fairness, though one has nothing to do with the other. It simply is not "fair" to take from someone who spent years in higher education, worked hard for 25 years and risked everything he or she had, and give it to someone who did little or nothing to earn it, having spent their life doing none of that. It may make things more "equal", but it is anything but "fair".


The economic theory of the left also does not consider unintended consequences - when you take productive wealth that is typically used by the wealthy to create jobs, develop new products etc. and turn it into unproductive wealth that is not used to make society better and richer, you effectively REDUCE the amount of pie available by stifling an expansion of the amount of pie available. You simply cannot make more pie without adding more of the ingredients - investing in growth, production, jobs.


Capitalists like Trump understand that the best way to insure everyone has enough pie is to make the pie bigger, or to bake more pies. Certainly, the less fortunate will always have less than others, but they will still have MORE PIE! If you doubt that, just take a look at Americas poor compared to the poor in socialist "single pie" nations. Where once even our own poor were truly living in poverty, dying in sweat shops and starving, most of our poor today have cell phones, iPads, microwave ovens, internet access and widescreen TV. Americas poor are wealthier than many "middle class" families in other countries. They have been raised up through capitalism, where those who earn great wealth are permitted to reinvest it into baking more pies, rather than have their wealth confiscated and tossed onto barren ground.


In America, Republicans believe a person is entitled only to that which he or she earns as long as they are physically and/or mentally capable of supporting themselves. Those who are handicapped to a point where they are unable to do so should be provided for by those of us who are able. This excludes those who are capable, but unwilling. The unwilling should be allowed to wallow in the misery of their own making. "All men are created equal", but they must work and do their part to maintain their equality. As my dad used to tell us kids, "Yes, the world DOES owe you a living. But you have to work like Hell to collect!"


Democrats on the other hand believe not in fairness, but equality.  The mistake they make is in believing that the two are one in the same. They also mistakenly believe that "equal" means "same" - that to be equal, we must all have the same amount of everything. Again, the two are not synonymous - a pound of feathers is equal in weight to s pound of gold, but they certainly are not the same.


If a person fails to get educated, and fails to put in the effort required to succeed, they will assuredly have less than others, but what they have will be equal to the effort put into it. And THAT is fair.


Now, Democrats and Socialists will, perhaps rightfully claim that many people do not have the same access to education and opportunity as some others may have. That is true - but it does not change anything. Such persons must try harder than others. Abe Lincoln never went to school - he educated himself and became President. Henry Ford only had a 4th grade education but went on to build one of the biggest companies in America, and in doing so, transformed America. In an era where blacks had little access to opportunity, people like Sidney Poitier worked harder and created his own opportunity. Certainly, some of us face greater obstacles than other, but that just means you have to try harder, and it makes a person stronger, which is one ingredient for greatness. Adversity is a positive, not the negative that the left assumes with their "victim" mentality. It does not give you a right to take from others. Stealing is stealing, whether you do it yourself or let the government do it for you. [As a side note, it is the Democrats who always vote against school choice, which would help level the road to a good education for the less fortunate]


Here is the short take - fair does not mean equal, and equal does not mean same. A person can complain about the size of their piece of the pie, and attempt to steal from another, or that person can get to work and bake his own damned pie. He is the only one standing in his way. Like one of my earlier bosses said, "I don't want excuses and I don't want reasons. I want RESULTS!"


"When you spend as many years getting educated as I have; spend as many years busting your butt 100+ hours a week to build a business; and risk every cent you have, or ever will have to make it all work, then and only then will you be entitled to have what I have". - Bill Vaughn



/

Combatting Homelessness - Doing Everything Wrong?

For several years I ran the largest homeless shelter in New Hampshire - New Horizons for New Hampshire - which usually housed up to 120 people each night. Our shelter also included a soup kitchen and a community food pantry. Before that I was a resident at that shelter, having been homeless for three years after a very traumatic event. And from those experiences, and statistics I gathered, I believe I have a pretty fair idea as to what can and what cannot help combat homelessness effectively. But even so, this is still not a complete solution.

When a mayor like DeBlasio (or even a governor) tries to "solve" the problem by shipping the homeless to other states, the only problem he is solving is his own. And when other lawmakers like those in California try to solve the problem by putting millions of taxpayer funds into "low cost housing", they simply do not understand homelessness at all - they may as well throw all that money right into the dumpster for all the good it will do.

The first step is to determine, and then separate the usual "causes". You cannot cure something if you do not know what causes it. Here are some stats from my tenure running the shelter, for the major issues. Bear in mind that some suffered more than one causation. For example, an alcoholic might also have a mental issue. The following are the primary causes:

• Alcohol/drug addiction - 61%
• Mental impairment - 32%
• Just want a free ride and no obligations - 4%
• Temporarily dispossessed - 3% (often marital or family issues)

Each of the above would naturally require a different type of intervention. A one-size-fits-all solution such as increasing low-cost housing is both absurd and ignorant. Low cost housing or subsidies would only be helpful for the 3% dispossessed, with a smattering of the less hardcore addicts and those with only minor mental issues.

At New Horizons we had case workers during the day who would attempt to help the residents overcome whatever issues they had, and referred residents to medical or mental health professionals as needed. For those temporarily dispossed, they would assist is "smoothing" out the path forward - bus tickets to get back and forth to a job; finding temporary, low cost housing; finding jobs - whatever  was needed, including family counseling. For those who were simply avoiding responsibility (lazy) they were given 60 days to find and keep a job, and get a place of their own. Failure to do so would result in being denied further shelter services (except the soup kitchen).

About 1/3 of the addicted residents (drugs or alcohol) were beyond help. They were provided all the basic needs without any strings attached, usually until they died.

And those with severe mental impairments were also cared for with the basics - when a leftist Supreme Court ordered the closing of mental institutions nationwide, hundreds of thousands of seriously ill people were just put onto the streets, most without benefit of any follow-up or out-patient care. The best and most compassionate intervention for those people would be for the states to reopen facilities for such individuals. They cannot be be incarcerated by force, but they should still have access to a "home" under supervision where they can be cared for and provided with medical needs.

Homelessness, therefore, is not the problem. It is the result of some other, less obvious problem. Root out the core problem(s) for a homeless person and you greatly increase the chance of being able to help.

[Brought to you as a PSA by "The Simple Man's Guide top Real Estate Investing"] 

The Dirty Little Secret About Free Tuition

It is a popular political cry on the left these days - Free College Tuition. And while it seems like a great idea at first blush, there's a lot more wrong with it than just the extreme cost to taxpayers. I'll let others hammer at that point. Here, we will examine the not-so-well understood "unintended consequences" of such a rabid idea.

First, the more obvious, and lesser problems with free tuition...

Most sane and reasonable people (this leaves out AOC, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and several other politicians on the left)understand that not everyone is suited for college - or even want it. Moreover, a growing number of high school graduates are not even educated well enough to be able to cut it in college. But because it's free, they might waste taxpayer money and try anyway, only to drop out in the first semester. We would be far better off to find ways to instill a better education in our public schools.

Along those same lines, many students are far better suited to attending a good trade school - we have a dire shortage of tradespeople in America, and they make as much - if not more - than a college educated snowflake.

Now for the biggest reason to avoid free college for all who want it. Throughout history, and without regard for any specific economic situation, there have always been a limited number of "slots at the top". In fact, statistics show that only 4% of a population will ever achieve substantial financial success and wealth. For every few hundred employees, there are only a handful of salaried, "college-educated" management positions. What this means is that college education would become virtually useless, as it would be watered down with many students who are barely average and will never land a great job.

In the 1940's few people had any college degrees. In the '50's, that rose substantially as parents began to push their kids to get  a Bachelor's Degree, and it grew even further in the '60's. By that time so many students were graduating college that there were not enough well-paying jobs for all of them. So businesses began requiring not a Bachelor's, but a Masters Degree. The Bachelor's Degree lost most of it's power. By the late '80's and into today, the Bachelor's is nothing more than window dressing as businesses are forced to weed out the wheat from the chaff. And now even the Masters is just beginning to lose its punch, as more and more professions are requiring a doctorate.

In short, only 4% can be at the top of the work pyramid, and with 20% of the population is graduating college, three-quarters of them STILL end up working at WalMart, or flipping burgers. Imagine when 50% are graduating because callege was free!

The question then becomes: is it worth having taxpayers who are already heavily burdened to pay for "college for all" if it accomplishes nothing of value?

As proof, just check out any successful business. You will find that it takes at least 100 high-school grads and drop-outs to support 10 supervisors, who support  3 managers who support one top dog. The managers and boss represent the 4%. In other words, we NEED a lot of people who do not require a college degree in order to do the job they will end up with, anyway. After all, if everyone were a boss or a manager, how could they earn a living if there are no workers to manage? Who will MAKE the products, or PERFORM the services?

The short take for people like AOC who cannot seem to understand reality: It is not sane or reasonable to have already over-burdened taxpayers pay for the college education of other peoples' children only to have those young men and women working for minimum wage. No matter how much money you spend, you cannot make a silk purse from a sow's ear.

What DOES make sense: Have businesses "scout" high schools, just like sports scouts do, and offer to pay for a promising students' college provided they work for that business for a specified time, at a good salary. If Microsoft is going to benefit from a talented smart kid's education, then perhaps Microsoft should pay for that education.

And the taxpayers could more easily afford to "subsidize" (only) the most promising students who do not have the means to pay college. Those from poorer families and communities, who excel in school, would contribute more to our society from a college education than it would cost us to fund it. After all, if you need a lawyer, would you rather have one who barely passed the bar, or one who graduated top of the class?

Then we could take some of the money saved by not providing free college for all and use it to "funnel" high school students into two different scholastic groups - one geared for those who prefer to learn a trade, or otherwise have a limited scholastic ability, and a  college preparatory group designed to give the best-of-the-best a head start, maybe to even include internship. And that could easily reduce the number of years - and the cost - of their secondary education.


/

Crunchy, Nutty Caramel Apple Pie

Hope some of my readers enjoy this recipe - it once took first place at the fair. Topping, however, my be too sweet for diabetics, so maybe you can adjust that a bit if needed.

Enjoy! And Happy Holidays to your home from ours.

BILL'S CRUNCHY, NUTTY CARAMEL APPLE PIE

Ingredients:

1 pastry crust, deep-dish 9 inch
1/2 cup sugar
3 Tbsp all-purpose flour
1 Tsp ground cinnamon
1/8 Tsp salt
6 cups thinly sliced apples - I prefer a mix of Golden Delicious & Fuji

1 recipe for crumb topping (below)
1/2 cup chopped pecans
1/4 cup caramel topping

Ingredients for crumb topping

1 cup packed brown sugar
1/2 cup all-purpose flour
1/2 cup quick-cook rolled oats
1/2 cup butter

Directions for crumb topping:

1. Stir together brown sugar, flour, rolled oats
2. Cut in 1/2 cup butter until topping is course crumbs. Set aside

DIRECTIONS:

1. In large mixing bowl stir together sugar, flour, cinnamon, salt
2. Add apple slices & gently toss until coated
3. Transfer apple mixture to pie shell
4. Sprinkle crumb topping over apple mixture
5. Place pie on cookie sheet
6. Cover edges with aluminum foil
7. Bake in preheated 375 degree oven 25 minutes. Remove foil, bake for another 25 minutes
8. Remove from oven, sprinkle pie with pecans then drizzle caramel on top
9. Cool on wire rack