strong (3)

Did you know that by writing 5 numbers on a tax return the Internal Revenue Service will pay you $6,600 for doing nothing?  According to the Treasury Inspector General's Office the IRS is defrauded between $14 and $16 billion each tax season.  Nearly 30 million tax filers (not taxpayers) share in a $60 billion dollar pie called Earned Income Credit.  Basically, if you earn between $3,000 and $45,000 and have a dependent child, you qualify for a tax credit between $300 and $7,500. 

 

Here is How the IRS is Defrauded $6,600!

Jane Doe writes on her 1040 Schedule C that she earned $13,720 income from an imaginary cleaning business.  Since Jane doesn't have a business, she doesn’t need to purchase any brooms, dust pans, cleaning supplies or mops.  For Jane’s efforts, she will qualify for federal tax credits of $6,600. Before the US Treasury deposits a tax refund of $4,900 into her bank account, they make a deposit into Jane Doe’s social security retirement account for $1,700.  From start to finish, Jane can complete her phantom tax return using phantom income in 15 minutes

 

I contacted the FBI and informed them that tax preparation companies would defraud the US Treasury of $3.7 billion during the 2013 tax season.   Unscrupulous tax preparers don't hesitate to file bogus EIC tax returns defrauding the IRS of $6,600 because they slice a $200 prep fee before the money ever reaches the hands of the tax fraud.   

 

I issued a press release entitled "Tax Technology Would Save IRS $3.7 Billion in Next 60 Days".   The article had 881 readers.  This included nearly 75 from the counties of France and Germany.  Why would those countries be so interested in learning about tax fraud technology in the United States?

 

$5,000 Cash Refund or 10 IED’s

The IRS should consider offering EIC tax frauds the choice of receiving $5,000 cash or 10 IED's.   Terrorists shouldn't have to be burdened with going to the bank and then having to negotiate the purchase of improvised explosive devices. 

 

I estimate terrorists obtained 40,000 fraudulent 2012 EIC tax refunds that paid them $200 million this past March.  According to Wikipedia the avg. cost of an IED is $500.  As a result of the IRS ineptness at preventing tax fraud, the US Treasury may have just funded 400,000 IED's.   Why should American troops potentially suffer?

 

Last fall Randall Sorensen CPA provided the IRS a solution to prevent massive tax fraud.  The IRS kicked the tires for a month only to come back and say: 1) they didn’t have any money and 2) the idea of testing tax returns in real-time lacked innovation.  Really…..   I guess Pony Express trumps Federal Express in the eyes of the IRS.  In contrast, the cash strapped IRS managed to pay $500 million to software developer Strong Castle.  The company was “friends” with an influential IRS employee.  That is pure fraud.

 

The IRS doesn’t want American taxpayers to know what a complete sieve they are at preventing tax fraud.  Over the course of 20 years, one unscrupulous taxpayer can defraud the US Treasury as much as $300,000 and never have to pay a dime or work a day in their life.  One final rub, the tax fraud qualifies for a retirement because the IRS withheld Social Security taxes from their phantom job.  Speaking of retirement, I believe it’s time to permanently retire the IRS unless they can demonstrate the ability to prevent massive tax fraud that jeopardizes the safety of our troops.

Read more…

Just got an e-mail from a friend who taunted me with remembrances of the presumably unfounded “birther” notion; and Van Jones’ slip from power because he was discovered to be a “9/11 Truther.” He asked me “How can you be so careless as to use that Maurice Strong quotation in your otherwise wonderful and thought-provoking blogs, Bob? It makes you seem like just another conspiracy fanatic.”
OK, let’s set matters straight, a political blog is an agreement, a contract between the writer and the reader for honest and full evaluation and judgment about the state of the world as he sees it. Rajjpuut when asked for his opinion does NOT give warmed over milk:
1.
BIRTHERS: My friend and I and all loyal readers know Rajjpuut is not a birther. I have on several occasions said something akin to this (but probably NOT these exact words) to dismiss the birther line of thinking. “It’s possible that Barack Obama is NOT a U.S. citizen according to the strictest interpretation of the rules. However, no matter what else is discovered, he was born to an American citizen, no matter how much I despise her and no matter how likely it may be that she screwed up his paper-work possibilities with her shenanigans. IF he is NOT a U.S. Citizen on a technicality, I’m NOT impressed. The SPIRIT of the law is that he IS a citizen, certainly much more than any baby born to an illegal alien is a citizen. It’s not his fault his mother was a ditzy communist bi__h! My problems with Barack Obama are not cleared up by technicalities. Remove him and another progressive idiot replaces him. My problems are that Barack never used his free will and his intellect to disprove the communist crap he was spoon-fed as a boy and that he now embraces that refuted ideology with all his being and is leading our country down the road to ruin." Any questions on that?
2. 9/11 TRUTHERS: To a certain small degree, Rajjpuut himself is a 9/11 Truther. You heard me right. TO A CERTAIN small DEGREE . . . let’s explore and explain that. If you were to visit and watch:
You’d see a lot of truth and nonsense woven together . . . (one proviso here – the link is apparently NOT the original link I viewed 2-3 years back and it’s a movie, pretty long . . . but unless it’s been changed dramatically, I’m aware of what’s in it. The original movie was in three parts, before I go further I’ll describe them . . .
A. one part was an attempt to link conservativism with Christianity and then to repudiate both on some semi-damning evidence about Christianity’s origins – from my knowledge of Christianity’s origins in studying the matter from history classes and several books, I’d say that this 1/3 of the movie is about 90% accurate but about 70% corrupted as far as interpretation. Yes, Christianity has screwed us up at times, but taken to its core . . . its intentions are purely good. Certainly the same could be said of many other religions. One strong point Zeitgeist makes is tying in “fundamentalism” to much of the problems that religions cause, regardless of which religion is being talked about.
B. Another part was an attack on federal reserve banking in the United States and Britain before 1776 across history and on the Fed as it exists right now. Rajjpuut refers you to the book, “The Creature from Jekyll Island” to now say that he’s absolutely convinced that this 1/3 of the Zeitgeist link is not only 100% accurate but, far more importantly, 100% true to the spirit of the Fed’s history. Rajjpuut would say that 97% of today’s worst problems in this country arose with Jekyll Island’s secret meetings that created today's federal reserve system.
C. The third part of the movie is the one Rajjpuut has viewed the most, about seven times. It is certainly the most compelling 1/3 of the movie. At first, though quite skeptical, Rajjpuut was willing to cede the possibility that the movie could have it right . . . that 9/11 could have been an inside job. The evidence presented sounded very strong. Every time viewing, however, the doubts have grown. An incompetent FBI and CIA can explain 99% of the situation quite nicely in Rajjpuut’s view. So 9/11 Truthing is not part of Rajjpuut’s make-up. However, the possibility exists, Rajjpuut does not have the resources to say with 100% certainty the whole thing is a humbug. Besides some difficulty believing certain technicalities and the science behind them, it’s just very hard to believe that the 300 or so persons necessary to pull that monumental crime off could all keep quiet so long. Even the possibility of “just standing aside and letting the Jihadists succeed “with their plan (a huge sin of “omission” rather than an even more monstrous sin of commission) would take too much effort to be believed by too many people . . . and one good American woud have stood up before, during and/or after the event at least.

For a comparison of thinking patterns when faced with the same possible universes (conspiracy? or no conspiracy?) . . . whereas my extensive reading on the Kennedy assasination led me in 1995-6 to the conclusion that the truth was covered-up and a larger conspiracy than Oswald (who well may have been a patsy) existed and involved about a half-dozen people and that VP LBJ (who was to be dropped off the presidential-ticket in 1964 by Kennedy and benefitted most when all the corruption charges aimed at him and Baker and Sol Estes disappeared the day after the assassination; not to mention becoming President of the United States) was at its heart. I’m much more convinced that 9/11 was NOT an inside job than I am that a wider conspiracy exists in Kennedy’s death, say about 90% convinced there. But, I’m a fallible human being . . . and that fact, underlines the tiny 1% 9/11 truther in me and the meager 10% conviction that the Warren Commission got it right about Oswald. Rajjpuut does not have trouble holding these contrary notions of conspiracy-yes and conspiracy-no at the same time.
So, now, in answer to my friend’s claims that by using the Maurice Strong quote from 1990, Rajjpuut left his otherwise excellent blogs open to “conspiracy-theory” charges, let’s revisit the Maurice Strong quote in question:
“. . . What if a small group of . . . world leaders were to conclude that the principal risk to the Earth comes from the actions of the rich countries? In order to save the planet, the group decides: Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring this about? . . .”
The quote is valid, you can find it in a 10,000 places on the internet and in the original form which is much, much longer. The context in brief is that Strong was purportedly driving a car while giving an interview to a left-leaning journalist and the quote was later written up in the man’s magazine as part of a fairly long story, the journalist involved recently covered Strong’s tracks by saying “he was discussing a possible novel plot.”
The fuller context is that Maurice Strong (who had written no novels before 1990 and none since) is a Canadian multi-millionaire who’s been politically very active within the United Nations and among environmental groups. Today he is a man who sees himself standing to gain mightily if Cap and Trade legislation passes in the United States, because of his connection to CCX (Chicago Climate eXchange). If you’ve read Michael Crichton’s “State of Fear” than you might recognize the Strong persona clearly delineated as a character among the novel’s many environmental uh, “enthusiasts.” Crichton is the master of the Techno-thriller like “The Andromeda Strain” and “Jurassic Park” and his plot-description has been largely unvarying: technology runs amok and threatens man’s survival. Crichton did an enormous amount of research, starting out believing that global warming was the greatest threat to mankind and the planet and then . . . turning around completely by 2004 when the novel was published. Did Crichton interview Maurice Strong? Read the blog, read the novel and judge for yourself. As for Strong in the complete interview as published, he was referring originally to a yearly convocation of world leaders in business and government and environment attended by perhaps 1,000 persons. He was saying that the tone of the conference would lead virtually anyone to the conclusion that the principal risk to the earth during an upcoming catastrophic environmental collapse comes from the rich countries. Strong was then saying (in this proposed “novel” of his) that the rich countries are approached and asked to change, but of course (due to political consequences) they can NOT or will NOT. And now you have the “small group of world leaders” left to decide to bring about the collapse of the wealthy nations that will save the planet or not . . . gosh, one wonders what they’d choose. In a word, the Strong “novel” is about eco-tage or environmental- sabotage.
Strong has never written a novel, but everything about his life over at least the last twenty-five years suggests the man (who is very much into the occult as well as the environment) believes he is the protagonist in such a novel. He is greatly involved with CCX. And right now only the fact that cap and trade legislation (today given the prettier name “America’s Power Act”) is stalled in the U.S. Senate interrupts Strong’s novel reaching its denoument. If APA passes dozens of persons such as Andrew Stern, Al Gore, Barack Obama, Richard Sandor and Joel Rogers look to become hundred-billionaires; about eight progressive foundations and the AFL-CIO and SEIU unions can expect to prosper; and seven individual Goldman Sachs personalities and the 10% owning Goldman Sachs firm itself will reap the wild wind.
Michael Crichton didn’t start out researching and writing his novel believing their was a conspiracy to destroy much of today’s most civilized economies to the benefit of a power elite. He did not start out believing that global warming was a hoax. Those things arose the deeper and more deeply he looked into the matter. Up till 1998, Rajjpuut had never NOT believed in global warming. Greenhouse gasses and their ceaseless increase and danger were an ordinary unquestioned FACT taught in science classes at U.N.C. Even when slight doubts arose as to the severity of the problem and the absolute certainty of the connection to man’s activities, it wasn’t until he read Crichton’s novel and then saw a History Channel program “Little Ice Age, Big Chill” in early 2006 that his objections were firmed up. Global warming was nonsense. Rajjpuut’s been preaching strongly against the global warming lie ever since. Then last year three things happened first:
. . . first Climate-Gate occurred, as I always knew it must. Time magazine broadcast the story on the internet and I was amazed. Time online saw the story reach it’s “most popular story of the day” within fifteen hours . . .
. . . and then the next thing happened, Joel Klein of Time Magazine** took the article down and made all traces of it disappear from its online website, the story could NOT be found. Rajjpuut was aghast.
And the third thing is that after five months, the story (link above) run even by the ultra-liberal London Times (so now global warming is an Unquestioned hoax in rational European eyes) still has not been printed or broadcast in the United States by the oldest and till recently, most-trusted, sources of news (ABC, CBS, NBC, NPR, PBS, CNN). As a result we are within an eyelash of seeing APA pass and ruin our nation . . . that, my friend is why I showed the Maurice strong quote: I believe it underlies an actual conspiracy for wealth, power, and misplaced environmental concern. That quote underscores the greatest act of eco-terrorism ever contemplated and no one has to burn an SUV or drive a spike into a tree to pull it off . . . it’s all “legal.” The fact that the connections to CCX **by Gore, Obama, Strong, Joel Rogers, Richard Sandor, Valerie Jarrett, et al ad nauseum have been known for over five weeks and the mainstream media refuses to acknowledge or investigate them is that last straw on Rajjpuut’s back . . . somebody needs to speak up and it might as well be me. And no, Rajjpuut does not have trouble holding the two contrary ideas of Maurice Strong-conspiracy-yes and Maurice-Strong-conspiracy-no in a 97-3 ratio respectively in his mind . . . somebody's got to deal with uncertainty. This world is not black and white. Why make up your mind? Be strong and honor the possibilities. Who knows unlike the Kennedy assassination and 9/11 we might find out on this one . . . .
Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,
Rajjpuut
**the full story of consequences and means can be found at:
Read more…

No Excuses Now, Mr. Obama,

Socialism’s Sad History Repeating in Greece
Europe Semi-Cheerfully Opts for Combined Ruin

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutions_of_1989

Should we, the United States of America, opt-out of greatness and turn the mantle of “the world’s lone super power” over to Red China? It’s NOT a rhetorical question, unfortunately . . . . Harry S. Truman used to say, “The buck stops here.” Unfortunately, Mr. Obama has not once in his sixteen months in office shown any proclivity for facing responsibility for his failings. So, if China quickly becomes the world’s single super-power . . . expect nothing but excuses from Mr. Obama as we slide into history’s trashbin.

With the specter of Greece hanging over the world’s markets and the halls of government everywhere, there can no longer be any pretense for the Obama administration. The potential debacle awaiting us is dramatically etched in our brains from the violent images repeatedly seen on the nightly news. Mr. Obama who reportedly went into a “three-year fugue” when the Berlin Wall came down and the USSR collapsed can NOT deny the obvious truth about his preferred political ends. You canNOT help the poor by willfully becoming one of them. The United States must resume its economic leadership. If this country wishes to remain the beacon of hope in the world, only three choices remain for Obama (only one for a STATESMAN):

  • 1) a return to sanity by butting out of the free markets (the choice Bill Clinton made in 1994) and ending the “let’s completely take over everything” games of socialism and “Obama and Progressives Know Best” . . . as stated a “return to sanity.” Rajjpuut states without reservation . . . this will NOT happen so long as Barack Obama has power in the oval office and so long as progressives Democrats call the tune in both chambers of congress
  • 2) ignore Greece’s example, continue the charade of “I am NOT a socialist, I’m not” and assume that the recent historical example from Greece as well as the older examples given by Cuba’s super-booming civilization and the defunct USSR and the defunct Warswa Pact and China prospering by stacking capitalism atop its Marxism and the failed attempts at communism in Italy long ago, and Chile long ago are all just anomalies . . . and this time we’ll get it right because . . . well, because we’ve got Barack Obama working things this time . . . this would be the choice one would expect if Obama were merely a socialist, dyed in the wool, and convinced of the rightness of his ideology (“I’m not an ideologue!”).
  • 3) Embrace Greece’s example and deliberately push even harder for financial markets takeover under the guise of a “financial ‘reform’ act” and the new “America’s Power Act” (actually NOT new at all, just “Cap and Trade” under a sweet sounding name) and literally see how quickly we can emulate Greece. “What,” you say, “he’d deliberately take the country into financial ruin?” Yes, Pilgrim he definitely could choose either door #2 or door #3 and they both might lead to abject financial ruin. And it’s NOT a moot question which choice he makes. More on that below.

As recently as last month, Rajjpuut’s Folly’s ran a hard-hitting little blog under a title something like “PIGIES R Us” which told of the sad state of economic collapse found in Portugal, Italy, Greece, Ireland, England (U.K.), and Spain whose initial gave us the “PIGIES” countries. The kicker to the story was that the United States’ ratio of debt/Gross Domestic Product (D/GDP) was worse than all but two of the six European countries mentioned. Things are changing rapidly in Europe. If written today the blog title would have to be ammended to: “BIG PIES R Us.” Belgium has now entered the “room of doom” and become an entrant in the “Who’s Next” Sweepstakes. And, you guessed it, the U.S. D/GDP ratio is worse than Belgium’s. Thankfully, the United States has a far more resilient economic system in place than most of the BIG PIES countries do. Socialism is not our underlying economic system YET. In terms of absolute risk we are very much caught between England (the U.K.) and Spain.

Yes, the U.K. just made a half-hearted effort to change directions by booting out the fanatically socialist government of Gordon Brown but they didn’t give a mandate to the conservatives either. Rajjpuut predicts the tenuous coalition between the Conservatives and the Social Democrats will break apart within a year. Remember that the so-called “Tories” are only fiscally-lukewarm conservatives anyway . . . in these days true Libertarianism is required and England’s condition will worsen, if only slightly. In short, England can most-likely only serve as a bad example: going fiscally-conservative with all your heart is the only viable path out of the swamp for them and they show no willingness to make that choice.

Spain, also, is a very good example the United States can learn from. Again the lesson learned is a negative one, however. Spain about eight years back bragged of Europe’s most robust economy. Among other things, surpluses were being run and unemployment was sticking around 3%. Today,” Tinta roja se encuentra por todas partes,” that is, “Red ink is everywhere!” Unemployment is also at 21% and rising (19% a year ago). “What the hell happened? “ you ask.

Spain’s economy went “GREEN!”

The cost of “political-correctness” in Spain was devastating. For every subsidized job in the green-pipedream world of Spain, 2.2 real, permanent jobs were lost. The hit didn’t come overnight but insidiously over about three years. Cost on average for creating one green job? $677,000 U.S. dollars. Most green jobs lasted only between six weeks and eighteen months. Only 10% proved permanent. The median green job paid $13.18 per hour, virtually all paid between $10 - $15 per hour. So for every permanent green job created, twenty-two real jobs were jeopardized and ultimately LOST!

Now let us translate that Spanish horror onto Barack Obama’s stated goal of “. . . creating five million green jobs . . .” That means eleven million real jobs lost. That means only 500,000 permanent green jobs created. That means a net loss of 10.5 million jobs. That means ruin . . . but wait, there’s more , much much more . . . .

http://rajjpuutsfolly.blogtownhall.com/2010/05/07/the_man_who_owns_obama%e2%80%99s_strings_says_%e2%80%9ccapitalism_is_monstrous%e2%80%9d.thtml

Barack Obama and roughly twenty cohorts (their leaders are ex-U.N. bigwig Canada’s Maurice Strong and communist Wisconsin professor Joel Rogers) and seven or eight upstanding progressive foundations and Al Gore and his private London-based company have been pushing like madmen to pass “Cap and Trade” legislation, now euphemistically known as “America’s Power Act.” (doesn't it look beautiful all green like that without the ugly words "cap and trade"?) Compared to the results of cap and trade, Obama’s green jobs promise (five million of ‘em, remember, resulting in only half a million permanent ones at the cost of eleven million real jobs) would seem like laissez faire capitalism.

Twenty-years ago Maurice Strong set this whole cap and trade boondoggle in motion. He was quoted by a reporter for a left-wing group in 1990 as saying,

“. . . What if a small group of these world leaders were to conclude that the principal risk to the Earth comes from the actions of the rich countries? In order to save the planet, the group decides: Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring this about?”

The reporter when queried about this later said that Strong was just discussing “a novel plot idea” he had. Mr. Strong had no novels written or published at that time and today twenty years later has still not written or published a novel.

Remember, Maurice has not yet acted on his bang up novel idea (he’s now approaching 80 years old) but fortunately, Michael Crichton has taken the bull by the horns and done the job for him and it’s a very good novel “State of Fear” which environmentalists and progressives detest with every atom of their beings. You remember Michael Crichton? If anyone could have been expected to be an environmental alarmist Crichton would have been everybody’s anti-technology #1 candidate. Everyone of his books starting with “The Andromeda Strain” and running through to mention just a few “Terminal Man,” “Jurassic Park”( and “Lost World “which was Jurassic Park II, really), and “Prey” are all 100% stories of technology run amok and threatening humanity’s very survival.

Crichton, unfortunately for Maurice Strong and his buddies, has a very bad habit of actually doing monumental research about the subjects of his forthcoming novels. He started to write a story about global warming, Al Gore's and the Climate Research Unit's (CRU's) preferred "global warming story" he believed it was true . . . so then Crichton went where his research took him . . . to a belief that global warming was a monstrous hoax aimed at creating a new power elite . . . feeling actually at risk for his life, he put that knowledge and conviction into writing “State of Fear.” His research took him to a strong conviction that Maurice Strong’s “novel idea” was being put deliberately into motion . . . but back to Maurice . . . Here in a piece from the ultra-liberal London Times is a story that our mainstream media has refused to disclose to American for over five months now:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6936289.ece

Besides refusing to let Americans know that European liberals are fed up with the Climate-Gate scandal (link immediately above) and NO LONGER believe in global warming‘s inevitability and connection to man’s activites . . . here’s what the American mainstream media will NOT tell you, much less investigate about Maurice Strong’s activities and their connection to our favorite socialist president and ex-vice president:

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=531731

http://www.fusionfx.net/index.php/2010/05/01/crime-inc-obama-climate-collusion/

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,591845,00.html

Too bad Maurice was not just talking about conspiracy novel plots. No he’s never written that novel, but Maurice Strong is active in the Chicago Climate eXchange with Barack; Al Gore; John Ayers; Valerie Jarrett; Joel Rogers; Richard Sandor; Franklin Raines; David Blood; Paula DiPerna; several U.N. environmental honchos; the AFL-CIO union; the SEIU union; Andy Stern; Van Jones; several Goldman Sachs bigwigs (and independently 10% owned by Goldman Sachs itself); the Joyce Foundation; the Tides Foundation; ACORN (name now changed to fifty-one separate names); the Apollo Alliance; the Emerald Cities Collaborative; and so many others.

http://justincofield.typepad.com/my-blog/2010/05/digging-into-the-cap-trade-story.html

And the bottom line for Maurice and his fellow bandits is this: if cap and trade becomes the law of the land they each profit by BILLIONS from their connection to CCX (now supposedly talks are under way to sell CCX to a European group, bet we’ll find a lot of the same names hooked up with that) and most importantly the “ten TRillion dollar industry that Richard Sandor bragged about would be created. And the bottom line, what would be the result for America if cap and trade is created? Well you take a $15 TRillion economy and you create a $10 TRillion price tag for selling it “blue sky” (literally) and you have a nominal $25 TRillion economy with only $15 TRillion worth of goods and services. That is, 40% of the economy has become bogus –completely BS. The bottom line: everything in America would eventually cost 67% more than it now does (not counting any inflation caused by the Federal Reserves unending money-press activities). For you mathematically challenged, look at it this way 40% false economy supported by 60% real economy = 67% increase in prices or 40%/60% = .666667.

So, the only question left is this one, what is the goal for Strong, Obama, Gore, et. al. door #2 or door #3 mentioned above? Rajjpuut leaves you with a famous quote you may be familiar with . . . .

“. . . What if a small group of these world leaders were to conclude that the principal risk to the Earth comes from the actions of the rich countries? In order to save the planet, the group decides: Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring this about?”

Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,

Rajjpuut

http://rajjpuutsfolly.blogtownhall.com/2010/05/02/thanks_to_media_obama,__gore_and_cronies_might_make_trillions.thtml

Read more…