Top 10 Reasons Why it is “Morning in America” Again

Top 10 Reasons Why it is “Morning in America” Again
Ty J. Young Editorial

The classic Reagan refrain from the 1984 Presidential race, it’s “Morning in America”, is considered one of the most eloquent and effective campaign advertisements in electoral history. After the ’84 election, the advertisement proved true, and it truly was “Morning in America!”

The question for the country today is: Can the Trump administration usher in another “Morning in America?”

The answer is an emphatic yes! It won’t be easy. The media was, and remains, working on over-drive to defeat him. Far-left radicals are creating carnage and chaos throughout the country, becoming more bold and dangerous with each passing protest. Trump can also be his own worst enemy, with verbal gaffes and a thin skin.

But the agenda he has put forward, updated for the modern era we live in, resembles the best ideas and policies that once made us great, and can do so again.

Top 10 Reasons Why it is “Morning in America” Again:

1. Across the board tax cuts. Flatter personal tax rates, which will reduce the number of tax brackets will provide the country with a free market stimulus to the economy. Tax reduction and simplification has the added benefit of increasing revenue to the government. We have said many times that when John F. Kennedy cut taxes the economy grew and tax revenue increased; when Reagan cut taxes the economy grew and tax revenue increased; when Bush 43 cut taxes the economy grew and tax revenue increased. It has worked every single time.

2. Cutting the corporate tax rate. Currently one of the highest in the world, reducing the corporate tax rate, along with other actions such as repatriating cash held abroad by U.S. companies, will help stimulate business expansion and investment. That means more jobs, higher wages, and a stock price based more upon business performance than government intervention.
3. Across the board deregulation. Dodd-Frank? On the chopping block. EPA rules and regulations? Ready for the dustbin. Executive orders implemented with a pen and phone? To be erased from history. Small and large businessmen will tell you that even more than tax reform, regulations have stymied business start-ups, business growth, and business expansion. Compliance with Obama era rules and regulations are calculated at a best-case scenario of $100 billion annually… most analysts think it is even higher. The lost business from the requirement to comply probably reaches a half a trillion per annum. Removing burdensome government intervention is high on the list for the Trump administration.

4. Repeal and Replace Obamacare. The media’s and the left’s incessant screams of taking insurance away from millions of people is a charade to protect a law whose main purpose was greater government control over our lives. A) Obamacare premiums have risen for 74% of all plans and the average increase is 26%; B) 90% of the insurers in the exchanges are now operating at a loss; C) The 20 million that the government and media say now have insurance and previously did not, is factually untrue. 1. Twelve million people were added to Medicaid who were already eligible for it, but had not enrolled. The remaining 8 million are an unprovable number, since the government leaves them on the rolls even if they have stopped paying after enrollment! Over 10 million LOST their coverage due to Obamacare. The stories of corruption and government mismanagement are legion. It impacts religious entities because of mandates for birth control and abortion. It has been an epic disaster. Yes, you will see stories of someone who lost their insurance, and possibly someone with some horrific disease. It is sad and will be tragic. But Obamacare does not work, and we cannot afford it. It is time to return the market, and individual choice, to healthcare.

5. Immigration reform: build the wall. Stopping illegal immigration, starting with his quintessential campaign promise to “build a wall,” is critical to ensure the safety and security of the United States citizens. The wall will be a huge infrastructure project, and yes, Mexico will pay for it, most likely through a tax on remittances back home.

6. Extreme vetting of migrants from the Middle East. You cannot determine if someone is a terrorist, or could be a terrorist, if they are coming from a war-torn region. Especially, since by definition the region does not have functioning government entity to background check the departing migrant. Jimmy Carter banned admission to the U.S. of Iranian citizens from 1979-80. Obama himself banned all immigrants from Iraq from 2009-2011. Those who argue you cannot halt immigration into your country, for the safety and security of the citizens that are here, simply do not understand the law, and do not have the interests of the country at heart.

7. Re-building the military. Conducting global military operations non-stop in multiple theaters since 2001… equipment not replaced and cannibalized thanks to Obama-era budget cuts… social engineering through the ranks… Trump’s election comes with the promise to rebuild the military, expand our nuclear stockpile, increase the size of the Navy, and to support our wounded warriors with greater care through the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. His election could not have come soon enough.
8. The Free Trade agenda becomes the Fair Trade Agenda. It is not “free trade” if one side can freely sell into your market, but you are not free to sell into theirs. The theory of free trade is that it does make everyone richer and more prosperous, but in practice both parties have to compete in a free market on equal footing. That exists within the United States, as businesses essentially operate with fairly established rules within the market, but it has not existed in trade deals with other countries. While Trump may have a hard time bringing back lost manufacturing, he will certainly re-frame the priorities in D.C. as to who the trade deals should benefit—not other countries, not crony capitalists, but American workers first.

9. Rebuilding our infrastructure. Like so much of the Obama era, government simply lied, and expected you not to notice. The “stimulus” package passed in 2009 was supposed to be a jobs bill. But as Obama stated off the cuff years later, there weren’t that many “shovel-ready projects.” That was not true, it was never meant to build major projects, he was simply funneling the stimulus money to unions, teachers, and health care supporters. The lack of shovel-ready projects also had a lot to do with the environmental lobby. But several projects are ready and waiting for leadership, and financing. They include: A) New rail tunnel between Jersey and New York, approximately $20 billion; B) Highway reconstruction, $50 billion; C) New highways such as from Phoenix to Vegas, $10 billion; D) Renovate and repair our subway systems, $50 billion; E) Expansion of Naval fleet, $100 billion. As a small government conservative, we are not necessarily in favor of large scale spending projects given the size of our national debt. But as a campaign promise, it can be done for one-fifth the cost of the Obama stimulus, and actually have something to show for it.

10. A pro-American message from the White House. Support for law and order? Check. Defeating our enemies? Check. End to political correctness? Check. Support for our friends? Check. On every level, the Trump administration seems poised to reverse the apology tours and global retreat of America’s strategic position. It may not be possible to recover lost ground, but we can certainly make sure we lose no more.

The Trump administration already faces a hostile press, uncompromising protest movement funded by anti-American groups, and a militant Democratic Party in Congress. The establishment of the Republican Party is only lukewarm in their support. But the Trump agenda is a Reaganesque agenda … “Morning in America” is here again!

Take advantage of the fruits of a pro-American agenda in the White House by ensuring your gains are protected against stock market losses. We all know that the market goes up, and the market goes down. Keep your money protected and growing at the same time. Call Now! 877-912-1919

Cashless Society … When?

Cashless Society …When?
Ty J. Young Editorial

Fans of science fiction, and of personal convenience, may welcome the advent of the cashless society. It will supposedly make things easier, and contribute to the digitized world that is quickly approaching.

We already have digital currency in many forms, and one of the more well-known is Bitcoin (BTC). Bitcoin is an alternative currency used through the internet. It has had wild price swings in its stock, specifically after China announced significant regulation of the online usage of Bitcoins. This is truly a new frontier!

But will we see the new frontier, and do we want to?

In November of 2016, the government of India instituted a policy to eliminate paper currency. The stated objective was to reduce crime and “under the table” transactions…..what India describes as “Black Money.”

This is a widely under-reported story by the U.S. press, including the involvement of the U.S. government essentially strong-arming India’s government into doing it, as a test run for implementation here at home.
The U.S. media ignored the move and what has happened since. India, the world’s 6th largest economy, has seen their economy freeze up. The Indian Composite PMI (Purchasing Manager’s Index) shows a near collapse since the November decision:

India Composite PMI Chart - Cashless Society

Furthermore, India’s growth has shrunk from 7.6% in 2015, to 6.6% in 2016,. Almost all of the slowing is due to contraction in the 4th quarter of the year. Cash shortages have led to near panic amongst the middle class and banks have not properly accounted for people’s deposits who brought the cash in for credit, . This essentially means the government has confiscated the cash and the government’s expected tax windfall has not materialized. Lastly, they didn’t need to do it for the reasons stated: the “Black Money” was already shrinking as anti-corruption efforts were taking hold.

Demonetizing society (eliminating actual cash in your pocket as a means of exchange or in other words moving to a cashless society) can sound “cool” to the millennials and can have sound arguments in its favor. But the strongest argument against it is simple … you are turning over more control of your life to the government.
I. Three Reasons FOR Eliminating Cash:
1. Reduces financial crime and tax evasion. It would seem obvious that financial crime and tax evasion could be reduced if you require all transactions to move through the digital banking system. But criminals adapt. They would use the larger or smaller denominations not banned. When all cash is eliminated, they would barter until the transaction was laundered, and then sell the final hard asset which was “clean” for the cash involved. The same would apply to evading taxes as well. Demonetizing will change crime, not stop it, and it will have limited impact on the collection of additional tax revenue.
2. Makes life and record keeping more efficient. Obvious to the 21st Century person, eliminating cash could help make life more efficient and allow for an easier way to maintain your own personal records. No doubt it disciplines spending, and helps keep your personal finances much more in order. It can reduce business costs as well, in terms of keeping money on hand, secured, and accounted for.
3. Costs less to the taxpayer. Printing costs, production costs of physical coins and paper money, government agencies tracking counterfeiting … this all can be saved in a digital banking system, in theory.
II. Three Reasons AGAINST Eliminating Cash:
1. It makes daily life inefficient. It is hard to argue against digital money being more efficient IF the entire society has adequate infrastructure for it. Does your local high school swipe a card or scan a phone to get into games? Does the hot dog vendor have credit card processing capability? The cost and lack of uniformity make this not feasible as we stand today. Yes, technology has made things awesome in the 21st century, but that does not mean eliminating cash is going to work anytime soon. India’s problems are proof of that.
2. It is part of a global central bank agenda. It is not a secret for peddling conspiracy theories to say that Central Banks, of all governments around the world, would love to eliminate cash. It would help them collect taxes, and would lead towards global taxation on things such as carbon taxes. It would be a step towards eliminating American sovereignty. That does not seem like the direction any traditional American would welcome.
3. It puts more control in the hands of our government. Make no mistake, we live in the era of “Big Brother.” Digitized money, eliminating the use of the good ol’ greenback… this eliminates choice and freedom. You will be subject to the government on all economic transactions, which is quite a distance from the belief of the founders. Paying your neighbor $25 to mow your yard? He may be subject to taxation, Social Security withholding, etc. Is this the future we want?

When Russians can hack into the Democratic National Committee and the Chinese can hack into our banks on a daily basis……are we supposed to believe our money is safe in the digitized banking world?

“The world has changed, clearly it’s not the 80’s and 90’s anymore.” Sometimes that can be a good thing. Technological advances allow us to open our doors, secure our homes, and find our children, all through a cellular phone. But a cashless society should not be the goal of America’s banking system, because it will undermine the freedom that Americans are supposed to enjoy.

If you want to ensure that no matter what decisions are made by government, your money is completely protected against market losses, call us now. You can have those good ol’ greenbacks in a place where they will never be subject to market risk, and have the ability to grow at the same time. Contact your advisor today at 877-912-1919.

Russian Hacking … Elections Affected?

“Russian Hacking … Elections Affected?”
Ty J. Young Editorial

The possibility that U.S. elections could be hacked by foreign governments is scary and worrisome. Without question, over the years, American elections have been subjected to disinformation, cheating, lying, and voter fraud. All and more have occurred over the past two centuries. Most of the voting public believe when criminal intrusion into the voting process happens, it is discovered and prosecuted. The public perception prior to 2016 is that cases not discovered are so minor or rare that they have not impacted the outcome of a national election.

The Russian hacking case, made public in the media for several days and addressed as a big issue by the outgoing Obama Administration, is something quite different. The media has portrayed this hacking event as directly impacting the outcome of the election. To be clear, it has not. All the major stories regarding classified emails, James Comey’s announcements, FBI investigations, and secret servers were first reported by U.S. news agencies. Not Wikileaks or the Russians.

Thankfully, Russian computer hacks could not have changed votes since the voting machines themselves were not hooked up to the internet. Furthermore, the reports to Congressional committees last week confirmed that vote counts were not affected.

The media has also built the narrative this was a campaign to affect the outcome of the U.S. Presidential election in general, a sort of “disinformation” campaign that would widely impact voter sentiment and therefore voting decisions. That may be true, but it is nothing new. Foreign and international events always affect voting patterns, whether a foreign government puts it into the media or not. The attacks on 9/11 directly impacted how people voted, as did the 2008 banking crisis. Foreign governments often try to influence public opinion in the U.S., but that is something quite different than trying to change vote totals. The Director of National intelligence, James Clapper, confirmed the following about the Russian hacking– “…. They did not change any vote tallies or anything of that sort.”

So why does the media and the Obama Administration continue to hammer the message that the Russians affected the 2016 election? And why are most observers dismissing the media narrative?

I. Why the Media Believes, and Wants Us to Believe, the “Russian Election Hacking” Narrative:
1. ALL the Intelligence Agencies are saying it happened. What do the intelligence agencies say? They say there was a concerted Russian effort to supply hacked information and emails online to negatively impact the campaign of Hillary Clinton. This is not news – it happens every day on every major global subject, and we do it to other countries as well. An important fact is the intelligence agencies said not one vote was changed electronically by Russian hacking, and not one news story regarding Hillary’s stolen emails has been denied. These email stories, including but not limited to: (A) Using unethical practices and breaking their own rules to stop Bernie Sanders from winning the nomination; (B) Using racist terms to describe their own voting groups; (C) Planning assault and battery at Trump rallies; (D) Collusion with the media to help defeat Trump in the debates. The problem with these email dumps weren’t that they were Russian propaganda, but that they were ALL TRUE!
2. It is Obama’s favorite story line. Focusing on a story that had no impact on the election, but could distract a certain segment of the population away from recognizing the national repudiation of your legacy, would seem like the smart thing to do if you were an outgoing President. It would be an attempt to distract voters from your campaigning on behalf of the person who lost… on the historic losses at the state and local level… the loss of the governorship… the continued Republican hold on the Senate and the House… that your legacy was rejected to a man with no political experience whatsoever. Obama had nothing to say when the Chinese hacked over 1 million of his employees personnel files at the Office of Personnel Management last year. And the government knew of the Russian hacking into the DNC systems back in the spring of 2016… and did nothing about it! When you put that into perspective, it is easy to see why the President would prefer to talk about something else.
3. It fits the Clinton narrative and helps explain away her loss. It is much easier to talk about Russian election influence than why her campaign pulled out of Michigan, or never visited Wisconsin. It is much easier to talk about Russian hacking than why you put yourself and the country at risk with a server in your basement outside of government oversight and protection. The Russians did not make Clinton refer to American voters as “deplorable.” Clinton and her team needed an explanation aside from their own incompetence and ineptness, and with the media’s help, they found it.

II. Why Many are Skeptical of the “Russian Election Hacking” Narrative:
1. Blue Collar voters never got the message from Putin that they should vote for Trump. The steel-worker in Ohio or the laid-off auto worker in Michigan never heard a whisper from ol’ Vladimir Putin on how he should vote for Trump. Even then, if they heard the Russians preferred Trump, they voted for him anyways. Lost jobs, lost wages, lost hope… these were the driving factors in rust belt voting patterns. It is beyond belief to most people that the Russians enacted a disinformation campaign that affected their vote. Almost every exit poll found the same issues affecting voters: fear of the future, anger at the establishment, and wanting a change. It was not a Russian preference for Trump. Dislike for Hillary carried many votes in blue collar states, and that dislike came from negative news stories about Hillary. Those stories were reported by the mainstream media and they were not disavowed. Those were the reasons people voted for Trump, not some Russian boogeyman sending them an email saying “…. hey, we think you should vote for Comrade Donald.”
2. Intelligence agencies have a poor track record when politicized. From Pearl Harbor to the Iranian Revolution to the Pakistani nuclear program to the fall of the Soviet Union, the CIA has rarely gotten their predictions right. While Iraq did have weapons of mass destruction, it was far from a slam dunk. The FBI solves domestic crimes, and is therefore usually reacting to events, not predicting intelligence outcomes. Furthermore, it is highly unusual to be reporting on findings to the media, and to Congress, on such highly subjective subject matters. Especially, right before a new administration takes office.
3. It didn’t make sense for Russia to support Trump – Obama was Russia’s best friend. It started with Clinton’s Russian reset, combined with selling 20% of our uranium to the Russians through the Clinton Foundation. Follow that up with knowing and doing nothing about the Russian violations of the original Reagan era INF treaty and don’t forget one of Obama’s FIRST actions was to prevent the installation of missile defense programs in Poland and the Czech Republic at the request of Russia. There was Obama on the hot mic telling Premiere Medvedev to tell Putin to hold on until the 2012 election was over, and then Obama could be more “flexible”. Or how about the Syrian “red line” and no action taken – allowing the Russians to enter the Syrian Civil War, and replace the U.S. as the primary major power in the Middle East for the first time since 1973. The “New Start” Treaty only required the U.S. to reduce its missile stockpile, allowed the Russians to have the final numerical advantage, and even with that victory it is being reported the Russians are cheating even further. The Ukraine invasion and annexation of Crimea was met with stern lectures. The idea that the Obama/Clinton team was bad for Putin goes against all available evidence.

The United States has, and our citizens should support, a robust intelligence capability and agencies which execute the mission of keeping Americans safe. Whatever evidence exists to suggest the Russians were attempting to affect the outcome of the American election, it did not succeed – as Director Clapper stated on the record.

To the extent the information the Russians stole and possibly gave to Wikileaks, which Wikileaks denies it was the Russians, and then was made available in the media, you have to ask yourself:

A) Whose job was it to prevent the hacking?
B) Who exposed the secrets in their own server in a basement?
C) Was any of the information untrue?

The answers to those questions will help you assign blame as to who was responsible, and how the voters determined the winner on their own merit, not a Russian boogeyman.

Both parties, and all voters, should be alarmed at efforts by foreign governments to influence our elections. We have a right to expect our government is taking actions to protect the integrity of elections. However, unless a vote was changed by Russian actions, the idea that voters were persuaded by the Russians to vote for Trump is silly. Only Hillary has herself to blame for a vote cast against her.

International disinformation campaigns aimed at the United States can impact not just voting decisions, but your money decisions as well. You can remove your retirement money from the market risk that is associated with bad information, and the investment choices that could be made on faulty intel. Call your Ty J. Young Inc. advisor and learn how you can protect your money from the highly volatile stock market and have it growing at the same time. 877-912-1919. .