Well, I’ve been struggling with the question of whether I should run to replace Jim Nielson in House District 19 since he announced that he won’t run for another term. Apparently Mike Leavitt told Mitt Romney about it and Mitt took the time to share his thoughts:
With that encouragement how could I not take the leap. I’m glad that Mitt is using his iPad to dispense so much wisdom. The people of House District 19 will be the beneficiaries of it.
Thanks for your support Mitt. On to victory!
Why is it that the government gets to tell me when I can spend my money?
That’s a question I have asked myself many times. The “you can’t touch it until you’re 60” rule is proof of why it is not the business of government to get involved in what private citizens do with their money (within the bounds of the law). I remember hearing a story from the Romney campaign about Mitt Romney sitting down with his sons at dinner and asking them about their savings. He was surprised to learn that none of them had any savings in the form of 401K or IRA accounts. Their reasoning was that they could not afford to lock up money in that kind of long term plan because they would not be prepared if they had any financial emergency. I remember thinking “I can relate to that.” For Mitt Romney the result was that he now proposes a Tax Free Savings Policy:
Governor Romney Will Make Middle Class Savings Tax Free. Governor Romney’s plan will allow middle class Americans to save tax free by changing the tax rate on interest, capital gains and dividends to absolutely 0%. By helping more Americans save and invest, we can meet the challenges of an aging population and ensure the financial security of America.
– Governor Romney’s Plan Will Allow Over 95% Of American Families To Save And Invest Tax-Free. Any taxpayer with Adjusted Gross Income of under $200,000 would pay a tax rate of absolutely 0% on all of the income they earn from their savings, capital gains and dividends.
My experience has been that I got a job and could not contribute to the 401K plan at the company for 6 months – of course that was when I was technically working as a contractor from a temp agency. At the end of the 6 months my job status changed to being a direct employee of the company and the clock restarted on their waiting period before I could contribute to their 401K plan. I had hardly begun contributing to that 401K plan after their waiting period before the company started downsizing and I was out of a job. I now work for a very small company that does not offer a 401K so I have to roll over my pittance from the other plan into a personal IRA, but I can’t actually invest the money until I have many time more money than I would be rolling over. My current company offers a 403B but there is no guarantee of their matching anything I contribute so the incentive is absent.
As I was contemplating that predicament I also started to consider the implications of contributing to either a 401K, a 403B, or an IRA – anything I might put in any of those would be locked away. What if I had a need, or what if I wanted to retire early? If I put my savings in any of those I would have to have a separate means of savings to fund an early retirement. Essentially the government is locking me into working for at least 30 years unless I have a very lucrative career.
From my perspective the tax-free savings policy sounds like a good thing. I hope it gets enacted. Maybe our current lame-duck president could start pushing for it. If he did I can guarantee that I would view him more favorably at the end of his term than I currently view him.
I saw a video clip (I believe this was from an “Ask Mitt anything” session) in which someone asked Mitt Romney how he would go about changing the culture of Washington D.C. I thought the answer was good and the question is more important than we might guessed based on the amount of coverage it gets in the media.
P.S. This is also an excuse to test the embed tag in one of my blog posts.
Yeasterday I wrote about my apprehension with Mitt Romney’s approach to health care reform in Massachusetts and the social direction of this country that our current health care reform discussion implies. Today I was surprised to find articles on both topics. Lessons from Massachusetts highlights the kinds of reasons to be uneasy with Mitt’s Massachusetts approach. E Pluribus Unum goes into more depth on where this country is headed and why it’s not as good as advertised.
I look forward to the details of the proposal that Mitt is supposed to make today on health care, because it is supposed to be different than his Massachusetts approach. Maybe it will be better. I also hope that we can become aware of the dangers we face if we do not turn our cities and states around and get the country back on the path of greatness. Don’t get me wrong, we live in a great country, but being in a country built on great principles does not guarantee that the choices we are making now will lead to future greatness. We still have to be careful.
I said before that I was becoming increasingly uncomfortable with my favorite major candidates over one issue. That issue is the issue of health care reform. Obama seems firmly in the camp of having the federal government provide health insurance for many or all Americans. I think this is a very bad idea. It looks easy on the surface, but I think it is a step towards making our government financially insolvent.
On the other hand, Mitt Romney has experience implementing health care reform as governor. On the surface his approach sounds more like the kind of thing that I could accept. That means I am more comfortable with Romney than Obama on this issue.
What this country really needs is for the federal government to scale back in many areas where it was not meant to be. We are working towards a homogeneous society where there are no substantive differences between Idaho and Florida. The strength of this country is our freedom to make choices. Unfortunately we are working to create a society where there are no meaningful choices that have not already been made for us through our laws. This is not a recipe for stability. We need the challenge of meaningful choices if we are to hope to build the kind of strong character in our citizens which drives us to do the things that make this country great.