Watching Trump take on the establishment and winning has been truly incredible to watch unfold.  It’s easy to watch him give what seems unplanned remarks that came out of the blue.  Heck this is how he lulls everyone to sleep.  The reality, I think he has an incredibly calculated strategy.  Let’s piece this election together.

As I see this race there are actually 3 lanes.

  • I think Cruz shares more in common with Trump voters than Marco’s voters.  Trump is like a non-evangelical version of Ted.
  • Trump equals 3/7th  of all fed up voters that want change, let’s call them independent minded.
  • Cruz basically grabbed all of the Carson evangelical / liberty / constitutionalist votes and now he is sitting 2/7th of the vote.
  • Rubio would basically be tied with Cruz if Kasich dropped out, giving him an establishment vote of a small 2/7th of the rest.


How this election plays out.

Trump is attacking Marco to drop now, this is an incredible calculation.  There is always a big group of momentum voters that jump on the winning band wagon.  Trump understands this and that Marco is the only person with a shot at beating the Don in Florida.

Marco is still the stronger of the two candidates (him and Cruz) against Trump.  The front half with the SEC states voting were Cruz’s strongest states.  After Ohio and Florida the tables turn to a Marco favored match up with less of an evangelical voter base.  Trump needs to decimate Marco in Florida first.

With Florida out of the way, watch Trump the map will look much more clear.  It will either be a run the clock out strategy, or he goes after Cruz to grab market share.  I don’t think Marco voters would vote for Trump except given the alternative being Hillary.  So Marco will have a floor of 25%.

The real battle for market share will be with the Cruz Trump voters.  My prediction is that Trump will continue winning by the exact same amount the whole way to the end.  There will be no real candidate consolidation.

Trump will win the Republican nomination.



I had a long drive to go meet with a client today so I turned the Radio to Glenn Beck.  I was out of my mind listening to the fire and brimstone coming from him about how the world will end if and when Trump is nominated and heaven forbid becomes president.  He went on and on even suggesting this is how Hitler took over Germany.  So let’s throw out a Libertarian Case for Trump.  Sure he scares me on trade and civil liberties, but let’s focus on the good.

People’s Views Evolve

Funny enough, as a Libertarian minded Rand Paul / Ron Paul supporting type person I have watched Glenn Beck himself evolve more than anyone in recent memory.  He started out absolutely hating Ron Paul and everything Ron spoke of evolving to his current Evangelical Libertarian (Is that a thing, I just made it up?)  Now I respect views evolving for one simple reason.  As a Libertarian, I constantly argue with everyone, that means nearly everyone I talk with needs their views to evolve.  Imagine having a civil discussion with someone, and at the end of hearing your views, they said hey I never thought of it that way you are correct.  That is someone’s view evolving and in my opinion is a good thing.  They may have thought one way, my concern is that they have the right view today not yesterday.

He Is Making Too Many Promises He Can’t Deliver

This one is an interesting one.  The complaint is not they are mad about what he is proposing (minus a few subjects), but instead they are mad because he won’t be able to do it when he get’s in.  My question to you is, would you propose he run on a platform that everything is too hard to do?  He is laying out a mandate of his agenda, I don’t see the issue doing that.  Is he setting a high bar, sure.  Will he be able to deliver, maybe.  It will require the full effort of the congress working with him.

Promises He Has Made And His Plans To Do It

  • Get Rid of Common Core –  He wants to get rid of the Department of Education and send the money back to the states.  This is about as conservative as things get, good luck getting Marco Rubio to say he would get rid of the Department of Education.
  • Take On The Military Industrial Complex – He nailed it when he said the military is being run by contracts and special interests not real military need.  He wants to dig his hands into the waste, fraud, and abuse at the Pentagon.  This is a sacred cow, let’s hear Marco Rubio talk about the MIC and how it is hurting our troops.
  • Get Rid Of Obamacare – And he will replace it with a market oriented plan.  He will push to sell across state lines, support HSA accounts.  He says he will take care of the poor with Medicaid.  The poor are on Medicaid today, so in my eyes giving the working class that pays for private insurance a free market option first is a huge win.  We don’t need to get rid of the other socialized programs until we get a free market program first.
  • Will Balance The Budget- He understands it will take a mixture of growth and cutting of expenses to get there.  I have absolutely zero issue with him saying we need to pay down our debt and balance the budget.  How will he do it?  He suggested a few places here and there, likes the penny plan.  But the reality is Congress controls the budget, so he just needs to hold them to the fire.  He is running on a mandate so if he wins he has the high ground in getting it done.

Trump Is Taking Over Just Like Hitler Did

I keep hearing some compare this campaign to exactly how Hitler came to power in Germany.  For someone like Beck to say this clearly doesn’t understand the fundamental difference of Trump vs Hitler is simple.  Trump is looking to reduce the size and power of government not increase it.  If Hitler had given the power back to the States would he really have been in the same situation.  Hitler like all left wing visions is to consolidate power and ultimately allow him to rule.  That is 100% opposite of saying I am going to reduce the size and thus power of government.


Is Trump perfect?  Absolutely not, but nobody is.  Checks and balances still remain in our country.  He may be the perfect sledgehammer to get things done.

Here is a quick  food for thought.  Iowa is not your typical State when it comes to voting.  Unlike the standard ballot box style most states have where you stand in privacy making your anonymous vote, the caucus style adds a level of peer pressure.  So here goes my theory on why Trump Lost Iowa.

In the last several election cycles, the winners of Iowa tend to be the religious evangelical voters.  Now my theory is that this crowd adds a lot of peer pressure on who you can vote for.  Trump has a wishy washy past with some issues evangelicals would be in an uproar over, particularly abortion.

So the stigma of going over and picking Trump is harder in a Caucus.  This is why Santorum and Huckabee were able to win the last two times.  It was a show of who is more evangelical than the next.   So in my eyes, the bottom line for Iowa is that it is irrelevant who won, but definitely relevant for who didn’t win.



I think it is time to weigh in on the Kim Davis dram I can’t seem to avoid.  As a Libertarian leaning fellow, I always cringe when I see conservatives representing the “other option” as if Kim Davis is either right or wrong and those are my two choices.  Well it’s time to clear the air and say let’s consider that 3rd option.  Let’s fire Kim Davis and others just like her.

Well that comes off quite harsh and difficult to say, what could my rationalization be behind such a strong stance?  Am I anti God or Anti Religious Rights?  No, I happen to have the simplest rationale out of everyone.  Why the heck does the position Kim Davis currently works in even exist?  When we talk about bad regulations, and useless bureaucrats we are talking about the Kim Davis of the world.  She is the exact poster child of why Government should be reduced and should not be running and meddling in free individuals lives.

What if Kim Davis and her job were eliminated across this country, would the sky fall?  No we would reduce thousands of unnecessary costs on every town, city whatever in the country.  The wasted pension costs, the wasted benefits costs  all going towards a regulation enforcer that doesn’t then follow the regulations she was told to enforce.  Let’s simply reduce the size of government and get more of it out of our lives.  Let individuals have whatever agreements they choose to have.  Let’s simplify the entire process so that an eCommerce computer can register these transactions for peanuts and get rid of the bureaucrats.

So yes, let’s fire Kim Davis, but let’s fire all of the meddling government busy bodies in our lives.  Let’s get rid of regulations, lets live a life of freedom.


It’s time to throw out the first pitch on this blog.  I have been thinking about issues and solutions to health care in this country.  I think we need to transition away from employer paid plans and towards a private market driven one instead.  How do we get there?  Well, I am going to take a stab.

Change Employer Healthcare Contribution Incentives

The current system forces employers to pay for the Health Care of it’s employees.  From my understanding, if you have over 50 full time employees, then you would need to provide an approved health insurance policy.  This is a costly proposition and varies wildly from company to company.  The idea that I have to lose my families coverage and benefits simply for looking at getting a better job makes no sense to me, also the idea that if I get sick and can’t work, I have to quit my job and lose coverage also makes no sense to me.  So let’s fix it.

One Employer Pays The Brunt

Currently a family of 4 with two working parents will have two choices of plans to adopt.  The likely outcome is that the the family will choose to join the best option of the two plans, and most likely that would be the more expensive option of two policies.  So basically no good deed goes unpunished and the employer offer the most expensive option gets the likely burden of paying, while the cheapest company likely gets a pass and doesn’t contribute at all since they likely get opted out.

How much are we talking about?  Well according to the NCSL   that average cost recently exceeded $16,351.  So this clearly isn’t peanuts.  Considering that entire burden is equivalent to working a 40 hour week every single day of the year at an hourly rate of $7.86.   Ok so we know there is a lot of money at stake, how do we change this around.

Tax Incentives

This is a very simple fix.  I am going to use arbitrary numbers, but I think you will get the idea pretty quickly.  We know the average family of 4 health insurance plan costs $16,000, so $20,000 would be a fantastic round number to talk about.  I propose we change the tax deduction laws for corporations to be able to deduct UP TO $20,000 dollars per year towards an employees healthcare contributions.  That money would be paid directly into a HEALTH SAVINGS ACCOUNT or similar type vehicle.  So each year an employee would be given up to $20,000 cash into an account to buy whatever it is they choose to.

Now that may not be a huge incentive for employers to over contribute, so we could simply give a 2X or 3X deduction against every dollar contributed.  So if a company made a $600,000 profit for the year and was going to pay a 35% tax on that income leaving them with $390,000 in profit , instead they could choose to fund 10 employees Health Accounts with $20,000 each at a cost of $200,000 and with a 3X write off, they would end up with $400,000 in profit.  So you can now see that would be a pretty smart investment by each company as it is a benefit to it’s employees giving them a cash infusion of to $20,000 dollars into their savings account.

But WAIT….  It get’s even better.  In our family of 4 example, this would apply to the non paying employer too!!!  So now the second person in each household could receive a benefit of $20,000 as well.  That means that a family with two working parents could receive up to $40,000 dollars per year in their health savings account.  That is a lot of money, yes it is.

So Now What?

So now individuals / families or whomever have these full funded accounts, but they no longer get insurance from their employers and instead received up to $40,000 in cash.   So now they will need to buy a private policy directly from an insurance exchange.  I will be posting at some point on how to fix the exchanges etc, and no I can’t say I am thrilled, but we have them and they are functioning, and this post is simply tackling the idea of how a person’s insurance should not be attached to their employer.

Ok moving on, if you have a bank account accruing $20,000 dollars per year or more, let’s look at what that could buy you and your family.  I like looking at and using it as a reference point.  So at random, a family of 4 in Massachusetts can pick a PPO plan costing $941.56 per month, and having a $4,000 dollar family deductible.  So that would cost $11,292 per year in premiums, plus another possible $4,000 dollars for the deductible.  So basically the absolute total worst case cost for a family of 4 would be somewhere around $15,292 per year.  So if you receive $20,000 per year from your employer, you would accumulate a positive surplus of $4,718 per year.  If your second employer is kicking in $20,000 then that number jumps to $24,718 extra per year.  All while being fully covered from any sickness or injury.

What Happens To The Money?

Ideally this account would grow and grow.  Only to be used on Health Care Costs unless a threshold is hit.  Let’s say that a surplus of $200,000 is hit, then it could simply flow through as income.  We could also make it eligible for converting it to retirement income at a certain age as well.  That gives a massive incentive to live a health lifestyle and question high cost health services.  It empowers the consumer to make the rational decisions on what policy and plan is best for themselves and gets rid of our current distorted market place.  This will no doubt drive down the cost curve on health care costs as it is individuals making individual health care decisions.    It removes the religious arguments as it is simply money financing an individual, not a certain drug for abortion or birth control etc.  There are infinite reasons we need to get out of our current system, most of all because it is broken.  The same concept above could easily be applied to Medicare and Medicaid with a voucher system as well.

I would love to hear your thoughts.






After a few years of growing older, wiser, and certainly not better looking I am hitting the reset button on this site.  The goal is to share a different perspective on current events, politics, and economic issues.    So here goes nothing!!!