Barrett Rainey's Second Thoughts

When someone has an asset or significant advantage in life, it may’ve come from hard work, inheritance, luck or just serendipitous circumstance. Most of us don’t give such a situation much thought and go on our way.

But when someone so advantaged – regardless of how that advantage was acquired – brags about it or expects the rest of us to construct a special pedestal from which the wealthy can gaze lord-like over the rest of us, I get pissed. Such is my state at the moment.

We poor plebeians are suffering a torrent of billionaire bitching as some of them suddenly come out from the secured grounds of their compounds to complain we don’t appreciate them sufficiently. We’re being told they don’t deserve our scorn – that we’re treating them the way Nazis treated Jews – we “have-nots” should stop complaining about the “have’s” and spend more time admiring their success – voting should be based on “one-dollar-one-vote” – people who pay no taxes shouldn’t be allowed to vote – yadda, yadda, yadda.

Much of the arrogant blathering has been so ridiculous as to make me wonder how in hell they were smart enough to make a pile of bucks. Maybe Daddy left it to ‘em.

One of the craziest voices is that of Bud Konheim, CEO of a luxury fashion brand. I’m not going to give the bastard a dollop of publicity so if you want to know which one, look it up.

He says 99% of Americans should stop complaining and realize how lucky they are. He says our “poverty level is wealth in 99% of the rest of the world. Exact quote: “The guy’s making, oh my God, $35,000 a year. Why don’t we try that out in India or some countries we can’t even name. China. Anyplace. The (in America) guy is wealthy.”

If you’re trying to make sense out of that blather, don’t bother.

Konheim’s disconnect from reality interested – and revolted – Yale School of Management prof Jeffrey Sonnenfeld who said such “thinking” shrieks of “insensitivity and grandiosity.” “It makes you wonder about other decisions he’s making,” Sonnenfeld said.

Then there’s billionaire Tom Perkins who believes the mass of us poor folk are making “progressive war on the 1% as did the Nazis on anti-Semitism.” Perkins also has proposed giving each of us as many votes in elections as we have dollars in the bank. He, of course, would get a billion ballots or two. Damn! The last 15 years of her life, my mother – with only Social Security and family care for income – paid not a dollar in taxes. But she never missed an election in her life. Doubt her citizenship record could be matched by ol’ Perk.

Fellow billionaire Sam Zell defended Perkins with this gem: “The 1% works harder.” Said it with a straight face, too.

AOL’s Tim Armstrong slashed corporate contributions to 401(k) programs of thousands of employees because of high medical costs of two births. Said his self-insurred company just couldn’t afford it. Lululemon CEO Chip Wilson even blamed the failure of his company’s latest line of yoga pants on the women who bought them. “Some women’s bodies just actually don’t work,” he opined arogantly. And unfeelingly. Bet he sleeps alone.

Several years ago, social psychologist Paul Piff rigged a Monopoly game, sat back and watched the players. He found those who were given more money at the beginning of the game – those who used the advantage to get richer quicker and acquire more property – got ruder, less sensitive to “poorer” players and more demonstrative about their own “successes.”

When the game was over, Piff asked the winners how they did it. Most replied it was their wise purchase of property, handling their money well, quick thinking and making the right decisions. None of them brought up the privilege and extra bucks they got at the beginning.

In another dip into our social connection – and behavior – with wealth, Pitt found people making less than $25,000 a year gave 44% more of their income to charity than people making upwards of $200,000.

For every Warren Buffett among the monied class there seems to be a significant number of rich deadheads who’ve forgotten where they came from, how to relate to others not so privileged, are isolated in their “thinking” and totally divorced from the realities of people who make up the vast majority earth’s population providing their wealth. We’re currently being verbally assaulted by such monied flatulence.

One of my favorite lines from the theater was written by Philip Barry for “The Philadelphia Story” in 1939. A working stiff photographer was standing to the side of a large group of millionaires. All were jovial and enjoying the company of each other in their plush surroundings.

“Nothing like watching the idle rich enjoying their idols,” he opined.

As a proud member of the 99% or the 47% or the pick-any-percent crowd, I’d advise these guys – and the others hiding behind their security systems – to read up on Dr. Piff’s rigged Monopoly game and its findings.

Oh, yes. As Flo used to say, they can also “Kiss my grits.”

Posted in Column | | Comments Off on Rich bitchin’

I gotta admit. Writing a think piece or two a week can be tough when you hit a dry spell. “Writer’s block” it’s called. Just nothing in the tank. But every so often, inspiration comes along like a lighting strike. BOOM! Such a “loud” inspiration struck the other day – easy enough for even that Palin woman to put it together. Well, almost.

Idaho’s attorney general has been trying to make the case with legislative budget types for a larger legal staff. Eight years he’s been scratching on that door without success. Of course, what success can you have when your hard-to-focus governor passes the idea off wittily by telling the media “We don’t need more money for lawyers. We need fewer Idahoans suing the state.” Butch always was a “big concept” guy.

Last three years, Gem State paymasters – read “taxpayers” – have coughed up $18 million for outside attorneys to help the state’s understaffed staff. $18 million! Downtown legal beagles charge $125 $400 an hour for their help. A.G. Wasden bills his staff lawyer’s work about $54 an hour. As I said, even that Palin woman could subtract a smaller number from a large one and – with help – see the problem. But – alas! She’d be wrong. Again.

Here’s the problem. The 105 people on the third floor of the Idaho Statehouse euphemistically called “legislators.” If you replaced that number with about the bottom 10% of any local high school graduating class, you’d solve the issue. Because “the issues” are outright stupid bills written, passed and sent to various governors. Session after session after session. Year after year after year. And they are SIGNED! Over and over and over.

Case in point. A state senator named Vick has put one of these “ain’t-got-a-chance-in-court” bills in committee. It would charge any Idaho cop who tried to enforce any as-yet unwritten federal gun law with a crime. If the guv signs it into law, which legal meter starts running? The $54 an hour in the A.G.’s office or the $400 an hour downtown? You guess.

Case in point: At a speed to make Carl Lewis proud, the folks on the third floor are ramming through a bill allowing concealed carry of guns on Idaho college campuses. On public record already: no college president wants it – no police chief wants it – most students don’t want it. Teens, alcohol, drugs and concealed 9mm’s. What could possibly go wrong? This one will be in court before the first shot’s fired.

Case in point: Another Senator – Thayne by name – has put this little gem up for consideration. If the current POTUS somehow declares war on another nation – which he can’t – Idaho and all who live there would be exempt. Wouldn’t have to fight. Just ignore the war. Now, even I know only Congress can declare a war. But nobody told Thayne – er – Sen. Thayne. Or George Bush, for that matter. So if a majority of the other 104 upstairs sent this bowl of idiocy down to the governor – and he forgot his one constitutional law class of 50 years ago and signed it – whose legal meter starts on this one? And at what per-hour cost? With what outcome?

Terrible case(s) in point. Ol’ Rep. Luker and his two ALEC-written pieces of guaranteed court time that would allow Idahoans not do business with gay or homosexual citizens – or others who “offended” someone’s “religious sensibilities” – to refuse service regardless of the 1964 Civil Rights Act or other laws. Say, a gay man was robbed but a Pentecostal-believing sheriff refused to do anything based on his “sincerely held religious belief” that the gay man’s “lifestyle” was an affront to the sheriff’s way of life. Can’t you just see the worms struggling to get out of the can on that one? Do we hire the $54 an hour Deputy A.G. or does Idaho government turn to the $400 an hour private folk downtown? Again, to what end? It’s a loser. Mr. Luker has withdrawn his paperwork while he “thinks” about it. Prediction? It’ll come back in some form. This year or next. Bet the farm on it.

NOTE: Arizona has just put this on their books. Let them pay the big legal bucks!

I’ve watched the Idaho Legislature for 50 years or so. And I can tell you – without hesitation – the quality control department has closed. For decades – with assistance from a series of governors on the second floor – Idaho taxpayers have underwritten a permanent “Idaho Lawyer’s Perpetual Retirement Fund.” ILPRF for you government readers. And the won-loss record isn’t even close. Big bucks paid. “Laws” shot down in flames.

Even with pretty constant use of several search engines, I have yet to find a state that’s had to go to court to defend dumb state laws more often than Idaho. Or one that LOST more often! I’ve tried to get my attorney daughter to quit her job on a neighboring state’s A.G.’s legal staff and open up a small office in Boise specializing in just defending the Idaho Legislature. My grandkids could not only GO to Harvard. They could BUY the place!

The kicker to all this: more often than not, Idaho’s A.G. Wasden has told the legally obtuse upstairs – well in advance – what they were doing was likely wrong – probably unconstitutional on its face – another legal loser. To no avail!

The breakdown of quality control in selection of Idaho’s legislators really rests with voters. Most specifically Idaho GOP voters, since that party took almost all the keys to legislative bathrooms away from Democrats years ago by keeping the number of the opposition down to a point they need only one. It’s been those same voters who’ve gullibly given anything breathing with an “R” after it a seat in the chambers. Many sent annually to Boise in recent years have failed the admission test of pounding sand into rat holes but they’re not being exposed by keeping the failed efforts classified. The absolute proof has been this record faulty “legal”output.

Many states are racking up more bad legislation cases these days with the advent of ALEC. The one-size-fits-all effluent coming from that right wing “Hall of Legislative Horrors” has meant poorly-conceived bills on abortion, taxes, limiting voting rights and outright racial and religious discrimination. So, duplicate laws in more states have gone down in flames more often because of thoughtless rubberstamp enactment – time after time. One state loses and eight carbon copies fall as well. But the lawyers. Yes, Virginia, the lawyers – they win. Win, lose or draw. The ILPRF keeps paying off.

So, give a thought to Idaho taxpayers from time to time. They’re paying higher – much, much higher – costs-per-vote than you because they have to pay for all that time in court. And they lose so often.

But the lawyers? The Idaho lawyers. As long as the legislature refuses the A.G. more staff attorneys – and his legal advice – theirs is a splendid life of just staying near an open Statehouse window, listening for the scratching sound of the governor’s pen on the next piece of unconstitutional legislation. The well-worn road from downtown to Statehouse and over to the courthouse is a definition of perpetual motion.

Good old ILPRF. More assured than state retirement.

Posted in Column | | Comments Off on Idaho’s lawyer retirement fund

The growing coarseness in our society seems an unstoppable trend many folks just take for granted. Especially those with teens in the house. Most of us don’t like it but we seem powerless to stop it. We ignore it when we can; deal quietly with it when we can’t. Comes now a new, even lower level of character assassination vulgarity that should offend nearly everyone.

It comes from one of the least contributory and most obnoxious members of the U.S. Senate and his contempt for a former member of that body – a former member that conducted the office with far more dignity and many more contributions than his own. The over-rated and under-performing offender is Rand Paul. The target of his warrant less B.S. is Hillary Clinton.

Paul has spent his limited time in Congress accomplishing absolutely nothing. A check of recorded business of the Senate shows Paul’s name connected to zero legislative sponsorship of any substance while contributing to numerous instances of unseemly behavior and self-promotion. Neither his home state of Kentucy nor the nation at-large have benefitted from his presence along the Potomac. His time in office has not been much longer than it takes to find the Senate men’s room but he’s already off on what will likely be a dead end run for the presidency.

From his place near the bottom of the national political totem pole, Paul has already embarrassed himself in a number of ways. But nothing he’s done or said previously comes close to his effort to somehow tie former Sen. Clinton to the Monica Lewinsky scandal of her husband.

NBC’s David Gregory showed his own professionally ignorant coarseness when he asked Paul on nationwide television if the Lewinsky scandal was fair game in a presidential political contest.

Rather than point out the obvious disconnectedness of the query, Paul launched off into his “reasons” why that 20-year-old episode involving two other people was “relevant” to today’s political environment.

“Fair game,“ was the sum of his addled response.

No, Mr. Paul. It’s not “fair game.” Any more than the years of insane statements, impossible politics, early racist writings, public rants and other dubious activities of your father are “fair game” in someone’s campaign against you. In both situations, the principal players were others beside you and Sen. Clinton.

Did you rush to either defend or castigate ol’ Pater for publishing his yellow, baseless trash on his own congressional letterhead? Or did you just ignore what he was doing and saying? Or – even worse – did you agree and keep quiet?

When your father was running scam after money-making scam and calling them “presidential campaigns,” did you publically distance yourself from his felonious activities or did you just learn the old man’s tricks and file them away for your own future use? Your father bilked hundreds of thousands of people out of millions of dollars for many years in what any rational person knew were impossible presidential campaigns. He followed up with more money-making slight-of-hand with paid newsletters, poorly executed videos and amateurish, fact-challenged books pitching the same old crap. Are three decades of fleecing sorry souls with his medicine show tactics relevant for your opponent to use in the 2016 presidential campaign?

No. And neither is the Lewinsky episode for you or anyone else.

From the alleged diary of a dead former Clinton friend, it’s been widely reported Sen. Clinton – then First Lady Hillary Clinton – used the words “loony narcissist” to describe Ms. Lewinsky. So what? What’s it to you. Or anyone else? My own more limited experience with the woes of marital infidelity tell me that’s a pretty calm reaction. If, indeed, that WAS her reaction. What’s it to you?

Frankly, as I recall, a good portion of this country – especially women – found her response underwhelming, restrained and the decision to keep her marriage active very courageous things to do. While she and Mr. Clinton may have had one or more private set-to’s over Ms. Lewinsky, her public persona and demeanor were quite acceptable to a lot of us.

In fact, aside from the obvious “snowball’s chance in hell” of you waging a successful presidential campaign with all your own baggage – and that of dear ol’ Dad – you may have hit a nerve with a lot of us who felt that Mrs. Clinton has shown a great deal of class and grace with a very tough personal situation many of us can identify with. And many tough, difficult moments while in public life in her elective and appointed service.

The fact is, Rand, there should be no place in any campaign involving Mrs. Clinton for talk of her husband’s transgressions. Unless, of course, you want to explain some of the money-grubbing, racist transgressions of Pops..

Aw, go ahead. Give it a try.

Posted in Column | | Comments Off on Like father, like son

While nearly all of us have said – one time or another – we’re mad about something and want to move to another country, few of us have packed up for the trip. But, last year, not only did a record number of Americans flee the good ol’ U.S. of A., they also renounced their citizenship. Just quit!

The exact number – 2,999 – is 217% more than the year before.

It’s likely some left with hurt political feelings. But the Treasury Department blames three other things: increased awareness of an obligation to file U.S. tax returns by U.S. citizens and U.S. “tax residents” living outside this country; the ever-increasing burden of complying with our tax laws and fear generated by the potentially bankrupting penalties for failure to file tax returns when an individual holds substantial non-U.S. assets.

In other words – they reason – file or flee.

This country is one a very few requiring its citizens permanently living abroad to continue filing returns and paying taxes in the nation of citizenship. And the policy is very actively pursued. In 2009, UBS Bank of Switzerland was fined $700 million for providing services to more than 4,000 U.S. account holders on the tax evasion list. Department of Justice and other fed agencies regularly publicize names of banks and other sources who aid in hiding wealth of Americans as well as the names of the “hiders.”

Filing forms are quite complicated and there are lots of ‘em. Next year, the recently enacted Foreign Account Tax Compliant Act will require foreign financial institutions to report accounts and other holdings of American citizens to the I.R.S. Every year.

So, a lot of folks with a lot of assets decided to pack up and leave. For good. And a lot of ‘em paid a large “exit tax” on their way out the door.

Now I’m a long, long way from being a financial “heavy hitter” and certainly don’t have the counsel of high-priced folks to advise how to handle weighty money matters. But, it seems to me, there must be some other way of resolving international tax matters with Uncle Sam besides telling him to “go to Hell” and skipping the country of your birth. I mean, if Mitt Romney can still live in four states with all the foreign deposits we know he has, there must be ways of dealing with our tax laws besides quitting.

And it’s not just the wealthy all upset about things these days. The W.P. Carey School of Business at Arizona State University did some extensive research which showed a lot of us are damned mad and damned angry about certain things. Their “customer rage” investigation found 68% of American households mad about the way they’re being treated in the marketplace. It found instances of yelling and cursing customer “service” representatives at an all-time high. Yelling alone up 36%! Swearing, too.

Among those actually complaining about something, 56% felt they got absolutely no help. And what category of service enraged customers the most, you ask? Cable and satellite TV providers. Unhappy folks doing the calling said it wasn’t government issues that got them all upset. It was problems stemming from private companies.

Now, I’ve got to admit, if I got really, REALLY mad about something, I wouldn’t leave the country over it. Of course, if I had Romney’s money, I wouldn’t be doing the calling, either. So, maybe money DOES buy happiness.

Posted in Column | | Comments Off on File or flee

At the end of 2013, United Van Lines checked moving tickets for the year and found the greatest percentage of people for whom the company hauled household goods went to one state. Oregon.

More than 61% of all interstate moves made in Oregon last year were for people coming from some other place. Lest you think this is some small sampling, the company tracked 129,000 trips in the country for the period. And Oregon topped the pack. Washington D.C. had led the list for the previous five years but – in 2013 – dropped to fourth,

Why Oregon? Why do so many folks want to come here? What is it about the place? What makes our real estate so desirable? Oh, lots of answers could be the Pacific Ocean, the Cascades, Mt. Hood, a good and varied climate, better environment, outdoor activities, cleaner water, better air quality and on and on,. You hear all those a lot.

My take is – as usual – different. I think people come here because we’ve “got our s*%t together.”

“Oh, Momma, look what he said!”

Well, it’s true. We do have it together. Especially politically. Compared to a couple dozen other states, we’re downright – rational. Oh, we’ve got some dim bulbs and political zeroes. One of them is actually the chairman of the Oregon Republican Party. But we’ve got him right out there on a stick where he can be seen so we know what foil-hat-idiocy he’s up to. That’s different. In North and South Carolina, Florida, Oklahoma, Arizona, Texas – especially Texas – residents have allowed them to go underground – into the legislatures and governor’s bedrooms. Real folks lost control.

But here – in Oregon – we’ve kept the system pretty balanced and most of the loonies penned up. When you think back a couple of years, we ran an evenly divided House of Representatives with dual Speakers from different parties and duplicate committee chairs and, all in all, it went very, very well. How many other states could do that today? The two major parties get along most of the time around here. That sort of sends messages to folks in other states that we’ve “got our s*%t together.”

“Good Lord, Momma. He said it again.”

And it’s still true. Nobody here is trying to stop “undesirables” from voting. Nobody here is living under legislated “uterus attacks.” The governor is not talking secession. We’re not drug-checking people who just happen to be unemployed at the moment for whatever reason. We’re not even making food stamp recipients take a leak in a bottle!

Idaho, for example, used to have a slogan: “Idaho is what American was” which they really can’t say anymore ‘cause the nation’s reddest state is falling further behind with an increasingly flat earth contingent that has pretty well contaminated government. Idahoans have lost control. Oregon’s Republicans and Democrats still “Howdy” each other and the state is better for that. “Oregon is still what it was,” I guess.

We, in Oregon, even vote differently than voters in most other states. By mail. And it works! The only fraud we’ve had in recent years was a couple of over-zealous office volunteers messing up a few ballots. We caught ‘em. I think they were escorted to the border. Idaho, maybe.

We’ve got a lot of clean industry percolating along in a relatively stable economy that’s the envy of lots of other states. Our tax base is stable. We’re welcoming to the retired who like our more moderate ways. We’ve got an education system that – for the most part – is the envy of others. We’re not on top but we’re a long way from the bottom. Just goin’ along.

With the possible exception of three or four Southwest Oregon counties, we value diversity. Not just because it makes things more colorful. But because it adds value to our economy. It’s good for business – our neighborhoods – our relationships with each other – and it works wonders when raising our kids.

I’m not surprised at the United Van Lines numbers. But I don’t think our attractiveness to outsiders is all the doing of the media advertising programs out of Salem. No, I think a lot of people want to come here because they don’t hear the name “Oregon” bandied about in negative media messages. Stories about racial profiling or purging unwanted minorities from voter registrations or a legislature hellbent on criminalizing lifestyles and personal choices. We aren’t known for sending little people to Congress wearing tin beanies who put chewing gum in the wheels of democracy. We have a relatively quiet and productive political system that usually functions as it should. We sort of hold to the moderate path in all things.

For folks from Oregon reading this in other places, I’d bet you miss the place and harbor some thoughts about eventually “coming home.” For others who aren’t firsthand familiar with the place, you’ll likely come on out for a visit one of these days. And when you do, there’s good chance you’ll like what you see. You might even call United Van Lines and make it permanent. ‘Cause we’ve got out s*%t together.”

“MOM!!!”

Posted in Column | | Comments Off on Oregon’s got it together