Untitled

We see other countries going Socialist and collapsing, but it seems like a great plan to us.  

Somehow it’s un-American for the census to count how many Americans are in America.

People who say there is no such thing as gender are demanding a female President.

Universities that advocate equality, discriminate against Asian-Americans in favor of  African-Americans.

Some people are held responsible for things that happened before they were born,  and other people are not held responsible for what they are doing right now.

Criminals are caught-and-released to hurt more people, but stopping them is bad because it’s a violation of THEIR rights.

People who have never owned slaves should pay slavery reparations to people who have never been slaves.

If a guy pretends to be a woman, you are required to pretend with him.

It was fine for Joe Biden to “blackmail” the President of Ukraine, but it’s an impeachable offense if Donald Trump inquiries about it.

People who have never been to college should pay the debts of college students who  took out huge loans for their degrees.

$5 billion for border security is too expensive, but $1.5 trillion for “free” health care is not.

Trump’s Real Tariff Strategy

Lewis Morris

The trade wars that economists predicted would follow President Trump’s raising of tariffs against various nations and trading blocs around the world have officially begun.

China announced last Friday that it was matching $34 billion in U.S. tariffs on Chinese imports with an equal level of tariffs on U.S. goods coming into China. The American imports targeted include soybeans, lobsters, SUVs and whiskey.

China said it is responding to 25% taxes levied by the U.S. on Chinese industrial products coming into America. The Chinese economic ministry claims the Trump administration is guilty of “trade bullying” and that the U.S. had begun the “biggest trade war in economic history.”

Trump probably takes that latter statement as a compliment, but for the Chinese to accuse the U.S. of being trade bullies is more than a bit hypocritical.

China reached its status as second-largest economy in the world through a lot more than just having a large, hard-working population. Currency manipulation, breaking trade agreements, rigging contracts with foreign companies, industrial espionage — China’s done it all. The problem for the Chinese now is that the president of the United States is looking to do more than just shake his fist.

Trump has stated since his campaign that he wanted to punish the countries that have taken unfair advantage of America in international trade. That list includes Canada, Mexico, the European Union and China. All these nations are big trading partners with the U.S., but they have all placed tariffs and trade barriers to keep America’s strongest companies from being able to compete in their markets while prying open America’s market and making it accessible to cheaper foreign goods.

This has been going on for years, but economic globalists, at least three previous presidents and many members of Congress have done little more than lament America’s trade deficit with a shrug, as if to ask, “What are ya gonna do?” Well, Trump came up with an answer to that half-baked question.

It’s hard to know if Trump’s tariffs on foreign goods will have the desired effect of motivating our trade partners to play fair. There are many economists who are against tariffs under any circumstances, even if the alternative means America getting hammered by trade agreements that tilt in favor of foreign partners. These people claim that we should use the World Trade Organization to press our case for better trade practices.

The WTO has supported the U.S. consistently in its trade disagreements with China, but the process is long and arduous and its enforcement regime moves painfully slow. China has learned to play the bureaucratic wrangling of the international body to its advantage, changing its tune to suit any given situation.

The media has portrayed the coming trade wars as Trump’s fault. It conveniently leaves out the part of the story that reveals Trump is responding to foreign tariffs and trade restrictions, not causing them. The media complains that Trump’s actions will bring an end to free trade. This claim is meant to gin up anti-Trumpers, many of whom don’t support free trade anyway. Besides, we don’t really have free trade now. America operates in a sea of tariffs, fees and taxes that make international business needlessly more complex and costly than it needs to be.

This is not to say that Trump’s actions don’t have the potential to cause harm. International stock markets and consumer prices on goods in affected industries are stable so far, but the real trade war has only just begun. Many analysts note that they have already baked in some of the cost of a trade war between the U.S. and its partners, but no one can predict what will happen if this drags on for weeks or months.

Trump supporters in the farm belt are still with the president, counting on his business skill and his courage to face down China to get them through. Again, their views may change if things drag on and they start to feel the heat from higher prices and shrinking foreign markets. And these people may feel it first. Foreign countries are making a point of retaliating against Trump’s tariffs by targeting industries in states he won in 2016.

Any trade policy that costs American jobs is a bad policy, but so is one that maintains a meager status quo that does not grow the U.S. economy. That’s the policy we’ve had for several years, and Trump wants to change that. He has an advantage in that the American economy is strong and growing right now. He may be calculating that the U.S. can absorb a mild hit caused by a trade war if it means getting our trading partners to change their ways.

There is no good time for a trade war, but if it has to happen, then now may be that time.

Phil Donahue vs Milton Friedman

Milton Friedman and Phil Donahue discuss capitalism and free.
An excerpt from an interview with Phil Donahue in 1979.

Transcript:

Phil Donahue:

When you see around the globe the maldistribution of wealth, the desperate plight of millions of people in underdeveloped countries, when you see so few haves and so many have-nots, when you see the greed and the concentration of power, did you ever have a moment of doubt about capitalism and whether greed’s a good idea to run on?

Milton Friedman:

Well, first of all, tell me, is there some society you know that doesn’t run on greed?
You think Russia doesn’t run on greed?
You think China doesn’t run on greed?
What is greed?
Of course none of us are greedy. It’s only the other fellow who’s greedy.
The world runs on individuals pursuing their separate interests. The great achievements of civilization have not come from government bureaus.
Einstein didn’t construct his theory under order from a bureaucrat.
Henry Ford didn’t revolutionize the automobile industry that way.
In the only cases in which the masses have escaped from the kind of grinding poverty you’re talking about, the only cases in recorded history are where they have had capitalism and largely free trade. If you want to know where the masses are worst off, it’s exactly in the kinds of societies that depart from that. So that the record of history is absolutely crystal clear that there is no alternative way, so far discovered, of improving the lot of the ordinary people that can hold a candle to the productive activities that are unleashed by a free enterprise system.

Phil Donahue:

But it seems to reward not virtue as much as ability to manipulate the system.

Milton Friedman:

And what does reward virtue?
Do you think the communist commissar rewards virtue?
Do you think Hitler rewards virtue?
Do you think American presidents reward virtue?
Do they choose their appointees on the basis of the virtue of the people appointed or on the basis of their political clout? Is it really true that political self-interest is nobler somehow than economic self-interest?
You know, I think you’re taking a lot of things for granted. Just tell me where in the world you find these angels who are going to organize society for us.

Phil Donahue:

Well —

Milton Friedman:

I don’t even trust you to do that.

The Tax System Explained in Beer

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all

ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes,

it would go something like this:

– The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.

– The fifth would pay $1.

– The sixth would pay $3.

– The seventh would pay $7.

– The eighth would pay $12.

– The ninth would pay $18.

– The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that’s what they decided to do.

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the

arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball. “Since

you are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the

cost of your daily beer by $20”. Drinks for the ten men would now

cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes, so

the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free.

But what about the other six men? How could they divide the $20

windfall so that everyone would get his fair share

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they

subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the

sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s

bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle

of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out

the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving).

The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 … (33% saving).

The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7… (28% saving).

The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 … (25% saving).

The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 … (22% saving).

The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 … (16% saving).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four

continued to drink for free.

But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.

“I only got a dollar out of the $20 saving,” declared the sixth man.

He pointed to the tenth man, “But he got $10!”

“Yeah, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a dollar

too. It’s unfair that he received ten times more benefit than me!”

“That’s true!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get $10 back

when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!”

“Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison, “We didn’t get

anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!”

The nine men surrounded the tenth man and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine

sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to

pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have

enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and government officials, is how

our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes

will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction.

Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may

not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas

where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.

Professor of Economics.

For those who understand, no explanation is needed.

For those who will not understand, no explanation is possible.

Six quotes – who said them?

1) “We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.”

A. Karl Marx B. Adolph Hitler C. Joseph Stalin
D. Barack Obama E. None of the above

2) “It’s time for a new beginning, for an end to government of few, by the few, and for the few.. And to replace it with shared responsibility, for shared prosperity.”

A. Lenin B. Mussolini C. Idi Amin
D. Barack Obama E. None of the above

3) “(We)…. Can’t just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people.”

A. Nikita Khrushchev B. Joseph Goebbels C. Boris Yeltsin
D. Barack Obama E. None of the above

4) “We have to build a political consensus. And that requires people giving up a little bit of their own turf, in order to create this common ground.”

A. Mao Tse Tung B. Hugo Chavez C. Kim Jong II
D. Barack Obama E. None of the above

5) “I certainly think the free-market has failed.”

A. Karl Marx B. Lenin C. Molotov
D. Barack Obama E. None of the above

6) “I think it’s time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched.”

A. Pinochet B. Milosevic C. Saddam Hussein
D. Barack Obama E. None of the above

(1) E. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/29/2004
(2) E. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 5/29/2007
(3) E. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007
(4) E. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007
(5) E. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007
(6) E. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 9/2/2005

Stay at 17 inches

from here: http://www.sperrybaseballlife.com/stay-at-17-inches/

In Nashville, Tennessee, during the first week of January, 1996, more than 4,000 baseball coaches descended upon the Opryland Hotel for the 52nd annual ABCA convention. Nineteen times since, many of the same professional, college, high school, youth, and a slew of international coaches from passionate and developing baseball nations have gathered at various convention hotels across the country for two-and-half days of clinic presentations and industry exhibits. Sure, many members of the American Baseball Coaches Association have come and gone in those years; the leadership has been passed, nepotistically, from Dave Keilitz to his son, Craig; and the association — and baseball, in general — has lost some of its greatest coaches, including Rod Dedeaux, Gordie Gillespie, and Chuck “Bobo” Brayton.

I have attended all but three conventions in those nineteen years, and I have enjoyed and benefited from each of them. But ’96 was special — not just because it was held in the home of country music, a town I’d always wanted to visit. And not because I was attending my very first convention. Nashville in ’96 was special because it was there and then that I learned that baseball — the thing that had brought 4,000 of us together — was merely a metaphor for my own life and those of the players I hoped to impact.

While I waited in line to register with the hotel staff, I heard other more veteran coaches rumbling about the lineup of speakers scheduled to present during the weekend. One name, in particular, kept resurfacing, always with the same sentiment — “John Scolinos is here? Oh man, worth every penny of my airfare.”

Who the hell is John Scolinos, I wondered. No matter, I was just happy to be there.

Having sensed the size of the group during check-in, I woke early the next morning in order to ensure myself a good seat near the stage — first chair on the right side of the center isle, third row back — where I sat, alone, for an hour until the audio-visual techs arrived to fine-tune their equipment. The proverbial bee bee in a boxcar, I was surrounded by empty chairs in a room as large as a football field. Eventually, I was joined by other, slightly less eager, coaches until the room was filled to capacity. By the time Augie Garrido was introduced to deliver the traditional first presentation from the previous season’s College World Series winner, there wasn’t an empty chair in the room.

ABCA conventions have a certain party-like quality to them. They provide a wonderful opportunity to re-connect with old friends from a fraternal game that often spreads its coaches all over the country. As such, it is common for coaches to bail out of afternoon clinic sessions in favor of old friends and the bar. As a result, I discovered, the crowd is comparatively sparse after lunch, and I had no trouble getting my seat back, even after grabbing a plastic-wrapped sandwich off the shelf at the Opryland gift shop.

I woke early the next morning and once again found myself alone in the massive convention hall, reviewing my notes from the day before: pitching mechanics, hitting philosophy, team practice drills. All technical and typical — important stuff for a young coach, and I was in Heaven. At the end of the morning session, certain that I had accurately scouted the group dynamic and that my seat would again be waiting for me after lunch, I allowed myself a few extra minutes to sit down and enjoy an overpriced sandwich in one of the hotel restaurants. But when I returned to the convention hall thirty minutes before the lunch break ended, not only was my seat not available, barely any seats were available! I managed to find one between two high school coaches, both proudly adorned in their respective team caps and jackets. Disappointed in myself for losing my seat up front, I wondered what had pried all these coaches from their barstools. I found the clinic schedule in my bag: “1 PM John Scolinos, Cal Poly Pamona.” It was the man whose name I had heard buzzing around the lobby two days earlier. Could he be the reason that all 4,000 coaches had returned, early, to the convention hall? Wow, I thought, this guy must really be good.

I had no idea.

In 1996, Coach Scolinos was 78 years old and five years retired from a college coaching career that began in 1948. He shuffled to the stage to an impressive standing ovation, wearing dark polyester pants, a light blue shirt, and a string around his neck from which home plate hung — a full-sized, stark-white home plate.

Seriously, I wondered, who in the hell is this guy?

After speaking for twenty-five minutes, not once mentioning the prop hanging around his neck, Coach Scolinos appeared to notice the snickering among some of the coaches. Even those who knew Coach Scolinos had to wonder exactly where he was going with this, or if he had simply forgotten about home plate since he’d gotten on stage.

Then, finally …

“You’re probably all wondering why I’m wearing home plate around my neck. Or maybe you think I escaped from Camarillo State Hospital,” he said, his voice growing irascible. I laughed along with the others, acknowledging the possibility. “No,” he continued, “I may be old, but I’m not crazy. The reason I stand before you today is to share with you baseball people what I’ve learned in my life, what I’ve learned about home plate in my 78 years.”

Several hands went up when Scolinos asked how many Little League coaches were in the room. “Do you know how wide home plate is in Little League?” After a pause, someone offered, “Seventeen inches,” more question than answer.

“That’s right,” he said. “How about in Babe Ruth? Any Babe Ruth coaches in the house?”

Another long pause.

“Seventeen inches?”came a guess from another reluctant coach.

“That’s right,” said Scolinos. “Now, how many high school coaches do we have in the room?” Hundreds of hands shot up, as the pattern began to appear. “How wide is home plate in high school baseball?”

“Seventeen inches,” they said, sounding more confident.

“You’re right!” Scolinos barked. “And you college coaches, how wide is home plate in college?”

“Seventeen inches!” we said, in unison.

“Any Minor League coaches here? How wide is home plate in pro ball?”

“Seventeen inches!”

“RIGHT! And in the Major Leagues, how wide home plate is in the Major Leagues?”

“Seventeen inches!”

“SEV-EN-TEEN INCHES!” he confirmed, his voice bellowing off the walls. “And what do they do with a a Big League pitcher who can’t throw the ball over seventeen inches?” Pause. “They send him to Pocatello!” he hollered, drawing raucous laughter.

“What they don’t do is this: they don’t say, ‘Ah, that’s okay, Jimmy. You can’t hit a seventeen-inch target? We’ll make it eighteen inches, or nineteen inches. We’ll make it twenty inches so you have a better chance of hitting it. If you can’t hit that, let us know so we can make it wider still, say twenty-five inches.’”

Pause.

“Coaches …”

Pause.

” … what do we do when our best player shows up late to practice? When our team rules forbid facial hair and a guy shows up unshaven? What if he gets caught drinking? Do we hold him accountable? Or do we change the rules to fit him, do we widen home plate?

The chuckles gradually faded as four thousand coaches grew quiet, the fog lifting as the old coach’s message began to unfold. He turned the plate toward himself and, using a Sharpie, began to draw something. When he turned it toward the crowd, point up, a house was revealed, complete with a freshly drawn door and two windows. “This is the problem in our homes today. With our marriages, with the way we parent our kids. With our discipline. We don’t teach accountability to our kids, and there is no consequence for failing to meet standards. We widen the plate!”

Pause. Then, to the point at the top of the house he added a small American flag.

“This is the problem in our schools today. The quality of our education is going downhill fast and teachers have been stripped of the tools they need to be successful, and to educate and discipline our young people. We are allowing others to widen home plate! Where is that getting us?”

Silence. He replaced the flag with a Cross.

“And this is the problem in the Church, where powerful people in positions of authority have taken advantage of young children, only to have such an atrocity swept under the rug for years. Our church leaders are widening home plate!”

I was amazed. At a baseball convention where I expected to learn something about curveballs and bunting and how to run better practices, I had learned something far more valuable. From an old man with home plate strung around his neck, I had learned something about life, about myself, about my own weaknesses and about my responsibilities as a leader. I had to hold myself and others accountable to that which I knew to be right, lest our families, our faith, and our society continue down an undesirable path.

“If I am lucky,” Coach Scolinos concluded, “you will remember one thing from this old coach today. It is this: if we fail to hold ourselves to a higher standard, a standard of what we know to be right; if we fail to hold our spouses and our children to the same standards, if we are unwilling or unable to provide a consequence when they do not meet the standard; and if our schools and churches and our government fail to hold themselves accountable to those they serve, there is but one thing to look forward to …”

With that, he held home plate in front of his chest, turned it around, and revealed its dark black backside.

“… dark days ahead.”
Coach Scolinos died in 2009 at the age of 91, but not before touching the lives of hundreds of players and coaches, including mine. Meeting him at my first ABCA convention kept me returning year after year, looking for similar wisdom and inspiration from other coaches. He is the best clinic speaker the ABCA has ever known because he was so much more than a baseball coach.

His message was clear: “Coaches, keep your players — no matter how good they are — your own children, and most of all, keep yourself at seventeen inches.”

He was, indeed, worth the airfare.

Letter to Washington

April 3, 2013

Senator Patty Murray
Senator Maria Cantwell
Washington, DC , 20510

Dear Senator:
I have tried to live by the rules my entire life. My father was a Sergeant Major, U.S. Army, who died of combat related stresses shortly after his retirement. It was he who instilled in me those virtues he felt important – honesty, duty, patriotism and obeying the laws of God and of our various governments. I have served my country, paid my taxes, worked hard, volunteered and donated my fair share of money, time and artifacts.

Today, as I approach my 79th birthday, I am heart-broken when I look at my country and my government. I shall only point out a very few things abysmally wrong which you can multiply by a thousand fold. I have calculated that all the money I have paid in income taxes my entire life cannot even keep the Senate barbershop open for one year! Only Heaven and a few tight-lipped actuarial types know what the Senate dining room costs the taxpayers. So please, enjoy your haircuts and meals on us.

Last year, the president spent an estimated 1.4 $billion on himself and his family. The vice president spends $millions on hotels. They have had 8 vacations so far this year! And our House of Representatives and Senate have become America ‘s answer to the Saudi royal family. You have become the “perfumed princes and princesses” of our country.

In the middle of the night, you voted in the Affordable Health Care Act, a.k.a. “Obama Care,” a bill which no more than a handful of senators or representatives read more than several paragraphs, crammed it down our throats, and then promptly exempted yourselves from it substituting your own taxpayer-subsidized golden health care insurance.

You live exceedingly well, eat and drink as well as the “one percenters,” consistently vote yourselves perks and pay raises while making 3.5 times the average U.S. individual income, and give up nothing while you (as well as the president and veep) ask us to sacrifice due to sequestration (for which, of course, you plan to blame the Republicans, anyway).

You understand very well the only two rules you need to know – (1) How to get elected, and (2) How to get re-elected. And you do this with the aid of an eagerly willing and partisan press, speeches permeated with a certain economy of truth, and by buying the votes of the greedy, the ill-informed and under-educated citizens (and non-citizens, too, many of whom do vote) who are looking for a handout rather than a job. Your so-called “safety net” has become a hammock for the lazy. And, what is it now, about 49 or 50 million on food stamps – pretty much all Democrat voters – and the program is absolutely rife with fraud with absolutely no congressional oversight?

I would offer that you are not entirely to blame. What changed you is the seductive environment of power in which you have immersed yourselves. It is the nature of both houses of Congress which requires you to subordinate your virtue in order to get anything done until you have achieved a leadership role. To paraphrase President Reagan, it appears that the second oldest profession (politics), bears a remarkably strong resemblance to the oldest.

As the hirsute first Baron John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton (1834 – 1902), English historian and moralist, so aptly and accurately stated, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men.” I’m only guessing that this applies to the female sex as well. Tell me, is there a more corrupt entity in this country than Congress?

While we middle class people continue to struggle, our government becomes less and less transparent, more and more bureaucratic, and ever so much more dictatorial, using Czars and Secretaries to tell us (just to mention a very few) what kind of light bulbs we must purchase, how much soda or hamburgers we can eat, what cars we can drive, gasoline to use, and what health care we must buy. Countless thousands of pages of regulations strangle our businesses costing the consumer more and more every day.

As I face my final year, or so, with cancer, my president and my government tell me “You’ll just have to take a pill,” while you, Senator, your colleagues, the president, and other exulted government officials and their families will get the best possible health care on our tax dollars until you are called home by your Creator while also enjoying a retirement beyond my wildest dreams, which of course, you voted for yourselves and we pay for.

The chances of you reading this letter are practically zero as your staff will not pass it on, but with a little luck, a form letter response might be generated by them with an auto signature applied, hoping we will believe that you, our senator or representative, has heard us and actually cares. This letter will, however, go on line where many others will have the chance to read one person’s opinion, rightly or wrongly, about this government, its administration and its senators and representatives.

I only hope that occasionally you might quietly thank the taxpayer for all the generous entitlements which you have voted yourselves, for which, by law, we must pay, unless, of course, it just goes on the $17 trillion national debt for which your children and ours, and your grandchildren and ours, ad infinittum, must eventually try to pick up the tab.

My final thoughts are that it must take a person who has either lost his or her soul, or conscience, or both, to seek re-election and continue to destroy this country I deeply love and put it so far in debt that we will neverpay it off while your lot improves by the minute, because of your power. For you, Senator, will never stand up to the rascals in your House who constantly deceive the American people. And that, my dear Senator, is how power has corrupted you and the entire Congress. The only answer to clean up this cesspool is term limits.

This, of course, will kill the goose that lays your golden eggs. And woe be to him (or her) who would dare to bring it up.

Sincerely,
Bill Schoonover
3096 Angela Lane
Oak Harbor, WA 98277

Go Long Coffee and Sandwiches… but Short Uncle Sam

by Alexander Green, Chief Investment Strategist, The Oxford Club
Friday, February 26, 2016

http://www.investmentu.com/article/detail/49631/go-long-coffee-sandwiches-short-uncle-sam#.VtDClsfJW7A

Most Americans realize that the government is inherently wasteful and inefficient.

Yet this year we have aspiring presidential nominees on both sides of the aisle promising to give us more of it anyway.

If you understand anything about coffee and sandwiches, you’ll realize what a bad idea this is.

Panera Bread (Nasdaq: PNRA) earned billions over the last decade selling soups and sandwiches. Annual sales are nearly $2.7 billion.

Each Panera store competes with every fast food joint, cafeteria, diner and local restaurant in its vicinity. In a sense, it is also competing with local supermarkets, since you could eat at home or pack a meal for work.

Yet because Panera offers tasty fare at a reasonable price, it attracts millions of customers and makes billions of dollars.

The Starbucks (Nasdaq: SBUX) story is similar.

The Seattle-based company sells coffee and pastries. But then so do all the other coffee shops surrounding its stores. There is no shortage of competition. Yet customers can be seen queuing up at Starbucks at all hours.

Just look at the numbers. Over the last 12 months, Starbucks generated more than $11.3 billion in gross profit on $19.7 billion in net revenue.

It’s hardly a news flash that Panera and Starbucks make billions – in highly competitive markets – selling sandwiches and coffee.

But for an instructive look at the difference between how things operate in the private sector and the public sector, take a look at Amtrak.

The government-funded railroad service has the distinction of losing more than $45 billion over the last 44 years. And the bipartisan Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act signed into law last year subsidizes Amtrak for another $7 billion from 2016 until 2020.

I’m not suggesting that running a passenger train line is like selling sandwiches and coffee. That would be comparing apples to oranges.

No, I’m going to focus solely on Amtrak’s café car, which sells sandwiches, coffee, pastries, soft drinks, and bottled water – the same things Panera and Starbucks offer.

Here’s the bottom line: Amtrak loses $80 million a year on its food service alone. It has lost almost a billion dollars over the last 12 years.

When you are traveling on Amtrak – as I often am on my way to our home office in Baltimore – there is only one place you can get a sandwich or a cup of coffee: the café car.

There is no competition trying to earn your business. Yet Amtrak’s food service loses tens of millions of dollars every year.

Don’t assume that Amtrak is charging too little. Look at the menu online. A cheeseburger is $7.25, a Pepsi or bottle of water is $2.25, a candy bar is $2.75.

“So how is this even possible?” you might ask.

A government audit discovered that the losses are due to waste, employee theft, lack of oversight and high labor costs. (Employees are covered under the Railway Labor Act. The average onboard worker earns over $42 an hour.)

Why doesn’t Congress do something about this travesty?

You’ll love this part. Since 1981 – 35 years now – Amtrak has been required by law to end its food and beverage service losses. However, Congress doesn’t enforce the statute, so Amtrak’s losses continue to pile up.

Running a food counter that dispenses sandwiches and coffee is hardly brain surgery. Yet the government turns even a simple operation like this into a gusher of red ink.

In the pantheon of government boondoggles, Amtrak’s food losses hardly rate a footnote. But they exemplify why government is inherently wasteful and expensive.

No one in government is penalized for poor performance, so there is no incentive to economize. There is no profit motive, so there is no demand for efficiency. And because voters and taxpayers are largely in the dark, needed reform doesn’t happen.

And we want our candidates for the nation’s highest office to give us more government?

Have a cup of coffee and think about it.

Good investing,

Alex