Rocky Anderson, Presidential Candidate, is coming to Berlin, Connecticut!

On Tuesday, May 29th, at 4 PM Eastern Time, Rocky Anderson will be interviewed live on The Barefoot Accountant’s Livestream Internet Program on Accounting, Taxes, and U.S. Politics.

Anyone interested in asking a Presidential candidate a question will have the opportunity via chat, available on the website, and/or telephone.

Rocky Anderson formerly was the Mayor of Salt Lake City from the year 2000 to 2008, serving two terms as a Democrat; however, in 2011, Rocky became disenchanted with the Democratic Party’s sell-out, along with the Republicans, to Corporate interests and left the party to form the Justice Party in order to advocate economic justice through measures such as green jobs and a right to organize, environment justice through enforcing employee safeguards in trade agreements, and social and civic justice through universal health care.

The Barefoot Accountant is endorsing Rocky Anderson for President of the United States, and is in the process of getting the party registered in Connecticut and Rocky Anderson’s candidacy on the ballot here.

All individuals interested in joining and becoming involved in the Justice Party here in Connecticut are urged to contact the Barefoot Accountant as soon as possible.  We want to organize individuals who are fed up with the control of the Democratic and Republican Parties by Corporate and wealthy interests.  It is time for working class Americans to reclaim their government.

If Egypt was capable of overthrowing a dictatorship through political activism, so are we through a grass roots movement.  We do not need a billion dollars, like President Obama or Mitt Romney, to attain the Presidency:  we have strength in numbers, a majority of the electorate disenchanted with the two parties’ candidates.

We can change Washington and the system.  All it takes is your involvement.

Posted in Connecticut Politics, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Caveat emptor: beware of contractors who do not honor their quotations

Oil Equipment Mfg 2x1-1/2 Vert Alarm/gauge My heating oil supplier refused to supply us with any heating oil last week because the fuel tank vent whistle indicating when the tank was filled was not working:  that is, it was not whistling when the tank was being filled, the whistling sound stopping when it was completely filled.  He referred me to Domenico Miele of Miele Mechanical Services L.L.C., located in Kensington, Connecticut, to repair the whistle on my oil tank, adding that his pricing was reasonable.

So on Saturday I called Mr. Miele and asked him how much it would cost to replace the fuel tank vent whistle on my oil tank.  He assured me that the maximum cost would be $150.  Taking him at his word, assuming him to be an honest and honorable person and businessman, I engaged him to replace the whistle.

When his service man arrived, he informed me that he had brought the wrong whistle with him since our oil tank whistle required a combination whistle and fuel gauge.  A combination whistle and fuel gauge is not uncommon.  In fact, in every home in which I lived, every oil tank had a whistle and fuel gauge.  Virtually all homeowners have a fuel gauge in order for them to determine if they need oil.

When the service man returned within 20 minutes with the combination whistle and fuel gauge, he installed it within 15 minutes time, and then presented me with a bill for $227.88, not $150.00 as quoted as the maximum cost, explaining that the difference in cost was due to the difference in price of the whistle/gauge as opposed to that of just a whistle.

Conducting a Google search on the internet, I found an advertised price of $31 for the whistle gauge that I had mounted on my oil tank today.  I then googled the price of just an oil tank whistle without the gauge, and found an advertised price of $18.

As a Certified Public Accountant, when I quote a price, and I assure my client that it will not exceed a certain amount, I live by that price.  My word is my reputation; it is the cheapest form of advertising of which I am aware.  My word, and my reputation, are worth more than $13, or $77.88.

The Barefoot Accountant

Posted in Connecticut Politics, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The rascist joke emailed by U.S. District Judge Richard Cebull, chief judge of the federal court in Montana

On February 20th U.S. District Judge Richard Cebull, the chief judge of the federal court in Montana, emailed to a half dozen of his friends a joke condemned in the media for being rascist.  A number of organizations, including members of the press, have since called for Judge Cebull’s resignation for his actions.  Since many of the articles on this story have not provided the contents of the joke, the Barefoot Accountant has decided to publish it here for you to judge and appreciate the seriousness of the offense:

“A little boy said to his mother, ‘Mommy, how come I’m black and you’re white?’ His mother replied, ‘Don’t even go there Barack! From what I can remember about that party, you’re lucky you don’t bark!’ “

Posted in Connecticut Politics, Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

The Faulty Arithmetic behind the Economic Plan of Mitt Romney

Provided to you by the Barefoot Accountant

Chris Matthews:  Let me finish tonight with this.  People keep wondering why Mitt Romney won’t say what he’d do in simple terms to cut the debt.  You know, the vision thing.   Just lay it out there. His big vision on how to attack what he keeps insisting is the country’s big problem. The reason we haven’t moved with a faster recovery, he says.

Well, it’s really quite understandable. It’s called arithmetic. If you want to cut the debt, really cut it, you have to cut spending big time. You have to chop off government programs big time.

What’s he’s going to chop off? Defense? Are you kidding? He attacks Obama for shrinking defense spending.

Chop off federal interest payments on the debt? Can’t do that. It’s called default. Default is what we’re afraid is going to happen in Europe.

What do you mean we can’t pay what we owe? Okay, eliminate social security and medicare benefits. Can’t do that. The government owes that money. And nobody is going to refuse to pay it. Nobody. Certainly not a Republican given that party’s record on social security.

So what’s Romney talking about? Wwhat’s he talking about right now? Earmarks.  And other Mickey Mouse stuff.  Again, why doesn’t he come out with a big plan to cut the debt? Because he doesn’t want to.

In fact, he’s ready to go the other way and add to the debt. Look at him last night.

Last night he went on television after the primary results to say he wants to eliminate what Republicans call the death tax.  He also wants to get rid of the alternative minimum tax.  Get that out of rich people’s hair.

He wants to bump a 20% across-the-board cut in the tax rates to boot.  That’s also for the rich people.  You know what that is?  It’s offering a sop to the big money people he wants to start ponying up to his campaign.

Did you notice how he laid out all of that right before he read out the name of his website for campaign contributions.  Get it?  It was a business deal.  Give a few thousand bucks to get him in office and he’s going to save you millions in taxes.

But didn’t he say the big problem was the rising debt?  Well, last night he went the opposite direction.  He pandered to the big boys to get campaign money to smother his opponents next week.  The debt Mitt Romney is really worried about is the one his campaign might leave him stuck with.

Posted in Connecticut Politics, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Good Old Family Doctor here in Berlin, Connecticut: Othman El-Alami, MD

Othman El-Alami MD Berlin ConnecticutDo you remember family physicians who made house calls when you were sick?  Do you remember not waiting endlessly in waiting rooms, only to be shuffled into one of a half of dozen examination rooms, only to wait endlessly again to see your doctor?  Do you remember your doctor spending more than just a few minutes talking to you, devoting considerable time examining you, explaining your condition, and precisely giving you instructions on how to take care of your illness?  Do you remember the family doctor who knew your medical history so you did not have to recount all of your ills and pains throughout eternity whenever you went to see him?  Do you remember a doctor who was willing to prescribe medication over the phone, without necessitating an afternoon visit to his office, and expeditiously authorizing those required refills of your medications without you begging and pleading on the other end of the phone? 

Do you remember when family physicians were considered just that:  family!  Yes, they were competent and knowledgeable, but they expressed a personable bedside manner as opposed to a strictly sterile and clinical demeanor.  Let’s face it:  our bodies are not objects.  They are very personal to us.  And although other professionals, like lawyers, need to convey a certain objectivity, doctors see and know all of us, even our most intimate and hidden aspects.  It’s hard to reveal all of that stuff to an outsider, to one who is not regarded as a member of the family. 

I remember when doctors were like family.  In fact, our family physician for years in New Britain was Edmund Orbach.  He was my grandfather’s doctor; my mother’s doctor; and my doctor until his retirement some decades ago.  Dr. Orbach had escaped Nazi-occupied Austria in the mid 1930s and started a medical practice in New Britain, on the corner of West Main and Washington Streets.  He was a little man with a thick German accent, with the bedside manner of the proverbial old-time family physician.  He knew me since I was a baby, and would ask me questions about school and my homework; and would even urge me to pursue medicine as a career. 

One never felt rushed during his examinations.  He patiently addressed all of one’s questions, no matter how stupid they might appear in retrospect, since we did not feel obligated to hold back out of embarrassment because, after all, he was like a member of the family.   And in detail without any rushing so that we would full absorb what he was saying, he explained the course of treatment, unlike so many medical professionals today who are already anticipating the next patient in the adjacent examination room and don’t want to know too much about you, but shuffle you out of the office, preferring not to say too much about your condition, diagnosis, prognosis, or prescriptions.

Perhaps such is due to the litigious nature of our times.  Maybe doctors are deathly afraid of saying anything that can be used against them in a court of law since so many people are sue crazy today.  Whatever. 

I recently met a doctor here in Berlin who reminds me of the physicians of yesteryears, possessing all of their courtesies and graces, reminiscent of the bedside maners of doctors of yore.  He is very personable; he conveys a real genuine concern for the patient; he takes his time examining each patient; and he explains in great detail the course of his treatments without rushing each one out of the office.  I am relieved to have found such a physician here in Berlin, Connecticut.

His name is Dr. Othman El-Alami.  My wife first introduced me to Dr. El-Alami a couple of years ago since she had been raving about him for years to me.  She thought him to be a very special doctor and trusted him.  My wife is a cancer survivor of ten years, and knows everything there is to be known about doctors.  Trusting her expertise in this important area, I decided to give him a try as my primary doctor, and now I am so very pleased to have made this wise decision.

What first impressed me about Dr. El-Alami was his courteous, warm manner.  Unlike so many physicians that I have patronized in the past, I did not feel that I had to apologize for being ill and taking up his time.  He displayed a genuine interest in my well-being and health.  When was the last time you felt that way in a doctor’s office?

But what impressed me the most was his willingness to openly communicate his detailed diagnosis and prognosis of my condition without me drilling him like a prosecuting attorney.  He takes his time, volunteering information unasked for but appreciated by me.  For instance, suffering from a post-nasal drip that felt like the flow of the Mississippi River coursing down the back of my throat, he recommended covering my mouth and nose with a scarf so that the cold weather did not irritate my nasal passages.  It was like mom reminding me to button up my coat and put on my earmuffs.  I liked that.

Or upon noticing that I was adding pounds like the neighborhood hippo, he suggested that I refrain from more than one starch at dinner, refusing that tempting slice of fresh Italian bread from San Remo’s bakery.  I am still struggling with that recommendation.

But what adds to that old-time feeling of a family doctor is the atmosphere of Dr. El-Alami’s office.  Nadia, his wife, is always at the front desk.  She is another familiar face who knows all of the patients and their medical history.  It is reassuring to me that there is continuity of the medical team–in fact, a “family” team–unlike all those other medical offices where the staff is indulging in musical chairs and there is always a different face manning the front desk, having no clue at to who you are, and recording your visit without that glad-to-see-you-again greeting.

And if you are suffering from a medical problem, Nadia will get you an appointment on that day, if necessary.  No suggestion of going to the emergency room if you cannot wait until next week or next month to see the doctor.

Yes, I am very pleased that I have found a doctor here in the town of Berlin to entrust my medical care.  A doctor that I know is accessible, competent, pleasant, and personable, just as Dr. Edmund Orbach was to my grandfather, my mother, and me as a young man.

Thank you, Dr. El-Alami.  I appreciate your genuine, kindly, family care.

Posted in Connecticut Politics, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

My email to Senator Richard Blumenthal from Connecticut regarding PIPA and SOPA

Senator Richard Blumenthal on PIPA and SOPARecently I emailed Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, requesting that he vote against PIPA and oppose SOPA.  In response, I received a form letter, which ended with the following question:

“If you think we can eliminate online piracy, what do you see as alternatives to the proposals in the Protect IP Act, and how can they best be implemented?”

My emailed response to his question follows:

Dear Senator Blumenthal,

This is the Age of Information. And to promote literacy, free speech, and the exchange of ideas, the internet needs to be protected and made free to all users, as if it were one huge public library.

If vendors wish to protect their property, then they are free to do so through technology, installing controls on discs to prevent duplication and publication. Let these vendors assume the financial responsibility; do not impose such at the taxpayers expense.

We are not charged extra if we lend copies of books that we purchased at bookstores to friends.  This is not regarded as piracy but as sharing.  Neither are we charged extra for copies of books that we take out from the public library.  Again, this is not regarded as piracy but as educational.

The important point is to conceive of the internet as one big public library, making all information contained thereon freely and publicly available. If we wish to promote intellect, communication, brainstorming, literacy, the exchange of ideas, creativity, innovation, etc., then make their medium–the internet–free and available to all.

Thank you,
William Brighenti, CPA
Accountants CPA Hartford, Connecticut, LLC

Posted in Connecticut Politics, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | 2 Comments

PEW Research Center study finds growing conflict between rich and poor in the United States

Conflict between Rich and PoorA recently published PEW Research Study found a growing conflict between the rich and the poor in the United States.  66% of those surveyed perceive a disturbing economic inequity between the rich and the poor, and feel that it has gotten only worse over the past two years.

With the backdoor bailouts of Wall Streeters like Goldman Sachs and others by individuals in the federal government, Americans more now than ever believe that our economic system is rigged because of government favoritism resulting from political contributions and swinging door recruitment of former federal employees by Wall Street firms.

Noted among these disturbing backdoor bailouts is the Goldman Sachs funding by American taxpayers of $16 billion when Henry Paulson was head of the Treasury Department.  Since Hank Paulson was the former CEO of Goldman Sachs, who earned about $567 million during his employment there, Americans are perceiving that our system of government is controlled by Wall Streeters and the rich.  Normally when a company goes bankrupt, there is not a government bailout at taxpayers expense at 100% of the monies lost from its economic failure.  Paulson’s, Geithner’s, and other governmental cronies’ involvement has had a disturbing effect on the American public’s confidence in the integrity of our political system.

Also in 2010 the enactment of the egregious estate tax law, which lowered estate taxes from 55% to 35%, is being perceived as a result of $10 million of political contributions by the Walton family alone, as well as from other monies from rich interests, at a time when our country cannot afford such luxurious and unnecessary tax gifts to those without need.  In return for their $10 million contributions, the heirs of the Walton fortune of $84 billion received a huge estate tax break of nearly $17 billion.  Not a bad return on the Walton’s investment, is it?  Political contributions sure pay off for Wall Street and the rich.

The study found that Americans are becoming quite upset with the collusion of government and the 1%, representing the rich in our country, and are becoming more disillusioned in our capitalistic system.  The question is, how long will the masses put up with this government of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich, given the recent uprisings in the Middle East and the protests of the occupiers of Wall Street throughout our land.

Let’s all hope not very long.

For a detailed discussion of the PEW Research Center study on the growing conflict between the rich and the poor in the United States, please see the article and video, the conflict between the rich and the poor has become very strong over the past two years.

The Barefoot Accountant

Posted in Connecticut Politics, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Another Wall Street Appointee by President Barack Obama: Jacob Lew, the New Chief of Staff. Good Grief!

by the Barefoot Accountant
Jacob Lew, Chief of Staff
Appointing Jacob Lew as the new Chief of Staff is further and continued evidence that President Barack Obama is working for Wall Street instead of Main Street.  Recall that Jacob Lew once argued against deregulati­on, asserting that the cause of the subprime mortgage originated before deregulati­on in 1999 with the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act.  Well, Jacob, what caused it? The Bogeyman? 

For those unaware, the Glass-Steagall Act originated in 1933 in response to the Great Depression since economists believed that permitting commercial banks to function as investment banks led to casino-like gambling in the stock market, creating that irrational exuberance of driving stock prices ridiculously above their economically justifiable market values based on earnings per share.  So it’s no small coincidence that merely eight years after its repeal in 1999 that the stock market suffered a collapse reminiscent of that of the Great Depression. 

With the continued repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act we have four big banks sitting on $2 trillion, investing in treasury bills and stocks, instead of loaning that money to small businesses to create jobs here in America.  And the stocks that the big banks are investing in are those of the multinational corporations, who are, in turn, investing overseas where labor is dirt cheap.  In other words, Wall Street is investing in Asia and not Main Street USA!  Consequently, don’t expect that unemployment rate to return to normal in your lifetime.  Better hold onto that $8/hour job at Walmart.

Jacob Lew is not in favor of Glass-Stea­gall either.  You may wonder why Jacob Lew is against deregulation of the commercial and investment banking industry.  Because he is a Wall Streeter, just like Timothy Geithner and Larry Summers and William Daley, Obama’s former Chief of Staff, who was formerly Vice Chairman of J P Morgan.  Did you know that Jacob Lew was the chief operating officer of Citigroup’­s Alternativ­e Investment­s unit?  You know, that very same Citigroup that is a big commercial and investment banker who betted against the subprime mortgages.

Obama keeps going to Wall Street for his economic advisors.  So even though it’s election season and Obama is talking tough about band-aid cures for our depression–e.g., two month extensions of our unemployment benefits and a patry $108 billion in infrastructure investments when some economists are urging the need for a $2 trillion investment–we have the same President Obama serving the interests of Wall Street and the 1% over Main Street and the 99%.

Isn’t it time to send a protest vote against Obama, the Democratic National Committee, and all representative pawns of Wall Street?

Posted in Connecticut Politics, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Accountability Plan of Susan Bysiewicz, Connecticut Democratic Primary Candidate for the US Senate

Susan Bysiewicz Accountability PlanThe Barefoot Accountant once again had the opportunity to interview Susan Bysiewicz, a Connecticut Democratic Primary Candidate for the United States Senate.

Susan Bysiewicz recently published her Accountability Plan, holding Wall Street and corporate special interests accountable for the economic mess in which we all currently find ourselves.  In fact, Susan today characterize that mess as a “depression”, and not merely a recession.  I agree with Susan Bysiewicz:  this is not a recession but something along the lines of the Great Depression.  Frankly, unless something is dramatically done in the very near future to change things in Washington, the middle class is in danger of disappearing in the United States in a matter of years.

Susan’s plan is simple, though well-researched and footnoted, detailed, and comprehensive.  It consists of thirty-four pages of about a half dozen proposed reforms.

To hold Wall Street accountable for its part in precipitating this calamity on middle America, Bysiewicz advocates a transaction tax on all speculative security trades on Wall Street.  This is not new:  in fact, we had such a tax until the mid-1960s.  Moreover, it is prevalent in the United Kingdom and in a number of countries in Europe.  She asserts that it has not impaired the capital markets there nor did not previously do such in the United States when it was in place; rather, she argues that it mitigates the frenetic activity of the casino-like gambling inherent in the day trading of the big security firms, reducing investment risk by stabilizing security prices.  Because of the trillions of trades on Wall Street every year, even though the tax is very tiny (which is why I dubbed it the “ttt” for tiny transaction tax), as low as .01% of the trade, Susan Bysiewicz estimates that its application would raise, at a minimum, $150 billion in additional tax revenues every year.  Perhaps a lot more.

With those additional tax revenues, Bysiewicz proposes that the funds be used to refinance under water mortgages and assist in the initial financing of clean energy alternatives.  Her proposal for the rescuing of homeowners in or near default is essentially the Homeownership Vesting Plan of Mark Zandi, a noted progressive economist.  Mortgages would be refinanced at their current market values, with the revenues from the transaction tax subsidizing the differential between those values and the existing mortgage balances.

The other portion of the transaction tax revenues would be used to offset the initially higher utility rates from the purchase of clean energy alternatives by utilities until those costs decrease to those of fossil fuel energy costs.

The other major components of Susan Bysiewicz’s Accountability Plan include the following:

  1. Elimination of corporate tax loopholes and subsidies as well as the Bush tax cuts.
  2. Further restrictions on lobbying and lobbyists, and the overturn of the United Citizen’s decision.
  3. Immediate return of all troops from Iraq and Afghanistan and the closing of many bases in Europe and Japan.
  4. Immigration reform.

For a detailed discussion and critique of Susan Bysiewicz’s Accountability Plan, please see,

Susan Bysiewicz has published her Accountability Plan for reforming and fixing America’s economy and government in Washington

The Barefoot Accountant

Posted in Connecticut Politics, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

President Obama alibiing the failure of his 2009 economic stimulus package

Jay Carney recently appeared on “Morning Joe” on MSNBC, alibiing President Barack Obama’s ultimate responsibility for the failed economic recovery over the last three years. Like a child caught in the act of a household crime, Carney pleaded the excuses: how was President Barack Obama to know how really bad the economy was in January of 2009; no one told Obama that the economy was that bad; if he had only known better…or the like.

But, in fact, back in January and February of 2009, a number of noted economists as well as a host of progressives told Obama and the public how bad the recession was. They likened it to the great depression. Only President Obama did not listen to the voices of Paul Krugman, Martin Feldstein, James Galbraith, Martin Zandi, and many others. Instead Obama listened to the establishment, to the counsel of Wall Streeters Timothy Geithner and Larry Summers, and instead of proposing an immediate infrastructure investment of a $1.5 trillion, and selling treasury notes to buy up subprime mortgages to restructure them, he offered a pittance of an infrastructure plan of $140 billion contained in a stimulus package of $787 billion, a third of which consisted of tax cuts. In other words, Obama caved in to Republican opposition and Wall Street and heeded the economic counsel of Geithner and Summers rather than economists like Krugman who said that his economic plan was too small to deal with the deepest recession since the great depression.

Now President Obama continues his band-aid approach to our never-ending recession, where true unemployment approaches 20% and not 8.6%, since many have fallen off the radar screen of national statistics, no longer eligible to collect, no longer attempting to find work. What is Obama’s big economic plan going into the 2012 election? Merely to extend the 2% cut in the payroll tax. Wow. Will this return our country to economic recovery and prosperity? Not a chance.

For Cenk Uygur’s transcript of his chastisement of President Obama on his repeated failure to listen to progressives, please see the article, President Barack Obama failed the economic recovery with a stimulus package too small

Posted in Connecticut Politics, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment