NOTE: Way back when, I used to write a weekly article for two  newspapers in our area. The articles covered subjects from political pandering to personal pontificating on any subject that struck my fancy. In other words, I had free reign.

 The following was written about Christie, my wife, dressing as a witch on Halloween night and giving out treats to the kids — from tots to twenty-something “kids” — who didn’t want to let go of the opportunity to fill their goodie bags with free candy.

 Anyway, I thought this article might tickle a funny bone, or two, and point out that political correctness is still alive — and just as dumb as I always thought it was. Of course, that’s just my opinion, right?

Halloween Costumes Getting Too Political

By Jake Jakubuwski

 I’m devastated!  Last week, I wrote a column about Halloween safety.  In that column I mentioned that some adults enjoying entering into the “spirit” of the night by dressing in a variety of costumes, and passing out treats to the youngsters that come callin’.  I also mentioned that my wife, Christie, would be one of those adults, and would dress as an ugly, cackling, old witch.

As I said, “I’m devastated!”  You see, at the time I wrote that article, I had no idea in the world that if Christie dressed as a witch, she would be displaying an overt insensitivity (I’m pretty sure I have this right, even though the reasoning seems a bit fuzzy to me) to women who had broken down sexist and stereotypical barriers, but may have been referred to as “witches” while doing so.

And, to make matters worse, by dressing as a witch, Christie would probably…in addition to being politically incorrect … cause others of her sisters who have not been even marginally blessed with physical attractiveness, deep misery (that’s the word I read) and anguish.  Honestly, I didn’t know all this when I wrote last week’s article.  So, I told Christie that the witches outfit was…NOT!

I suggested instead that she could be an Indian Princess.  We researched it, and found that it would demean Native American’s and continue to perpetuate stereotypical thinking.  “O.K.,” sez I, “How about a dancing girl?”  Research:  Tends to perpetuate male dominance by portraying a woman as a second class entity fit only to entertain the domineering male.

All right, then how about a grandmotherly type dressed in an apron and carrying a mixing bowl.  Nope.  I found out that elderly women might take offense at being categorized as cookie-baking, turkey-cooking, apple pie making grandmas.

A bum?  Shoot! You can’t even use the word “bum” any more as that would show a callous disregard to the plight of the socially disadvantaged, economically deprived homeless persons that roam our streets and neighborhoods.

A convict with a ball and chain!  A stereotypical portrayal of a socially dysfunctional element who, through no fault of their own, probably lacked a proper role model…demeaning.

O.K!  Then we’ll make Christie an angel!  No way!  Atheists and persons of differing religions may take offense. Since such a religious characterization might cause an irreconcilable conflict with their beliefs or lack thereof.

Wait a minute!  I just remembered:  my grandfather once told me that “you can please some of the people some of the time, but you could never please all of the people all of the time”.

So, I’ll tell you what.  When I wrote last week’s article, I wrote it mainly with the idea in mind that I would point out to parents and grandparents how to make Halloween a little safer for the kids this year.  When I wrote this week’s article, I didn’t realize that Christie and I would be politically incorrect and offensive to nearly everyone with a cultural ax to grind.

Consequently, Christie and I have made a decision.  Since we were raised in a culture that promoted Halloween as a time of fun, festivity, treats and being just a little bit frightened by the ghosts, goblins, witches and warlocks that run wild on Halloween night … Christie’s going to greet the trick or treaters dressed as a witch!

Besides, if any of the parents of the wee folks, and those not so wee folks, who come knocking at our door on Halloween night decide that Christie’s costume is inappropriate or offensive, they don’t have to let their becostumed offspring take our treats home with them!

As Christie says:  “Eee, hee, hee!  EEEEEE, HEEE, HEEEE, HEE!

To All My Locksmith Friends (And Others As Well):

On September 7th of this year, I gave my LAST Pure Jake face-to-face, standup locksmith seminar.

I want to thank my supporters, sponsors and “students” for their loyalty, encouragement and collaboration over the years that made PURE JAKE Learning Seminars a reality and a success. The good news — depending on how you look at it — is that I am STILL writing for The National Locksmith magazine, I am still editing their TECHNITIP column and I am still writing and selling locksmith related books.

Pure Jake Books and Videos are available at:  (http://www.purejake.com ). And, I still offer my FREE monthly — well, most months, anyway — newsletter  (http://purejake.com/purejake-newsletter )  if you’re interested in keeping up with me and my ramblings. And you can also view my books on my FaceBook page Pure Jake Books and Videos. Click the link below:
(http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Pure-Jake-Books-and-Videos/180638255295761 )

To make all of this even better, a couple of years ago, I partnered with Elite CEUs in Austin, Texas (http://www.eliteceu.com ) to present my classes on-line. Through Elite CEUs my courses are recognized, and accepted as CEUs in New Jersey, Tennessee, North Carolina, Texas, Louisiana and other states.

That means, Pure Jake Learning Seminars are now digital! Which means you can take  your required continuing education on line on your computer or laptop and never leave the comfort of your home.

If your only interested in my books, videeos and articles, I have also made my books and other stuff available as digital downloads and you can access my catalog of offerings on my web site or my Face Book page. You can even find some FREE stuff in the mix!

So, you can see that I plan on being around the “trade” for a while longer. Oh, another thing. I now write my own blog on my web site: http://www.purejake.com.

I post new articles as they strike me and they are not always locksmith related. When you open the home page, look to the right side of the page. There you will see the various categories that I currently have articles written for. Take a look. Let me know what you think. The blog is interactive so you can respond to posts that I make and even criticize them!

If you still want some face-to-face, stand-up seminars — then my good friend, Derek Hooker, is the guy to talk to. He has a nice slate of classes to offer and his course material and content  is growing all the time. the_impressionator@yahoo.com . You can also contact Derek at: 877-636-8384 for booking and class schedules, M-F 8am-6pm.

Now, just bear with me a moment longer… I am also writing non-locksmith related stuff! Those writings will cover self-improvement, “How-to” stuff like carpet cleaning and concrete sealing, and a bunch of other topics that I have had experience with. These books are not “reseller” offerings. I wrote ‘em and they’re based on my personal experience with the subject matter. I have not always been a locksmith — it just seems that way! {:>))  My first two offerings are:

http://www.sellingatfleamarkets.com/ and http://10secretsaboutworkerscompensation.com/

So, stay tuned for more about PURE JAKE. And, keep this in mind: What I write is PURE JAKE to the core!

Finally, there are a lot of folks that may be reading this that are among those that are responsible for whatever success I have enjoyed as a locksmith, a  writer and a lecturer. You each know who you are. To each of you, I want to saya heart-felt:  “THANKS!!!!!!!!!!!”

9 + 9 + 9 = 27

By Jake Jakubuwski

9+9+9=27.

3X9=27.

Simple — everyday math, right?

But 27% added to whatever I’m already paying in Social Security tax, state sales tax and what I lose in “deductions”; means I am gonna have to pay more money to somebody.

I hate to start an article with an apology.  In this case, I feel I have to.

You see, I am not an accountant, bookkeeper or math wizard. I’m just a guy who has operated my own business, of one kind or the other, for nearly 50 years. I figure that gives me some sort of platform to base my ideas of what constitutes profit, what makes up a loss and whether or not I’ve got enough money left over at the end of the day, week, month or year to have made it all worthwhile.

There are some things, financial, that I take as givens.

You can’t sell for less then the cost of your merchandise plus the cost of your expenses and stay in business very long.

You can’t spend your way out of debt.

And, no matter how big the pile of whatever it is that you have, if you keep taking away from it and not replacing it; one day — it will be gone.

Another thing I’ve learned is this: If you’re in financial trouble, the cure, generally speaking is not simple, sweet-tasting or fun.

That’s what leads me to believe that the economic problems this country faces (from the White House to the lowest paid laborer in a packing house) some tough choices, that will require a lot of sacrifice on everybody’s part in order to get our financial house back in order.

Those choices might be so hard to make that they prove impossible to implement.

None of them will be simple. None of them will be easy. None of them will be popular.

The politicians from the top of the heap to the wannabes are spewing mouthfuls of rhetoric that is so convoluted; it’s gibberish to the average voter. Some of it sounds so simple, and so easy, it makes you wonder why no one thought of that before. Here’s a newsflash! Someone probably has. The new group just gussied it up in flowery language, added a new twist to it and kept their fingers crossed when they delivered their solution to the voters.

I know I’m being cynical, but all of these folks running for office today remind me of what my granddaddy had to say about shirttail relatives that came seeking a handout. He said they had a mouthful of promises and a handful of gimmie. That seems to sum up all rhetoric; at least in my mind.

Specifically, I’m wondering how we’re gonna pay for all the bailouts, pork barreling, and give-a-ways that Uncle Sugar has been throwing around like we have an endless supply of money to give away.

Unless I’m not understanding the situation, Uncle seems to think that we can speed recovery by pouring bucks on top of the pile where the bankers and other financial sharks can gobble it up but when asked how we’re gonna pay for it, Uncle tells us we can cut programs to the poor and  “straighten out Social Security.” In other words, they look for the fix and sacrifices at the bottom of the pile. It might only be me, but I just don’t understand that idea.

With a new crop of presidential wannabe’s running around mouthing all kinds of promises and espousing ideas that they claim are a nearly painless way of fixin’ what’s wrong with the economy. I have to wonder if they really think Americans are actually so stupid as to believe their guff, or they figure the majority of the electorate is just so fed up with the current crop of crooks and cretins that they’ll vote for anyone who they think sounds like they know what they’re talking about.

For instance: Herman Cain has a plank in his platform that he calls, “9-9-9”. Just on the surface of it, folks seem to like the idea as a real simple roadmap to fiscal responsibility and a way to sort of make everyone pay their fair share. I don’t believe a word of it — at least not the way I’ve heard Mr. Cain talk it up.

First off, this “fair share” drum is rather tattered and worn. From what I read and understand only about 6% of the taxpayers (including Joyce Lunchbucket and Joe the Plumber) pay their full tax rate on their actual earnings. Is there anything “fair” about that?

My take on Mr. Cain’s 9-9-9 deal is that businesses will pay a 9% rate on all of their income, period.  They will not get any deductions, tax incentives, set-offs or loss carry-overs. Does that mean McDonald Corporation pays 9% on their gross income and loses any incentives, or tax breaks, to support Ronald McDonald House, their scholarship funds and deductions for all the wages they pay as well as all of the hamburger, rolls, fries and drink cups they buy?

What about Mickey D’s share of FICA (Social Security Tax) that they pay into the Treasury on behalf of their employees? Do they still have to pay that? Or is it “included” in the 9% tax?

If I understand the program, it’s going to affect General Motors, General Electric, AT&T, NBC, Sheila’s shop of Tonsorial Splendor, Mike’s Garage, Mom’s Apple Pie Shoppe and every other business inAmerica— regardless of size or income.

If a guy or gal is self-employed and are paying their own Social Security taxes, does the 9% Mr. Cain envisions cover that contribution as well, or is it in addition to it? If this “9” is just another tax that businesses of all sizes and income levels have to pay in addition to FICA, State, County and municipal taxes that they may be liable for — I don’t see the benefit. Actually I see it as regressive.

The idea of a “flat” income tax has been floating around for years. The idea has a lot of appeal because of its simplicity and the fact that it would yank half a zillion pages out of theUnited States Revenue Code. There have been at least a half a dozen variants discussed over the years without any notable success.

The next “9” is the 9% income tax that individuals would have to pay. Does that 9% pay the wage earners share of their Social Security; or is the FICA deduction in addition to the 9%? I believe that most wage earners that are currently in a 20% tax bracket probably wind up paying far less then 9% when their personal deductions, mortgage interest, child care fees and medical expenses are deducted from their gross income.

Those folks that currently fall below the poverty level are not paying any tax at all. Are they able to take a 9% hit on their already poverty-level wages?

Then comes the final “9”. The National sales tax of 9% which, as far as I understand it, is in addition to any state, county, city or municipal sales taxes. Ouch!

InNorth Carolinawe currently have a 7.5% sales tax. If Mr. Cain is elected and his 9-9-9 program is adopted, my sales tax goes to 16.5%! That also seems to mean that anything I buy to run my business: paperclips, ink cartridges, pencils, staples and a plethora of other stuff will cost me more. Those items become expenses that I can not longer deduct.

Does that same ‘sales” tax apply to GM, GE and Mickey D’s? If it does, that means cars, electric motors and hamburgers are going to cost all of us more. Which means, as far as I can see, another loss I have to absorb because I can’t claim it as a deduction.  What’s fair about that?

Another thought. If Staples buys computers from Dell, does Staples pay a 9% sales tax on them? If so, Staples is going to charge me more for the next computer I buy from them…

Why? Well, let’s say they have a computer that I can buy today for $500.00. That will change drastically under the 999 plan. If they pay Dell $375.00 for it, plus 9% Federal Sales Tax, then I pay that 9% as well. In which case, Staples will add a MINIMUM of $34.35 to that computer. So now, I will pay NC State sales tax on $534.35 at 7.5% PLUS the 9% Federal Sales Tax.

Another thing I’ve learned over the years is that if your cost of doing business increases — your selling price has to increase as well. Not simply by adding in only the extra cost but by adding in the extra cost PLUS a profit. If a business does not factor in a profit on their TOTAL costs of doing business that means they will make less gross profit at the end of the year. Doing that as a matter of course is a sure way to lose your business!

Here’s the really scary part of 999 as I see it: The first year it’s 9%. The next year, how much? Who knows?

I know something else from my years in business: Whatever Uncle Sugar does to help us out is going to cost us money because there is one immutable facet to the  Law of Financial Reality According to Jake:

“Nothing happens. Nothing gets sold. Nothing gets built, nothing gets repaired, nothing gets refurbished and nothing gets “overhauled” (Including the National Debt, the US Revenue Code, bureaucrat’s and politician’s salaries) that consumers and taxpayers don’t foot the bill for.”

 So, is Mr.Cain’s “999” idea just a catchy campaign slogan to entice voters and has no substance or value beyond that? Is “999” something he believes will work but has not given any meaningful thought to the actual impact of the program if it becomes law? Or, is it a smoke and mirror cure that that might kill the patient?

At this point, for me at least, the only thing 9+9+9 adds up to is 27% more money that will be coming out of my pocket.