Right of Center

War with the West

2010-01-06T07:47:00.000-08:00

How would you go about subduing much more powerful countries than any of those aligned with your own? Think about that for a moment. There aren’t any Muslim countries that could alone or collectively stand up to the Western nations. That is a problem that Islam has solved. Islam seeks to purify the world and eliminate all infidels leaving Islam as the last religion standing. Numerical numbers do not translate into strong armies when arrayed against technological superior armies. So to accomplish their goal, Islam needed a strategy that would give Islam an edge over the West.

What Islam came up with was plausible deniability by the various Muslim countries. This was accomplished by forming an army called Al Qaeda. With Al Qaeda, the Muslim world had a front group that they could support, yet be able to deny their culpability.

All Muslim countries support Al Qaeda in some form or another. That support may come in supplies, money, a place to train the recruits, or a network of Madras’s to indoctrinate young Muslims scattered throughout the Muslim world. The plan itself is masterful. Saudi Arabia may be supplying the manpower but not allowing training bases. In fact, they may militarily clamp down on Al Qaeda activities within their border, but you will notice that they still support the Wahhabi Muslim sect. In other words, they can openly oppose and support at the same time.

Whether we look at Afghanistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Djibouti, Indonesia or any of the other Muslim countries, the same pattern exists. Each one will oppose any Al Qaeda activity except the part that they are contributing. Al Qaeda becomes nebulous and not related to any particular country. There is not one entity that we can strike at because the threat is woven into the whole of the Muslim fabric.

Any Muslim nation that openly declares war on the West would be defeated. Iraq is testament to that fact. Saddam Hussein allowed his ego into thinking that he could openly oppose and get away with his activities. His invasion of Kuwait became his undoing. He made a bad miscalculation on whether the West would allow him to seize so much of the world’s oil production. Realizing that open military junkets against the West were futile, the Muslim world figured out a strategy that would keep them safe and still carry out a war at the same time.

Have you ever heard of ‘death by a thousand cuts’? The terror campaign carried out by Al Qaeda does the cutting, bleeding the Western cultures monetarily and spiritually. An embassy bombing here and a plane crash there, with suicide bombers and roadside bombs sprinkled all over the map has been a very successful campaign. Make no mistake; this Muslim effort to root out the infidels is a unified effort. At its core we don’t find politicians, we find holy men. Holy men are not political which is why the politicians will not succeed with political solutions.

In the weaker countries the Muslims carry out their genocide of non Muslims. It is the motivation for the killings in Darfur and other countries such as the Philippines and Kosovo. Any country showing weaknesses becomes a target. Politically, Muslims have been able to distort the public perceptions about the indigenous peoples of their target countries as being bigoted and anti Muslim. They maintain the charade of being the religion of peace but their history tells a different story. Since the genesis of that religion, they have been at war with the rest of the world. Most of the territory under Muslim authority has come by way of the forced conversion. In other words, you become a Muslim or die. The children are put through their religious schools and know of nothing other than what they are taught at these schools.

The Muslim world will have to be defeated in such a manner that it will extinguish the idea Muslims have about other religions. It is the true test of our times to defeat those who mean non-Muslims harm.

In that regard, President Obama is showing no sign that he understands the scope of the problems that we are facing, or it could be construed that he does understand and privately supports the efforts of the Muslim world to destroy the non-Muslim beliefs and cultures.

In the meantime we as free Americans, under Obama, award those dedicated killers of the non-Muslim faith, full protection as if they were American citizens instead of vigorously pursuing those who want to harm us.

All of Obama’s measures such as the closing of Guantanamo, bowing to the Arabian King, awarding combatants the same rights as citizens, giving phony deadlines to Iran, trying to force Israel to accept unacceptable terms, and not recognizing that the Fort Hood killer was a terrorist, all combine to give the image of a either weak President, or at least the consideration that he supports the Jihad efforts.

This President’s aggressive takeover of our private sector and reckless spending of public money and obsequious behavior to the Muslim world worries me. He is either really stupid or anti-American.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Email your Comments to editor@robfg.com

Go to http://www.robfg.com for more articles by Robert

The Chest of Gold

2010-01-02T07:05:00.000-08:00

I wrote this for my pretty granddaughter. She is 13, boy-crazy, full of confidence, and enthusiasm for life. She lives with her mother, brother, and the mother’s boyfriend. She has already witnessed much of life’s seedier side but still remains buoyant and effervesces with enthusiasm about life. I had reservations about her reading it because she might get the feeling that it is accusatory. But that is far from my motive for writing this piece. It was written out of love and with the hope she might glean something useful.

A young girl budding into womanhood should take to heart the following. –

Her body is like a chest of gold. She is rich in desirability and can attract males effortless. Life favors the young and adventurous and young girls epitomize this verve and enthusiasm. But there is another side to this story. It has been written in different ways but to the same end in countless civilizations.

In all matters of a girl sharing her body, only rape is not under her control. All encounters except rape have at the very least, her implied permission, if not complete advocacy. A budding young girl must be aware of the dangers of spending her treasure.

Remember, her treasure chest is full at puberty. With every coin of that treasure she spends on chance or planned encounters, she becomes a little less valuable. The female was given the mission to find and mate with a partner who will share the responsibilities of raising the next generation. It is sad but true, if a girl’s treasury is dwindling, finding a suitable mate becomes harder. In fact, it becomes almost impossible if she has spent all of her treasure seeking physical pleasures.

Many women who have spent their treasure foolishly live out the longest part of their lives lonely because they wasted their treasure on selfish frivolity. But the girl who does not waste her treasure remains desirable and has a better chance of finding an enduring mate. That road is not an easy one but the payoff is far greater than all other roads.

If a young girl is patient and thrifty with her treasure, she will reap the rewards of respect, love, family, and companionship in her golden years. Do not neglect those future years, they swoop down faster than an eagle can fly. The older years make up the longest part of our adult lives. And when age does become a factor in what you do and how you live, the dumb decisions made as a young girl could bear the bitter fruit of tumult and misery. But the girl who valued her treasure found it much easier to find a suitable and dedicated father for her children. And it is her family that will become the mainstay of her life in those later years.

I would add in closing, if you are a budding young woman, do not waste your treasure on someone without commitment. Every coin spent from your treasure chest without a dedicated mate only makes you worth less. It is like removing coins from a piggy bank only this bank doesn’t accept deposits. A young man with the promise of greatness will not willingly want to share his life with a woman who is worldlier and more experienced than he. Men find those types of women in brothels. In a brothel, men use the women and pay for selfish pleasures but do not marry them. The only difference between the professional prostitute and the young girl who gives away her treasure for free is that the young girl will not receive payment for her services.

Keep in mind, there is only so much treasure, and once it’s gone, it can never be replaced.

-Robert-

Email Your Comments to Robert at editor@robfg.com

Go to http://www.robfg.com to read more from Robert

The Terrorists are Winning

2009-12-30T04:31:00.000-08:00

The terrorists are winning the battle and cowering this society. We have a President that projects weakness. Weakness is provocative to the Jihadists. With every policy action by this President, the signal of weakness shouts out loud and clear to everybody including our enemies.

It is we the American people who must now sit in airplane seats like criminals with hands visible on knees, and no bathroom trips during airport approaches, etc. We have a government that will not take a stand against the Muslim Jihadists who want to kill us. We have a President who is naïve enough to think that by being obsequious to those who want to kill us will somehow make good guys out of them. This President is a loser and has surrounded himself with a bunch of radicals with a disdain for this country. Obama does not have a grasp of the greatness of this country or the reasons for its greatness.

The radical left is too stupid to understand that the only reason we do not have to carry prayer rugs and bow to Mecca 5 times a day is the strength and fortitude of our government and military. Even in the light of such a truth, we have to suffer the fools who attack our recruitment centers, drive the ROTC away from our colleges and jeer our servicemen and women. The Jihadists prey upon our folly and gain strength from it.

I want a President who stands for something. We don’t need a President who will not be proud of his country. We do not need a President who runs around apologizing for America and bowing to other world leaders. Obama is a liar, vacillates on important issues, and is constantly blaming others for his problems. Hopefully, help is just 3 short years away, but in the meantime, we can help nullify his stupidity in November of 2010.

I want a President who understands that Roosevelt’s policies did not get us out of the depression. What you hear about WWII getting us out of the depression is only partly true. The war in the economical sense was a giant government spending spree. It did put people to work but also ran up a huge national debt. What saved our bacon was after the war and the fact that we were the only industrialized country that was not damaged by the war. It was kind of like having the only store in town. England was devastated, Japan was devastated, Europe and Russia were practically destroyed, so if the world needed manufactured goods, we were it. It was Roosevelt’s policies after the war that enabled us to make a financial comeback. Roosevelt ended wage and price controls and unleashed our private sector.

From the private sector flows prosperity. Prosperity is not generated by government. Every dollar that the government spends has to come from the private sector. When the government spends ten dollars, it has to take ten dollars out of the economy. The more that government spends, the more that has to come out of the economy. At best, the only thing that the government can do is redistribute money from one group to another.

Redistribution may sound pretty good, but it has one major flaw. The source for the money that gets redistributed goes away. The efforts of the entrepreneurs that make the money, get taxed out of existence or they relocate somewhere that allows them to operate without the high taxes to fund redistribution. And, with a declining income, if the government wants to continue spending, it has to monetize the debt – meaning just print the money. When that happens, the value of the money goes down. It is a lose – lose proposition for everybody.

The problem is very visible today in New York and California. These two states are broke and can’t find enough money to pay their bills. They have managed to tax the money makers and wealth creators out of their states. California, New York, New Jersey, and Michigan exemplify this problem. They have lost a large percentage of their wealth creators to states and countries with a better business climate. Compounding their problems is that these states don’t lose those people with their hands out, those hands get multiplied because when the wealth creators are driven out, jobs leave with them. The lose of wealth creators result in increases of the unemployed as jobs become scarcer.

That is why you need elected officials who understand how business operates. Obama has wasted the good will and hopes of the people who elected him with political patronage and payoffs to his buddies. He is dirty (politically) and the press continues to cover for him. For Shame!

I feel betrayed by this President. America is being led off the cliff by a left wing radical with the press rooting him on. I disagreed with Bush on a lot of issues, but I never thought that he was out to destroy us. He certainly would not have bowed to an Arabian King or criticized America.

Come on November. Hopefully we will survive this idiot President until we can change the makeup of the congress.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Send Email to editor@robfg.com

Read more from Robert at http://www.robfg.com

I appreciate your comments.

Master of Double Speak

2009-12-22T09:14:00.000-08:00

I have never been a fan of President Obama, but never virulently against him either. I may be getting to that point however if he continues to mislead the people about his policies.

First, let us have a definition of taxes. Taxes are the revenues lost by the private sector because of actions (or Laws) mandated by the Government. All tax collections will find their roots in the private sector. Yes, even those import taxes applied to the foreign goods we import. The taxpaying public pays those taxes through the higher prices that the taxes impose upon those goods. They are unavoidable since we don’t manufacture most products that we use.

So now we have a President who tells the American public that his new healthcare plan will not add to the deficit, but will actually help bring down and save money for the deficit. He says it so smoothly that you can almost believe and hope that what he is saying is the way it will be.

Medical costs have been going up and certainly we need to do a better job containing those costs. How we do it is the big elephant in the room. Under the Obama plan, the costs are paid for from a variety of sources other than the Government. This legislation mandates coverage for almost everybody with a heavy fine imposed upon those without coverage.

Case #1 – Help for Small Business?

If you are a small business owner, the extra money for mandated insurance substantially affects your bottom line. Healthcare’s average cost is around $5,000 - $6,000/year. If you have four employees, that is the added cost of $20,000 – $24,000/year that you will have to pay – if you have four employees. At minimum wage, an employee costs the employer with no benefits from the following formula –

- 6.2% of that for FICA/Social Security

- 1.45% for Medicare

- .3% (minimum for clerical) for Worker's Compensation

- 6.2% on $7,000 salary for Unemployment Compensation/FUTA

In Texas, the current minimum wage is $7.25/hour – that calculates to roughly $13,000/year. Add to that $806.00 for the FICA/Social Security, $188.50 for Medicare, $39.00 for Workman’s Compensation, and finally $434.00 for Unemployment Compensation/FUTA. It totals to $14,467/year for the cost of a minimum wage employee. (In Texas)

With good management, your small business eeks out a gross of $500,000/year with a net of $75,000 that you keep as your reward. (That’s a 15% profit) Adding an additional 20 – 24 thousand dollar healthcare to your cost side comes straight out of your pocket.

As a small business owner, you might tighten up your expenses in other ways, but the main focus will have to be on the number of employees that you have. One of these workers will get the axe to help make up the difference.

Case #2 – Help the Economy

Obama bragged that his plan would decrease our insurance premium costs. That is, provided you make less than $200,000/year and do not have one of those so-called Cadillac plans. Oh, really! Think about it! I know several people making $200,000 and more. Most of those do not have a lot of left over money for the additional taxes that Obama wants to impose. This is the group of people who buy the better homes, pay the lion’s share of collected taxes, buy the better cars, and tip the waitress better. In short, it is their money that drives the majority of our economy. Their demands for goods and services is what keeps a large segment of our population working, and now Obama wants to tap into that money to pay for his healthcare program.

It is like he doesn’t understand the basic way that the economy works. When you mandate that a segment of the population do without a portion of their disposable income, then the ripple effects are felt by everybody. Under Obamacare, there will be more job losses as the upper middleclass of our society have to adjust their spending habits downward to accommodate for having less disposable income.

This income redistribution plan will impoverish more people than it helps.

Case #3 – Evil Insurance Companies

Medical insurance plans pay for part or all of an insured’s medical bills. But these groups of businesses are cast as the evil-doers by Obama. The man has no shame! Insurance companies have a small margin of profit. They are in business for profit. But insurance is not their only function as Obama would have you believe.

Insurance companies invest the premiums paid to them by their customers. They fund a lot of projects ranging from new startup companies, Federal treasury certificates, and industry needs. Their investment activities hold down insurance premium costs. Insurance companies have to augment what they collect in premiums with their investments to hold premiums low enough for their customers to afford. The loss of the investments by our insurance industry would cripple our economy – leading to additional job loss.

Obama’s shallowness is out front for all to see! His populist policies can only hurt this country. He is aware that his class-envy message is aimed at a population with a large number of ignorant people. This large group of ignorance is the product of the Liberal establishment. But that is a topic for another article.

Case #4 – A Prostituted Congress

Obama has literally prostituted our Congress in order to pass his healthcare plan. Hundreds of millions of dollars were paid to the recalcitrant Senate members who objected to this abomination of a healthcare plan. Then, like a thief of the night, passed the plan in the wee small hours of the night. Believe me; our Government was not set up to operate this way. Abuse of power, obfuscation and trickery, lies and non-caring, partisan news organizations have succeeded in stealing a large chunk of your freedoms.

Mr. Obama, I hope you are happy with destroying this representative republic. Your presidency will be remembered for the destruction of Liberty. In the future, people will have only fond memories of a society that once had the freedom of choice. We are in a headlong race to mediocrity with Obama leading the way.

Cheers, I think,

-Robert-

Email Comment to Robert

Trickle Down Jobs

2009-12-16T05:41:00.000-08:00

The discussions about jobs rage in the public square. The President has held meetings with the industrial leaders, bankers, his advisors, and members of Congress searching for a solution to the jobs dilemma. But the answers still elude this President.

The President and those around him hold on to the hope that the redistribution of wealth holds the key to putting America back to work, but is it? Why doesn’t it work? It has a populous attraction to those caught up on the bottom income levels. If we can just take money from the rich and distribute it to the poor, then the spending of that money by the poor will rekindle the economy. It is a bottom up theory that has been sold to this President. But will it create those jobs that are so precious to the whole country?

I will discuss disincentive a little later. But first I want you to look at what happens when the wealthy are stripped of their disposable income. Then, think about which method creates jobs and which method perpetuates social mediocrity.

It is those people with the drive and determination to be wealthy that contribute to all of our well being. How you ask? Well when the Government is not confiscating their disposable income, they spend their money on goods and services. Let’s look at a few samples.

Large Screen Flat Panel HD Televisions: The reason the rest of us can go out and buy one of these marvels of engineering without killing our budgets come from the “bleeding edge” effect. Most of you probably forget that when these marvels first hit the market, they cost $10,000 and more. It was the wealthy that bought this new technology at those ridiculous prices. It was the demand by the wealthy that funded the manufacturers and enabled them to improve their production techniques. Slowly, we saw those prices come down as it became cheaper to produce those flat screen televisions. All of us benefitted because of the wealthy. Real jobs were created for the manufacture, distribution, and sale of this new technology. The ones really responsible for the evolution were those who could pony up that money for those early flat panel TV’s. They made it possible for the rest of us.

Apartments: A lot of us live in apartments. Take a good look at them. They cost in the millions to build. They are the products of somebody wanting to make money. Yep, it is the greedy wealthy who build the places where we live. Apartment construction and upkeep provide real jobs. Adding to the benefits we receive from having somebody wanting to make money from building apartments – we get roads, sewer systems, sales of all the building materials, and last but not least, we get commercial activity from the many businesses that spring up where ever there is a bulging population. All of this activity comes from that person who sees a plot of ground and decides to develop it.

Cities: Do you like your city skyline? It too is the product of the monumental egos that want to make a statement. But egos aside for a moment, is it so hard to look at these monumental edifices and not see and comprehend the number of jobs that were created just to build those large imposing buildings. Businesses supporting the workforces that use those buildings create still more jobs. Does your job depend upon the efforts of the rich investors who say, “We want to build a large building as a monument to celebrate our success?” Most of the large buildings you see include rental spaces for other businesses. Remember, commerce begets commerce.

Fancy Boats: Ever drive around by a harbor and look at all the yachts and large pleasure craft? Building those floating pleasure palaces is a major source of employment. The wealthy among us want and buy these expensive trinkets and by doing so create good jobs for the rest of us. There are literally thousands of craftsmen involved in the building of those large pleasure craft. Then of course are the follow on businesses like building harbors for those boats which have the effect of concentrating people of wealth. That concentration of wealthy individuals in turn leads to hotels, service businesses for the boats, boat charters, and restaurants. All of which would not be there without the wealthy wanting to spend their money for pleasure boats.

In the interest of keeping this article short, I will close with the following. The people who earn the most money pay the most taxes. The top 25% income earners pay 86% of all taxes. The top 1% income bracket pays 39% of all taxes.

So the next time you enter your house or apartment, think about the entrepreneur who decided that he was going to invest money into housing. Or maybe you are a trucker who hauls goods from and to the businesses that need those deliveries for the purpose of making money. Or maybe you are the electrician wiring up one of those tall buildings or new housing additions. You might be that fast food employee serving the builders, office workers, or employees of the other businesses that have sprung up around the economical activity in your area.

Remember, it is the wealthy and those seeking wealth that make it possible for our livelihoods. When the government seeks to take from the rich and distribute their wealth to the poor, there is less money for them to operate with. They buy fewer products from that bleeding edge, build fewer buildings, buy fewer boats, and pay fewer taxes. If this is where your heart is then by all means support Barack Obama and his redistribution of wealth. But, if you value your freedom and the good things that result from those who want to make a profit, then say no to Obama’s dim vision of what makes this country great.

All of us depend upon the commerce that trickles down from the visionary few among us. The profit motive is the spur to the flanks that makes the whole economy work. What is really sad is that everybody can participate in the wealth creation of this country. Making money is not restricted to just certain people. In America, anybody with the dream and desire to achieve can accomplish their goals. But somehow that message is being lost by those who seek to kill that desire by controlling the reward side of the equation. Obama’s vision is to reap the reward while you put out the effort. But when the reward is drastically reduced (through taxation), so is that incentive for an individual to expend that necessary effort for achievement.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Email Comment to Robert

Good Intentions

2009-12-12T07:24:00.000-08:00

The world is full of people with ‘good intentions’. I personally do not berate those who have the strong desire to make things better for all of us. But any solution to even the most innocuous problem needs examination for its consequences. The solution to any problem will have other effects, some good and some bad. The question that has to be answered is whether or not the original problem would be more acceptable than those created by the solution.

Usually, when a particular problem arises, somebody comes up with a solution for it. The problem solver generally has the best of intentions and means no harm, but the law of unintended consequences always lurks in the shadows for the unwary. Those unintended consequences will ultimately have to be dealt with. Now, instead of just the one original problem, unwittingly a new family of problems has been created. Ethyl gasoline is one such example.

In its early use, the burning of gasoline in an engine had a problem. Whenever the gasoline ignited, the fuel burned so fast that it created an undesirable ‘knock’ in the engine. The most common solution, and there were more than one, was to use the additive tetra-ethyl lead to smooth out and enhance the power of a gasoline engine.

As a solution, it did the job very well. Engines ran smoother and did not have the fuel knock of raw gasoline. Tetra-ethyl lead use had its controversy back when it was first used, but the moneyed interest won the day and as a consequence, became widely used as a fuel additive.

But then, we had to deal with the unintended consequences of lead poisoning in the atmosphere and toxic smog. Our history is replete with such fiascos.

New medicines are one such area of unintentional consequences. With the best of intentions, medicines like thalidomide that caused birth defects, anti-depressants that raise the possibility of suicide, and pain killers that create drug dependencies all come under the umbrella of unintended consequences.

Lithium batteries are all the rage now because they have the appearance of less pollution. But what most people do not understand is that lithium is not found just lying around for the taking. No, lithium is not an abundantly available element. Even in supposedly good deposits of the stuff, a lot of refining has to take place. One common way to get at the lithium is to drill for it, pump the slurry into vast settling ponds, and then it’s off to the refineries for purification. The process is actually an environmental nightmare.

The tradeoffs using lithium center on whether or not it solves a problem with fewer side effects than the original problem. Cars with lithium batteries do not pollute. But we have to remind ourselves that a lithium battery does not create energy. It only provides portability for the energy that charged it. We still have to produce the energy for charging those batteries. A reminder at this point, there is no free lunch. Everything we do has consequences.

Corn and palm nut based ethanol were heralded as the next great fuel – but nobody took into consideration that corn was also a food product and while ethanol may be a great fuel, the demand for corn based ethanol drove food prices so high that a lot of people could no longer afford that staple in their diet. Palm nut growing became a source of income for the tropical regions and to produce palm nuts for ethanol; they started clearing rain forest to grow palm nuts. Again, unintended consequences come out of the shadows and create more problems.

All decisions of problem solving involve tradeoffs. But tradeoffs are a part of everyday decision making. Some are personal while others affect everybody. The flap over CO2 is another example. We as citizens of the world need answers and a range of solutions if the problem exists. Cap and trade is but one solution that is being proposed to diminish CO2 levels. But the consequence of such actions affects all of us and may create more problems than it is worth. Would cap and trade solve anything? There has to be other viable solutions to this problem, if there is a problem. Whether or not CO2 is a problem is still up for debate. It has yet to be proven that the increase of CO2 is the result in human activity. We may be trying to solve a problem that is not of our making and beyond our ability to solve. The science is ambiguous at best.

It is not just the scientific resolutions that we have to think about. Personal decisions also come with tradeoffs that we have to deal with. When we go out and socialize, we decide if the hangover the next day will be worth it, or if that partner we wind up with is going to create future problems. All actions of our decisions have consequences – some good, and some bad.

Never lose common sense. Learn from the mistakes you make. Your good intentions can result in somebody else’s nightmare so think before you act. But when the good outweighs the bad, then go for it. No matter how small the decision is, it will have consequences. I am not trying to advocate not making decisions, just understand the possible results of your actions.

Remember that old saying, “The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.”

Cheers,

-Robert-

Email Comment to Robert

What Lurks Inside

2009-12-05T09:39:00.000-08:00

The revelations about Tiger Woods only showcase the seedier side of humans. That seedier side has always been around, but we as a species, never seem to be able to get a handle on it. With the technology present in the here and now, human blemishes are hard to hide. It is not easy for anybody to escape the eyes of cameras or the instant recordings of the spoken word.

We can rail against Tiger, or others who have been caught up in the act of being less than they can be, but the awful truth is, all humans have this side of them.

Always remember, for every top, there is a bottom. The honing of our skills to perpetuate the darker side of our existence, only adds to that side. We don’t control porn because we do not want to control porn. And just like the tug of drugs to those addicted, sex is very addictive and among the highest treated causes in rehab centers.

When others get caught doing the same thing that most people do, it gives those not caught the invitation to be righteously indignant. The phoniness of this indignation is sickening. Every one of us wants to parade in public one set of values and do the things that enthrall us in private.

It may well be that we do not have the discipline to cure our prurient nature. If that is the case, we are headed towards a very disappointing life. The job of curbing that darker side of humans was entrusted to religion, but my personal belief is that the selfish, self-indulgent acts are getting worse. In that sense, religion is failing us.

As we pursue the pleasures of life, our culture is being dumbed down. We no longer have the attitude of a fiercely independent and proud people. How long will it be before the darker side of us wins the battle for supremacy? The lack of privacy in everyday events is numbing our sensibilities to those actions. Eventually, that which is considered abhorrent now, will become mainstream. The evolution of abortion clearly demonstrates this principle. This process will only get worse. There will always be a new revelation to get indignant about, and after the novelty of so many revelations about that activity, it too will become accepted into the culture.

It was easy to convince a person that killing the unborn was okay - because the unborn had no voice. Sexual deviancy will take a little longer. I invite you to read an article I penned for another website about unlimited sex. You will find it at Robfg.com.

The spiral of the pursuits of pleasure only has one direction for this culture and that is downward. There is not much to recommend about the direction our society is going in the moral sense.

As I write this, I want you to know that I am also no prima donna. I have the same warts and blemishes as my fellow humans. My concern is how to make things better. Would that I could, I would get everyone to do some inward soul searching and recognize what we are becoming. This culture desperately needs to reestablish a boundary of right and wrong. If the older spiritual model can no longer enforce that boundary, then another model is needed.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Email comment to Robert

Made in China

2009-12-02T00:36:00.000-08:00

Christmas shopping has dispirited me to the point that I no longer want to spend money for loved ones. Why, you ask?

Our Christmas shopping once helped the American economy by supporting American industries that paid good salaries to Americans. That is no longer true. I was going to buy a tool set for my son and found a nice chrome-vanadium metal set of wrenches made by Stanley Tool. But upon closer inspection was the label ‘Made in China’. So many of our American brands have been farmed out to China, it is no wonder that so many are unemployed or have marginal jobs.

I like the American cars, especially the Chevrolet products. But they are too expensive for my wallet. It is sad that I can buy a Hyundai or Honda of equivalent quality for so much less. It is not a matter of loyalty to the U.S., the foreign brands are hands down the better deal.

It shouldn’t be this way! But as long as we have the big spending Liberals running the country, our impoverishment is what we can expect. The Liberals tax our businesses and everything that this country produces so much that they are running our job makers and creators out of the country. But being a democracy, we keep electing those same politicians telling us the same pack of lies about how they will cut taxes and restore our small businesses and manufacturing jobs.

What we get instead is a takeover of American firms and higher taxes to pay for broad and expansive government programs. Enough already!

Even my penchant for smoked oysters by the once venerable Crown Prince brand has not been able to escape the pull of favorable tax and labor practices of China. The last can of smoked oysters I purchased was labeled ‘Product of China’. It was sad to think that this once great company had farmed out their operation to China; I couldn’t eat the oysters, I gagged on them at the thought.

If we ever hope to get back on sound footing, we must send the politicians packing and get term limits established. The professional politician has been feathering his nest at our expense for too long. It seems that after a few terms in office, they get corrupted and all of their energies are focused on getting re-elected. Re-election takes a lot of money and career politicians have defined the term of fund-raising into an art form. Their favors for the donations they need for re-election cost us all dearly. Insist upon term limits from any candidate that you nominate.

Yes, I just wanted to thank the Democrats for screwing up our country. They just can’t leave anything alone. The Democrats seize every opportunity to grab more money. There was a time that I loved to go to the casinos and play the slot machines but not anymore. Once again, the Government has put their greedy paws into an industry that once thrived and is now suffering because of the tax structures placed upon them. It is next to impossible to win on the slots because of the take from the taxing authorities. Bankruptcies are now common and getting worse with the casinos. People are not stupid, and when you can’t win at least some of the time, they will no longer spend their money for a losing effort. If you drop 4-6 hundred dollars/night, the best you can hope for is maybe a free meal and a complimentary room for your efforts – but forget about winning.

Liberalism impoverishes people. Liberalism is about the acquisition of power at everyone’s expense. Wealth redistribution works until there is no more wealth to redistribute – that is about where we are now. Soon the Government will be so desperate for money that they will literally print it. They will have to because they will have taxed our businesses out of existence or drove them to the more tax friendly countries of the world.

We have witnessed the devaluation of our national currency during this past year and it promises to get even worse. Unless spending is curtailed, our dollar will become worth more as toilet paper than money.

If you have a heart and concern for this nation, you will send the Liberals packing in the next election.

Maybe it isn’t too late to undo the harm done by Obama – but it has to be a decisive victory for conservatism to reverse course.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Email Comment to Robert

Obama Bungles the Economy

2009-11-23T04:43:00.000-08:00

Let there be no doubt that Obama stepped into a financial mess. He had an opportunity to demonstrate his skills at managing the economy for the good of all but he did just the opposite. Finger pointing has never solved a problem especially when that finger points to you and your party.

No matter how the Obama administration wants to spin the cause of this financial mess, the Democrats are liable for the lion’s share of it. It is the Democrats who have been in charge of the nation’s purse strings since 2006 – not the Republicans. Since 2006 the Democrats have been in charge of the Congress, and it is the Congress who spends the money. But I want to put blame aside for this article.

Obama and his willing accomplices in the Congress have sought to use the Government to shore up the sagging economy. Their anti-business approach has only deepened the size and scope of the problem.

Using the Government for such direct involvement in business is fundamentally flawed. The national treasury’s only source for money is the taxpayer. Period, end of story. All government jobs are a drain on the national treasury and contribute nothing back to the treasury.

However, there are proper places for Government spending. Government spending can create a good environment for businesses by providing the necessary infrastructures for businesses to thrive. Highways for commerce, a military to protect and defend the nation, maintenance of national parks and monuments that provide destinations for travelers, basic education that provides a first step towards pursuing happiness, and basic services for the poor and infirm all contribute to our well being as a nation. I am sure that I missed some, but the whole idea is for Government to provide the framework for opportunity and freedom for its citizens.

It is not the responsibility of the Government to provide the happiness to any group. The personal well-being of an individual is up to the individual. Obama has taken the opposite route by providing for certain groups at the expense of others. This is known as the redistribution of wealth. Saving large corporations suffering from mismanagement is not a function of the Government. Enriching banking institutions with taxpayer money after the banking management has over-leveraged and let greed consume them is not a function of the Government.

The Government does have a duty in preserving freedom. Failure is also a freedom. There is no better teacher than failure. But having the Government making the decisions of who fails and who does not is not equal opportunity. The bankers who squandered billions of dollars of their client’s money and got bailed out were no different than Bernie Madoff. Bernie Madoff was perceived to be a winner and a lot of people put their trust and their money in the way he did business. If Madoff would have been as well connected as the Wall Street Bankers, he probably would have been bailed out. But instead, he became the poster boy for what was wrong on Wall Street. In comparison to the Wall Street gang though, Bernie Madoff was a minnow. The wealth lost due to the incompetence and greed of Wall Street was in the trillions – but you don’t see any of the bankers or politicians that enabled them going to jail.

I think Madoff got what he deserved, but he should have company. Everybody with a 401K account lost money – some, a lot of money due to the avarice and greed on Wall Street.

Obama has set a course that will impoverish this nation. His spending is an attack on all of us. The inflation that is sure to come because of monetizing his expanding debt is sinking our ship. First our 401Ks, and now the double whammy of runaway inflation is an assault upon all of us. On a personal note, I have shed my dollars for the more stable environment of commodities like oil, gold, food, and necessary industrial products. The dollar is a declining product because of Obama’s bungling. Dollars are no longer worth holding. The shame of such foolish Governmental policies that are destroying this wonderful nation.

It is the businesses of our nation that need relief from Obama. The actions that he and the Congress are taking against them will only exacerbate employment and drive us deeper into debt. For reasons unknown or unfathomable, Obama thinks he can spend his way out of this mess. God help us!

Cheers, (I think)

-Robert-

Email Comment to Robert

Installing Windows 7

2009-11-21T05:28:00.000-08:00

My last article was about the upgrade I made to my computer. This is the follow-up to that article about my experiences installing Microsoft’s new operating system – Windows 7.

By the way, before I get to the actual installation of Windows 7, I want to comment on the box or container that the system comes in. I don’t believe there was ever a box designed that is more aggravating than the one chosen by Microsoft to ship and display their products. It took some tinkering to get at the enclosed system without resorting to an axe to open it. But being a klutz, it could have just been me.

Your first looks at the disks that came in the box gives you the impression that this was indeed a fancy iteration of the venerable operating system. They are laser inscribed with a wavy pattern around the outside edge. One of the disks is for a 64 bit installation, and the other is for a 32 bit installation. You have your choice of the system you want to employ.

If not for the limitation of memory I was experiencing because of a bad memory module, I would have installed the 64 bit system, but with only 4 gigabytes of memory, it made sense to install the 32 bit system. 4 gigabytes is the limit that is addressable by the 32 bit system, but the 64 bit system can address a lot more than that. In my case, I will do with the 32 bit system until the other half of my memory gets here from Corsair. They say it has been shipped, but I still have not seen hide or hair of it. When it arrives and posts properly, I will make the decision about whether or not to reinstall Windows using the 64 bit system.

Getting started: I allowed the new DVD with the system on it to boot up the computer. It was a surprise to read that I could install the system and retain my applications or do a clean install and then reinstall my applications. But printed clearly on the box, the new Windows has to be a clean install if you are replacing Windows XP. If you are replacing Vista, then you can install and retain your applications. Since I was replacing XP, I made the necessary preparations for a clean install. (I had to save those files that I wanted to keep that were on my System drive.)

When Windows 7 does a clean install, you will lose the old system, but some files are preserved and moved to a folder named windows.old. This new folder will contain your old Documents and Settings folder with all of your personal info including your music, photographs and videos. Just about everything else disappears so if you go the new or clean install route, be sure to back up any data files you have that are not in the Documents and Settings folder.

The new system is not a quick install. Be forewarned that in the process of Windows 7building its nest on your hard drive, it is moving a lot of information around and in a out of your computer. It is also very helpful to have your internet connection available to the new system.

Once the installation starts, Windows is pretty much on its own. Eventually you will get to the part where you have to type in your key code but other than telling the system your time-zone and language preference, that’s about it. The real adventure starts after the system is successfully installed.

Reinstalling all of your applications is a pain and time consuming. If you have downloaded programs from the internet, you will have to find the codes sent to you before they can be activated. I hope all of you either wrote down those codes or preserved your emails that contained them. Those codes are among the first problems I encountered.

For the applications I had downloaded like Winzip, Paretologic’s Driver Cure, Spider Sol and a lot of others, the key codes were in emails saved into a folder I named ‘Confirmations’. I use Mozilla’s Thunderbird for a mail client program and after installing the latest and greatest version from the internet, I tried to restore my saved email folders. Thunderbird would have none of it. Compounding the problem were the emails I received and sent during the few days between my having saved the folders and the present. The only up-to-date folders that contained all of my email addresses and saved emails resided within the new folder of windows.old that Windows 7 had created. I had to figure out how to retrieve those files, but they were hidden and I had no access to them.

So my predicament was twofold. Thunderbird would not restore the saved files that I had saved and I could not locate the files that Windows 7 had saved. It was getting close to panic time. If you experience the need to see the hidden files, do this --:

• Click on the Windows Icon(You’ll find it on the left bottom most of the screen)

• Click on ‘Control Panel’

• With control panel open, Click on ‘Appearance and Personalization’

• From the list of options that appear, Click on ‘Folder Options Show hidden files and folders’

After you set your system to show you the hidden folders, then you will be able to access the ‘Application Data’ folder within the old ‘Documents and Settings’ folder. For Thunderbird users, this is where you will find your address book and mail files.

My email program is my link to the outside world. I have literally over 2000 email addresses, all of the comments from my blog and the other web sites that I write for. Not to mention all of the thousands of emails saved from friends and family. Yep, all of the factual, funny, and ridiculously outrageous emails along with their accompanying attachments are to be found in my email archives. If you sent me a joke in the last 7 years, I still have it. My library also contains the videos, photographs, Power Point files and cartoons that have come my way. So reestablishing those files to an active status and making them once again accessible was vitally important to me.

Once I had located those files and pointed Thunderbird to them – it still would not recognize them. What to do ---?

I started the laborious chore of manually transferring the data to the new Thunderbird directories. It took nearly two weeks but at the same time I separated the data into categories and files that were not only accessible to Thunderbird but also to my file management system. I should have been doing that all along, but being the slug that I am, I didn’t.

As a side note, I also tried to get MS. Outlook to read those files and it would not. For a lot of reasons, I do not use Outlook. Outlook is the only program in the MS. Office Professional suite that I do not use.

Media player also gave me some concerns. I had to reauthorize all of my protected music. The process wasn’t too bad, just an annoyance. But once Media Player found my saved music files I was in business.

Windows 7 is a winner. It operates smooth as butter and once the UAC (User Account Control) settings are quieted down so that you aren’t pestered to death with those nagging popup windows – it only gets better. You can get to the UAC settings several ways, but I use the access through MSConfig. To get to MSConfig, do the following:

• Click on the Windows Control Button at the bottom left of your screen.

• In the space provided type ‘msconfig’. (without the quotation marks.)

• From the menu that pops up click on the tab labeled ‘Tools’.

• In the tools menu, you will find a lot of useful, helpful applets, including the UAC control panel.

• Click on the tool of your choice and then click ‘Launch’ at the lower right side of the window.

Whether you want the device manager, event viewer, or registry editor, this is a great place to find those programs. Mind you, it is not the only place to find the various tools, but it is a good place to find most of the tools you will need all in one place.

The MSConfig program also has other tabs that give you control over which services and programs start automatically, and the boot sequence. I rate it high as a versatile tool to keep windows running efficiently. A word of caution though – if you are not familiar with some of the services and programs that start automatically, I suggest you research it on the internet before you disable it. But there is a saving grace, all you have to do is recheck the box if you find you have made a mistake.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Email Comment to Robert

Computer Upgrade

2009-11-19T04:23:00.000-08:00

This article is for those of you wondering where my articles have been for the past 2 – 3 weeks. Life with our gadgets, if nothing else, is an adventure.

First I want to say up front that Windows 7 is a smooth operating system that addresses most of the irritations of XP, and now that I have it installed and all updates working, I very much like what Microsoft has done.

The glitches that I encountered during the new system installation were for the most part, self inflicted - even though I have been involved with computers since 1980.

I probably would not have installed or bought Windows 7 if not for a freak lightening strike that took out my satellite modem, hard disk drive, and messed up my motherboard so that it would not boot up without the system disk in the CD-Rom drive. When I realized that I was going to have to replace major components of my computer, saving and preserving my data was suddenly very important to me.

It was during this process that I received a notice from the folks at Newegg.com that I could pre-order Windows 7 for half-price. I had already read the good reviews about Windows 7 so I jumped at the chance to upgrade to the new system at a significant savings. A timeline would put this in August of 2009. The biggest problem I had now was to make do with what I had until the October 22nd release of the new operating system. I bought two new hard drives, one for archiving my data and the other one for a clean install of XP.

A clean install meant that all of my programs would have to be reinstalled. It took XP about two hours to install itself and another two to three hours to download all the latest updates. (My original system disk was at least 2 years old.) Altogether, it took me the better part of two days to get up and running again. In the process, I found out the hard drive that I thought was damaged was not damaged and that it was the motherboard causing the strange boot up problems. Even on a new hard drive with a clean install, I still had to have the system disk in the CD/DVD drive to boot.

The chipset on my ASUS motherboard turned out to be the problem and I could not find a software update for my AMD 590 chipset. This meant that I would have to go the hardware upgrade route.

You can buy a new motherboard in lots of flavors with numerous chipset and CPU configurations. Each combination of motherboard and chipset has its place concerning speed, economics, and features. I chose to buy one of the latest and greatest with the hope that time would not eclipse it so fast. The new motherboard meant that I also had to upgrade my memory and CPU; the other components would not be affected. (Power supply, computer case, hard drives, CD/DVD drives, video card, and monitor.)

For the record, a clean rebuild is easier than replacing just a few of the major components. Wiring harnesses and other installed components manage to get in the way and make upgrading a real pain. So after laboriously installing the new parts, I turned the computer on for the first time - it would not post. Posting is the process a computer goes through when you turn on your computer. When power is applied, the computer checks for hardware errors. Whenever a component does not respond properly an error is generated and the error checking process stops. At that point, the offending component has to be fixed or the computer will not work.

Fortunately for me, my new motherboard came equipped with an LED readout that shows a code of the post operations. When the post stopped, it gave me a code that I could look up to find out what was wrong. In this case it was one of the memory modules that I had installed. Removing the memory modules one at a time quickly located the one that was causing the errors. The memory sticks were a part of the upgrade because my previous system used the DDR2 memory and the new motherboard had to have the DDR3 memory. Long story short, I got the computer running with only one-half of the new memory.

I want to say a word about the company that made my memory. They were very nice and issued a RMA for the bad memory stick’s return, and have shipped me a new memory module. I expect it any day now. So if any of you buy memory for your computer, you might want to consider the Corsair brand of memory. For no other reason than they offer you service if you should ever need it.

When I do install my new memory module, my computer will be complete. But there was another adventure I want to relate to you and that is the Windows 7 installation. I will write about that in the next article. I was going to include it in this writing, but it made the article longer than I wanted.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Tort Reform

2009-10-28T06:31:00.000-07:00

The buzz word heard most often from the right, but is tort reform really going to solve the high cost of treatment?

The short answer is no. Should the Congress pass such legislation, do you really think that the doctors would be willing to pass on the savings on to their patients? Do you believe that tort reform would improve the quality of your medical treatment? Let’s examine both sides of the argument.

The threat of a medical malpractice lawsuit increases the cost of a doctor’s malpractice insurance. That cost is indeed a large burden placed upon doctors. They purchase the malpractice insurance for protection against lawsuits – but why wouldn’t they? A single lawsuit could potentially bankrupt a doctor. The cost of malpractice insurance is then passed to the patient or his insurance provider. And, even with the advent of tort legislation, the end cost to the patient is unlikely to change.

Assume that tort reform is passed and the cost of malpractice insurance decreases. The savings per patient is not very much. If a doctor has just 2500 patients (a conservative number) the savings per year per patient would only be $80.00. That is, provided his malpractice insurance costs him $200,000/year.

Well, what about all of those unnecessary tests that we hear so much about? Frankly, a lot of good comes from those tests. Those so called ‘expensive unnecessary tests’ are like getting a second opinion about a patient’s condition and ultimately benefit the patient. Patients get the benefit of possibly detecting other health problems because of those tests.

A doctor’s habit of relying on those tests for his diagnosis would probably not change a lot, nor would a patient want them to. So adopting tort legislation could potentially harm the quality of the health care we receive and produce little savings, if any to the patient.

Personally, I am highly offended by the greed of lawyers. But everything has to be weighed on the balance of good vs. bad. The threat of lawsuits by harmed individuals actually keeps doctors from making so many mistakes and that is good for all patients. The tests that the doctors order also keeps large numbers of people employed as well as improving a patient’s chance of having fewer complications due to misdiagnosis.

To be honest, I don’t savor the idea of having to keep the threat of lawsuits over the doctors, but try and imagine a world without any control over the quality of your health care. That is precisely what the threat of lawsuits brings to the table.

Just my thoughts on the subject,

Cheers,

-Robert-

Email Comment to Robert

Spreading Misery

2009-10-26T03:31:00.000-07:00

With the realization that what I write is getting to be repetitious, there are some things that need repeating. Everything that Liberalism touches systematically disembowels the apparatus for progress, wealth creation, and freedom. Liberals, usually successful Liberals, (thanks to a free market) have this tremendous heartfelt feeling of compassion for those who choose a less rewarding lifestyle. But their compassion is only evident when they can use other people’s wealth to reward non-achievement.

First, I want to point out that nobody should starve to death, no matter how lazy or unmotivated a person may be. But the idea that you can motivate these people by contributing to their low level of motivation is ludicrous.

Liberalism seeks to reward people for their lack of effort to achieve. It is really a sick notion that instead of rewarding effort, that we reward people for doing nothing. It is certain that if you keep paying for nothing, you will just get more of it. Destroying the wealth and ambition of the motivated segment of the population only serves to impoverish everybody.

This is self evident when a look at any Liberal controlled entity whether it is a State, county, or local government. There is not one Liberal controlled government that is not impoverished and in debt.

Conservative government systems are not lucky – such as Texas. It is the motivation of its people that make it a success. Motivation comes from wanting to do better and being rewarded for achievement. Motivation is inspiration received from the rewards of effort. Motivation comes from being taught about the rewards for effort, and receiving the rewards for effort. When people are continually rewarded for achieving nothing, they will continue to achieve nothing – welfare is their reward for not achieving.

Think about training a pet. Pets are trained using a reward system. When the pet does what we want them to do, they are rewarded with a hug, an at-a-boy, or a food treat. The animal soon learns what is expected of him and will behave in the manner that achieves his reward. People follow the same path. When people feel like they have achieved something, they get a feeling of pride and accomplishment. That feel-good-about-yourself feeling is never felt by the recipients of undeserved rewards. They may be grateful for the handout, but generally speaking, there is resentment because these recipients realize that they are somehow inferior. And if taken to the next logical step, when people continually depend on others for their sustenance, they are in fact, failures. They remain on the fringes, depending on the good will of others.

When you raise your children and do everything for them, they will get spoiled rotten. It takes a long time for a spoiled kid to overcome having the ‘benefit’ of not having to achieve for him/her self. Spoiled kids run the risk of never developing that pride that only achievement can bring.

In closing, I would tell President Obama to quit disenfranchising the achievers. The result can only be the impoverishment of all of us. Every society needs a top of the heap. Elevating ourselves to a comfortable level and away from the squalid bottom of the heap should not be easy, but at least possible for the ones who work at it. The top and slopes of the heap stand there as a challenge to those with the ambition to elevate themselves.

It is the Liberals who would take away our opportunities and keep us all down in the squalid bottom. Killing the rewards for a person’s effort only serves to lessen that effort. Less effort from those who would achieve translates into fewer jobs and a lower standard of living for all. Centralizing and trying to equalize what is not equal is a failed ideology. We have a whole generation of failure to atone for and the Pied Piper Obama is corrupting another. His message is sweet, but the morsel is poison.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Email Comment to Robert

Medical Tyranny

2009-10-18T20:37:00.000-07:00

I know it sounds silly. But my friends, who are persuaded to embrace the Liberal philosophy, repeatedly ask me, “How can Government run healthcare possibly intrude upon freedoms?” It sounds really neat to not having to worry about medical costs, so why isn’t that a good thing?

Snow White thought that eating the delicious looking apple was a good idea. This time however, the apple won’t put us to sleep, but establish control over our existence. Once the Government controls the healthcare industry, our healthcare will be up for grabs, controlled by every special interest group that gets in power.

Think about it for a moment – in this country we have the vegetarians, the anti-sugar crowd, the anti-pork people, and the fat police. Just to name a few of the groups that have decided that their way is the way to health and long life. Once medical care is centralized, you would lose your ability to choose the lifestyle you prefer because that lifestyle may run afoul of your getting the necessary treatment needed. Admittedly, some lifestyles are unhealthy and require considerable medical treatment. But all things have to be weighed on a balance – take obesity or getting fat if you will.

If it is decided that the fast food industry is the root cause of obesity, could you not cure obesity by just closing down all fast food restaurants? And while we’re pushing a bit of hyperbole, there are a lot of things that cost society tons of money – cars for instance. Cars do not slowly kill us like being fat does, but cars do inflict billions in property damage and medical cost on our society. I will not even mention the forty to fifty thousand people killed outright from car collisions every year. So should we outlaw the automobile? And while we’re at it, let us not leave out – getting old. The single largest medical cost to our society is taking care of our older population.

It is evident that by closing down the fast food system, doing away with cars and allowing the elderly to expire from lack of healthcare would drastically save us a lot of money. But – would we want to live in such a society? We could not afford the job loss from losing those industries.

The fast food industry alone hires most of our unskilled and entry level people. Would losing those jobs make any sense? Everybody doesn’t get fat that uses fast food restaurants! But if the fat police ever got one of their own into the decision making bodies for healthcare, it could become a possibility.

Should we ever decide that we will not extend the help needed by the obese among us, those folks would die prematurely. Obese people need diet education and intervention, lap bands or other type of bariatric surgery to enable them to live as long and healthy a life as possible. Ancillary care to treat their diabetes, high blood pressure and clogged arteries is also expensive. Washington would literally be deciding the fate of those individuals. But, the sword cuts two ways. If we decide that we will support those who are obese with the National health plan, then the cost would be prohibitive and provide no incentive for a person to adapt a healthier lifestyle. With a nationalized health system, decisions would have to be made as to what treatments are paid for. It would not be possible to make those decisions on a case-by-case basis, but would instead be controlled by guidelines. Those guidelines, out of necessity, would have to favor lower cost. It is a little like the argument for guns or butter.

What those guidelines would look like, I can’t even guess. But it is certain that cost will have to be a large factor. Will the elderly bear the brunt of health savings? Would age be a prominent part of the treatment decisions? This article is not written to favor the elderly, but the elderly make up the largest group in need of health care.

Logically, most of the elderly are retired and pay little into the health care system so it is those of a working age who will have to shoulder the load for elderly health care.

In the grand scheme of things, the government can subsidize healthcare as long as it gets the money from somewhere to do it. That means everybody will have to contribute into the system – not just the rich. Such an added expense to the business world and individuals may be the straw that chases what is left of our manufacturing base out of the country. The cost of providing government provided health care is not for free and can only lead to a national debt far in excess of what we can afford.

It is for that reason that so much of the cost savings will have to come from limiting freedoms that we take for granted – such as eating at fast food restaurants, or at the very least mandating the type of food served at those places. Government intervention, will out of necessity, have to be pervasive to control cost and be able to provide treatment to some degree.

When the medical debate started, it was my hope that congress would fix the bad and leave the good. I define the bad as those things that are driving the cost of health care such as doctors having to protect themselves against unnecessary lawsuits by ordering unnecessary test and treatments. And they could force the insurance companies into competing for customers by allowing them to sell their policies across state lines just as they compete for customers of automobile insurance on television. The congress already knows about the corruption, but there is no movement to put the perpetrators in jail. A pertinent question could be asked about why we are not already going after the bums that corrupt the system. Do we really need more legislation to enforce the laws already on the books? This congress seems Hell bent on a complete takeover of the medical system instead of fixing what is wrong with it.

Also not mentioned in the proposed legislation is any incentive to increase the supply of doctors. Even with insurance, a patient has to wait up to three weeks (or longer) to schedule an appointment. There is already a shortage of doctors – can you imagine what it will be like with an additional 30 million people trying to get appointments. Further, the same people who have just had their waiting time increased are going to be forced to pay for the ones who do not see medical insurance as an expense that they want to spend money on. However, you will notice that somehow these same people manage to drive nice cars and own wide screen televisions and other consumer goods like fancy cell phones.

Freedom to live your life as a free person will take a step backwards if the congress has their way. It is ironic, but the congress could make things better for all of us with some simple legislation, but evidently, that is not their goal. They want to reserve the right to dictate how you will live your daily life by controlling which treatments you need. Think of the society as a herd of cattle being marched through a cattle chute with no other direction possible. Say no to this debacle before it becomes law.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Email Comment to Robert

Undocumented Workers

2009-10-14T06:07:00.000-07:00

For me to keep this document short is a real challenge. As is repeated often, “Brevity is the soul of wit.” Being able to write directly to the point and not get distracted by insignificant footnotes is not one of my talents, but I’ll try.

The problem with an undocumented labor force cuts two ways. One way is good, while the other way is bad.

The Good: The undocumented workforce makes available a source of willing workers to do jobs that either we cannot afford to have done at prevailing rates, or no one else is willing to do them.

Prevailing rates is defined as an arbitrary number that will persuade an American to do the work. An example of a prevailing rate might be the minimum wage as set by Congress and is meant to apply to fulltime work. But if your job will only last for a short duration, the prevailing rate can go substantially higher. This is the niche that undocumented workers traditionally fill. Numerous jobs fall into this category such as highway construction, farm work, yard work, and any job that is particularly disgusting. The disgusting job list is long and includes mucking crews, poultry processing, and waste management. The above list is not complete, but I wanted to give you an idea of some of the low skill, undesirable jobs available.

We as a nation are very lucky to have a willing workforce to tackle these jobs. But sadly, if not for our friends from south of the border, these necessary jobs would be hard to fill. As I said, undocumented workers fill a necessary void in our workforce.

The foods we eat, the highways we drive on and the housing we enjoy come to us at a relatively modest cost since most of the menial, manual labor used in the production of these products are accomplished by the undocumented workforce.

The Problems: First and foremost, these imported laborers are human. They do not like doing crappy jobs either and will eventually migrate to better jobs. Whenever they find a job that is less of a pain and pays better, they move on leaving a void that is usually filled by another undocumented worker. This process keeps our need for more undocumented workers high. It is the human side of the equation that is often left out of any arguments about illegal immigrants.

Everyone is guilty of creating a market for the undocumented workforce. Whether you have a business or you just need a little help around your home, there is nobody better suited to help you than the undocumented day laborers that gather in well known places around town. Some city governments have even built day labor centers where they can gather and be found for hire.

Yes, these people have ensconced themselves into the fabric of our society, whether we like it or not, but there is a downside to this boon to our convenience of having cheap labor available.

Loss of entry level jobs for our young people.
Loss of tax revenues.
Higher cost of education without the accompanying tax revenues to offset the expenses.
Higher medical cost. (Somebody has to bear the brunt of their medical bills.)
Degrading of our institutions because such large contingents of people do not have an understanding of our system.
Formation of subcultures within the enclaves of illegal immigrants because of the language barrier.
Higher tensions over skilled positions that Americans compete for.

From a position of arrogance, Americans want the “Illegals” to stay in their place. But I will tell you that as a potential employer, hiring someone who will do the same or better job for less money is who I would hire provided I am unwilling to overlook all of the negative impact on our society.

That thought brings us full circle. According to the results of numerous surveys, America does not have enough skilled workers to man their workforce. This takes in the whole spectrum of both professional and non-professionals who make up our society. We even import more foreign doctors than we produce in America.

We snip and flush potential European descended young which limits our available pool of American workers. Out of necessity, we have to import the help we need to maintain our economy. As a nation, we have grown apathetic to maintaining our society and the opportunities that we can create by doing due diligence. Our self-indulgence knows no boundaries. We look to others to do the heavy lifting and refuse to do those necessary things that keep us from being swallowed into bondage.

If we made citizens out of the undocumented workers presently in America today, I will positively guarantee you that those citizens will not remain at those low end jobs. For those entry level and generally crappy jobs, we will need to import more and more – then what do we do?

The answer does not lie with those who see votes or those who just see cheap labor. There has got to be a mechanism put in place that allows foreign workers to do those jobs. Work banks can be set up along our border with Mexico that matches employers and employees. At the completion of the job requested by the employer, the immigrant worker goes back to his country of origin or the work center to be available for another job. A work center would be able to track who is in the country and the duration of the stay involved. The employer would be held responsible for returning the migrant after the completion of the job.

Potential employers would have to be screened to insure that they made good faith efforts to hire domestic help before they can turn to the legal hiring of foreign workers. Foreign workers would have to be paid the prevailing rates for the task involved and pay taxes. Paying the prevailing rate for the task involved would prevent the pollution of cheap labor from destroying the job pool for Americans.

The anchor baby system needs to be abolished. That system is a large magnet to parents who want to put a foot in the door to this country.

This article addresses some of the issues surrounding our undocumented workforce. Changes need to be made. If we do make the present crop of undocumented workers citizens, then we have to change the way we handle our labor shortages. Remember, when any of the common laborers get the opportunity for a better job, they take it. The problem is that as they get better jobs, it leaves a job to be filled – guess where the worker comes from to fill the vacated spot? Yep, another undocumented worker is recruited. This type of demand for the undocumented workers is a revolving door that has a voracious appetite for undocumented laborers. The system needs to be changed. Do not accept a system that does not allow for some type of work program. Do not be lulled into the idea of a permit based on time. The permits should be job based and the employer held accountable for the duration. Allow no full time employment of foreign workers unless they go through the process of becoming an American citizen. Each employer of migrant workers must provide a timetable and description of the job involved before hiring, and then held accountable for returning that worker at the end of the job.

We can solve the immigration problem with a little effort. It is in our interest to do this because we absolutely need the labor. All that is needed is a little political will. My suggestion may not be work, but there are enough smart people who can figure out a manageable way to satisfy our labor needs without the added burden to the American people by way of the back door. Missed taxes, free medical, free school, and the rest of the benefits received without any payment except for cheap labor is charged to the rest of the American workers through taxes and higher but hidden cost.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Email Comment to Robert

Failure Part 3

2009-10-02T09:31:00.000-07:00

If you read my first two accounts about failure, you will know that I view failure as a gift as long as we recognize our failure and keep trying to get it right. Getting it right leads me into Part 3 of this series.

An expression about not taking the advantage of failure reads something like this – “Doomed to repeat the same mistake”.

Case in point – General Motors went broke – not because they were a bad company, but because they made bad decisions in a time when foreign competition was very low. It is very hard to unspill the milk, but that is what they needed. Retiree benefit obligations had put them in a non-competitive position. Because they had to overprice their vehicles to meet their obligations, GM was not able to sustain their customer base.

Bankruptcy and complete reorganization would have cured a lot of their problems, but not all of them. The problem that hung in the air was a humane one. GM’s chief obligation was to the thousands of retirees. Pensions and medical care for the retirees put an exceptional burden on GM. The retirees were not at fault - they believed in, and trusted GM to keep their word concerning their retirement benefits.

It was obvious that GM could not afford to keep their agreements, so they went to the American People (The Government) and asked for loans. But what they asked for was loans to continue business as usual until somehow the market would turn around and they (GM) would make a miraculous rebound and be able to repay the loans.

Well, all lenders have to decide the question of whether or not a prospective borrower has the ability to pay back their loan. Since the Government is the lender of last resort, GM must have exhausted all other avenues for loans before approaching the Government. Can you imagine having a failed business and asking for a loan to extend that failure? Sure, a loan would have given GM a little breathing room, but without a cure, the patient would still die.

What GM and the Government settled on was not a good solution either. The company lost its autonomy and is still burdened with the retiree and union problem. GM still might not survive unless they can compete on a cost basis with other manufacturers. Even fixing quality problems may not be enough to attract buyers of the cheaper but equal in quality cars from other manufacturers.

Recognizing failure would have been helpful to GM. What if, when they went to Washington to get help, instead of asking for a loan to just prolong the agony, they confessed to having a bad business model? Instead of borrowing to continue with a failed model, they came with a plan for the borrowed money to retire all obligations to their retirees and the Union. Upon the success of retiring their long term debt to the retirees, they could then go through a normal bankruptcy for reorganization. A GM with a clean slate would have emerged as a tough competitor for anybody. The company would still have maintained its autonomy. A reconstituted GM would have been able to repay the Government and start making a profit. Of course that did not happen, but my-oh-my, what an opportunity.

When something isn’t working, it is time to rethink the situation. Until the core comes out of a boil, it just keeps on festering and hurting. All the band-aids in the world do nothing until that core either comes out on its own or is lanced.

GM isn’t the only company that needs to recognize their shortcomings. We have lost many manufacturing jobs because of stubborn bad management. Those companies that seek to improve their balance sheet by moving to a different country do all Americans a disservice. Real wealth creation is taking something of little value and making something of value out of it. “Made in America” used to be the trademark of quality and dependability. But we have lost the privilege of putting that on most of our products anymore because so much of our manufacturing and brands have been farmed out to China. “Made in China” is on most of the consumer goods we purchase. I lament that outcome because it could been so much different with a little effort.

Yes, as I have stated, failure is a gift. But what we do with that gift can mean success or just more failure. Just because what you are doing or manufacturing is no longer profitable, it is time to make the necessary changes to get it right. Taking your facility to another country is a band-aid that will still find the deficiencies in your business model. There are too many businesses that have sought for and found solutions other than moving their companies to other countries. These successful businesses should be a model for those thinking about jumping ship for cheap labor.

Our institutions like Harvard and other business colleges should instill into their students the importance of finding solutions and good management instead so much focus on profit. Profit is important, but how we make profit is also important. It is more than a shame for any business to need a Governmental agency breathing down their backs because today’s businesses put profit above ethics. Have we as a people lost sight of right and wrong and are no longer trustworthy? If so, then we have lost our value system and need to restore it.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Email Comment to Robert

Failure

2009-09-25T06:17:00.000-07:00

Failure is the one ingredient that is necessary for progress. Without failure, there can be no success. Failing to correct what goes wrong dooms us to repeat the experience. Others have said the same thing more eloquently than I, but the importance of failure and how it guides us personally, socially, and politically cannot be overstated.

Scientists call their endeavors to elicit the truth of a theory ‘experiments’. It is the experimental failures that lead scientists to make the necessary adjustments for success. The failures of their learning progress may even lead to other discoveries that create more theories. Progress is achieved by taking advantage of mistakes. Failures are a guide to success.

Whether we are talking about people, inventions, nations, or the world collectively; it is in learning the lessons from our failed attempts to get it right that leads to success.

Our cultures are littered with failures that have been proven to not serve the interest of the citizenry. Among societies’ failures we can include the feudal system, authoritarian regimes including kings and dictators, the rigid capitalistic model, the communist model, patriarchal and matriarchal models, and the socialist model. All have been tried and failed because of their inadequacies. The democratic model is survivable only because it gives the people a non-violent method to make changes to the different environments that the people find themselves in.

Humans are tribally centric. There is no ‘one size fits all’ set of rules that fits everybody’s needs. It is for that reason that total centralization of power just doesn’t work. The American founders realized this when they formed the United States. Local governance empowers individuals with the ability to make decisions affecting their ‘tribe’ or community without the involvement from people who are not affected by their decisions. And, as long as the local and state decisions do not contradict the umbrella agreement agreed to by all the States known as the Constitution, everybody feels that they are a part of the whole, yet independent.

The government formed by the founders also allowed for mistakes. They built into the Constitution a method for us to correct and make adjustments for the passage of time and human progress. The method the founders built into the Constitution is the amendment process.

Our Supreme Court, made up of generally well meaning judges, bring to the bench their different personal philosophies. Their decisions can alter the way we live. Because of the potential for a fanatical viewpoint to become prevalent on the Supreme Court, each justice has to undergo Senate approval. That process is supposed to ferret out any individual with a bias or desire to change the society according to their personal philosophy. Our system of justice selection is not perfect, but until a better method comes along, it is the system we rely on. The system does make mistakes and the Court has had its share of radical justices who made it to the Supreme Court for political reasons. Justices sometimes see the role of the court is to make changes to the society at large through their legal decisions rather than defer the issues not found within the Constitution to the Legislature for enactment on the issue. The Constitution does not embody every facet of human activity. That is why we have a legislature that is supposed to represent the will of the people. Several issues have been made into law that no legislation was ever written.

What has this all to do with failure? Starting today, it should be recognized that whenever the will of the people is circumvented, that the harmony of the whole is disrupted. Divisive decisions made without regard to the wishes of the public have broad and unsavory consequences. The decisions about abortion and prayer in school are examples of divisive issues that should have been codified by the legislature and the legality of that legislation decided upon by the Supreme Court. By working the issues through the people’s representatives, we empower the people with the responsibility for those decisions. Supreme Court Justices making decisions are not answerable to the people. They take it upon themselves to create law instead of deferring the matter for legislation where the people writing the legislation are held accountable by the voters.

Whether or not you agree or disagree with those decisions is not relevant to this discussion. The thrust of this dissertation is to point out that the will of the people was circumvented and created unnecessary divisions within in our society. The angst felt by the people who disagreed with those decisions would have been avoided if the Congress would have done their job by proposing legislation or allowed the amendment process to proceed so that the will of the people could be respected. Instead, the Congress failed in their responsibility and the matter was left in the hands of the Supreme Court. These are failures by a legislature afraid to rock the boat and satisfied kicking the can down the road without having to face their voters.

On the other hand, the Supreme Court seems perfectly willing to make changes in our society via their legal decisions. The Supreme Court does not have to face re-election and therefore have job security regardless of how they vote on an issue. The Congress uses the Supreme Court to handle tough decisions because it keeps their hands clean from having to expose their true position about an issue. In essence, the Court becomes the shield for congressional inaction. The court can make decisions about controversial issues without the voter’s involvement. This process disenfranchises large bodies of American citizens and is a failure of Democracy. Failure begets failure and will not change until Americans of all political stripes put an end to career politicians.

Career politicians spend most of their time running for the next election to hold on to their very lucrative and powerful positions. Please support term limits.

We’ve suffered through these failures and now it is time to correct their cause. Please understand that power is very corruptive whether it’s a corporation, our courts, or by our elected politicians. Our failures are guidepost for the American people to learn from. If we do not recognize and learn from our failures, no progress is possible, worse, failure is repetitive.

End Failure Part 1

Cheers,

-Robert-

Email Comment to Robert

Failure Part2

Part 1 discusses the failure of a system having career politicians. But in the end, we are responsible for those failures. It is we who keeps re-electing them. The longer a politician is in Washington, the craftier he/she becomes. The wizened politician learns the ins and outs of inserting unrelated amendments into a bill that raises his stature with his voting base, but has to be paid for by those outside of his home territory. This action keeps the politician in office because we think he is doing a ‘good job’. If we force the Congress to pass term limits, we will have made a correction to what we have now and force a different outcome from the repetition of mistakes that the Congress continues to make. Remember, failure is only a guidepost. It does not have to be remedied. No, we can live with our failures to correct problems and continue to repeat them.

But this is part 2. - Failure is also a winnowing process. It takes strong people to overcome failure and make the necessary corrections to arrive at their destination. When individuals become discouraged and settle for less than their objective, failure becomes imbedded and accepted by those individuals. Expectations become lower as well as self-esteem.

It is true that everyone doesn’t strive for the same results. Early attempts at endeavors that fail give rise to the acceptance of failure. Whatever our position on the ladder of economical success happens to be, we are at that position because of how much failure we are willing to accept. The more aggressive among us don’t tolerate failure very well and climb higher up the ladder.

Life starts out with high expectations, but the outcome of those expectations depend on how determined and prepared we are to face the obstacles that have to be faced. Preparation is the leverage needed to lessen the opportunity for failure.

Preparation has its own set of requirements. To properly prepare for a venture takes work and sometimes a lot of work. If you have the goal to do well in school, then you know that preparation for your studies will challenge you for your time away from life’s other distractions. One conclusion that you can make about minimizing failure in life is to have a strong work ethic.

One of the most damaging parts of our society to individuals is our practice of trying to help those of us who fail to help themselves. The help we render to those who are not very responsible becomes addictive to them. Failure has already become their way of life and no amount of help can rediscover that spark. The numbers of people who realize their sad predicament and make the necessary corrections for themselves is pitifully small. No, I am not suggesting that we allow these people to just starve. But they need encouragement. Progress on their part has to be a part of the price for accepting help.

Rehabilitation is more than just a word. Self-confidence has to be reignited with the poverty trapped people in our society. It is the ‘how’ to do it that remains to be answered. This goal can be achieved if we look upon the problem as just another obstacle to be overcome. There has to be a recognition that self-esteem cannot be given to a person. Only achievement can produce that result. With encouragement from the broader population, the spiral of low self-esteem can be overcome. The things we take for granted like paying the electric bill can be a monumental achievement for a person who is struggling just to live. These small steps by a person in the poverty trap of welfare need to have these achievements recognized. If we were to pay the electric bill for the person, that person has no way of being proud of it.

Doing things for people just makes them feel even more inadequate. And, that type of help is addictive. It just further aggravates the problem. A hand out isn’t even a band-aid for the problem of low self-esteem. Sure, the helped person would be appreciative but there is still that part of a person’s dignity that realizes they are failures. Handouts only serve to bolster the egos of the ‘helpers’ whether it is an organization like ‘Habitat for Humanity’ or sponsors of ‘Soup Kitchens’, the result is still demeaning to the recipient. Other solutions need to be found so that the poor can develop that sense of achievement. This problem is not about the givers, it is about helping those in need realize self-worth.

I repeat, continuing the failed solutions that we now employ only bring about more failure. Failure begets failure. We should resolve to recognize our failures and correct them. Remember successful societies overcome failure, those who don’t, perish. It is that simple.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Email Comment to Robert

Birth Skeptics

2009-09-18T04:46:00.000-07:00

President Barack Obama has a past and his unwillingness to share it with the American people is astounding. Most of his past is kept shrouded behind legal barriers. A reasonable person could ask -why? Why would this popular president object to the facts of his birth? Why would he object to revealing the name of the hospital where he was born or his college records? Could it be that the birth skeptics are on to something?

The short version: Obama’s mother was in Africa and very pregnant. She was so far along that the airline would not board her. Her only alternative was to have Barack at a local hospital in Kenya and then proceed to Hawaii.

This is plausible because Barack’s birth certificate is the ‘short form’ which doesn’t include the normal items of a birth certificate such as the attending physician, nor the name of the hospital. But, short form birth certificates are legal. Those children born at home, or other places have to have a mechanism to obtain a birth certificate. For that reason, I believe the short form birth certificate to be genuine. However, the short form birth certificate also supports the idea of Barack not being a natural born citizen.

Citizenship is another matter. Bararck’s mother married an Indonesian who reportedly adopted Barack. He was then known as Barry Soetoro at that time and was enrolled into an Indonesian school as Barry Soetoro. See photo below of the supposed school enrollment paper. This document has not been authenticated and represents just a fraction of the documents that proliferate all because Obama chooses to not reveal details about his origin, college enrollment, and other such pertinent data that would satisfy the doubters about his eligibility to serve as president.

This writing will not publish the complaint of Philip Berg’s challenge to Obama. However, those of you who are interested in the details of the doubts surrounding Barack Obama, I include the web address where it can be found. This link will take you to that web page. I recommend that you read the full complaint if you are not familiar to the ‘Birthers’ point of view.

http://headinthegame.newsvine.com/_news/2008/10/22/2029004-from-the-lawsuit-complaint-berg-vs-obama-must-read

Legally Weird: The lawsuits (and there are many) against Barack Obama have never been argued before a judge. All complaints have been dismissed on technical grounds and therefore not judged on their merit. It seems that the legal system is not interested in making sure the Constitution of our Country is being adhered to. This is where I am interested. If there is a legitimate question about Obama’s citizenship, then there should be a hearing to decide with finality the answer to the question.

Apparently, Obama was not vetted properly by the DNC or these questions would not still be around.

Recently, Lou Dobbs of CNN has been criticizing publicly the lack of proof about Obama’s failure to produce any of his school records or the ‘longform’ birth certificate from a Hawaiian hospital.

According to TalkingPointsMemo.com Jon Klein the President of CNN stopped Dobbs from further assertions with an email stating: "In 2001 - the state of Hawaii Health Department went paperless. Paper documents were discarded The official record of Obama's birth is now an official electronic record Janice Okubo, spokeswoman for the Health Department told the Honolulu Star Bulletin, 'At that time, all information for births from 1908 (on) was put into electronic files for consistent reporting,' she said."

Lou Dobbs had to go on the air and repeat the statement in an effort to give finality to the flap over Obama’s legitimacy as president.

It was after the public retreat from the issue by Dobbs, that Janice Okubo of the Hawaiian Health Department issued this statement: "I am not aware of any birth certificate records that have been destroyed by the department. When the department went electronic in 2001, vital records, whether in paper form or any other form, [were] maintained. We don't destroy records. ... Any records that we had in paper or any other form before 2001 are still in file within the department. We have not destroyed any vital statistics records that we have."

Her statement highlights the audacity and lengths that the left will go to prevent Barack Obama from having to prove his eligibility to be president.

In another twist to this strange saga comes the latest salvo from the complainants. I received this email on Sept. 16th: This should prove to be interesting.

I and many other concerned veterans and citizens attended the hearing today in Federal Court in Santa Ana in the lawsuit against Barack Obama to determine his eligibility to be President and Commander in Chief. About 150 people showed up, almost all in support of the lawsuit to demand that Obama release his birth certificate and other records that he has hidden from the public.

Judge David Carter refused to hear Obama's request for dismissal today, instead setting a hearing date for Oct. 5, since Obama's attorneys had just filed the motion on Friday. He indicated there was almost no chance that this case would be dismissed. Obama is arguing this lawsuit was filed in the wrong court if you can believe that. I guess Obama would prefer a "kangaroo court"! Assuming Judge Carter denies Obama's motion for dismissal, he will likely then order expedited discovery which will force Obama to release his birth certificate in a timely manner (if he has one).

The judge, who is a former U.S. Marine, repeated several times that this is a very serious case which must be resolved quickly so that the troops know that their Commander in Chief is eligible to hold that position and issue lawful orders to our military in this time of war. He basically said Obama must prove his eligibility to the court! He said Americans deserve to know the truth about their President!

The two U.S. Attorneys representing Barack Obama tried everything they could to sway the judge that this case was frivolous, but Carter would have none of it and cut them off several times. Obama's attorneys left the courtroom after about the 90 minute hearing looking defeated and very nervous.

Great day in America for the U.S. Constitution!!! The truth about Barack Obama's eligibility will be known fairly soon - Judge Carter practically guaranteed it!

Video from the press conference after the hearing coming soon. Congratulations to Dr. Orly Taitz! She did a great job and won some huge victories today. She was fearless!

Jeff Schwilk, Founder

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=109242

A California judge today tentatively scheduled a trial for Jan. 26, 2010, for a case that challenges Barack Obama's eligibility to be president based on questions over his qualifications under the requirements of the U.S. Constitution.

If the case actually goes to arguments before U.S. District Judge David Carter, it will be the first time the merits of the dispute have been argued in open court, according to one of the attorneys working on the issue.

In a highly anticipated hearing today before Carter, several motions were heard, including a resolution to long-standing questions about whether attorney Orly Taitz properly served notice on the defendants, which she had.

The expedited trial has been set for Jan. 26, 2010, just 4 1/2 months from now!

This news illustrates the point that this issue will not go away. If Obama should prove to be ineligible, he would be known as a usurper, and all legislation signed by him would be vacated since he was not a legitimate president. Wow!

I will point out to all of you birthright skeptics, this may be about a man who just wants to maintain his privacy and a large serving of crow could be in your future.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Email Comment to Robert

Tapping Casinos for Revenue

2009-09-14T22:23:00.000-07:00

You know that the options for increased revenues for the States are pretty well exhausted when our State and Local Governments turn to the gaming industry for increasing revenues. Casinos are sprouting up across the nation like weeds in an unattended garden. This turn of events is fueled by politician’s greed for more money to waste.

Casinos are no different from any other business. They exist to make a profit. Excessive tax policies by the State kill the proverbial goose that lays the golden egg. Lost in the shuffle for money by these wide eyed, overly optimistic politicians is the gambling public. Casinos depend on customers for making the system pay a profit.

The average casino customer is there for only one reason, the outside chance that he/she will be lucky and win.

I have enjoyed slot play in Mississippi and Louisiana since the late 1990’s. But I do not go any more. Why? Because State and local tax policies have made winning almost impossible. The chance to walk away a winner has been reduced to the point that it is almost a guarantee that you will not be successful with the slots. It used to be a delight to walk through the casino and hear the squeals of joy from people who managed to get good hits on a machine. But the heavy hand of government has seen to it that those squeals are all but muted now.

States now look upon casinos as a bottomless pit for money, or the proverbial glory hole if you will. Onerous taxing policies only serve to dampen the casino customer’s enthusiasm for surrendering his money for little chance of realizing a return on it. The real fun of playing slot machines is winning occasionally. When that fun has been removed, why bother.

Because of State and local politician’s attitude towards casinos as “come and get it” places for money, the casino businesses across the country are becoming basket cases wallowing in debt. All across the nation, casinos are either bankrupt, defaulting on their loans, or just barely hanging in there. The recession gets all of the blame, but is it?

Today’s casinos are a huge investment. They employ thousands. Construction crafts, suppliers, and manufacturing also benefit from the replacing of aging casinos and building new ones. Yes, there is an upside to the gambling industry, but to make it all work, the casinos need customers. Even with state owned casinos, the taxpayer’s investment in those casinos is squandered if there aren’t enough winners walking out the door to entice others to come try their luck. Enthusiasm dims unless you come out on the winning side once in a while.

On the practical side of the argument, take a look at the gambling dollar. Most states take their share of the money off the top. That amount is usually – around 50%. Translated, that means that for every non-payout dollar the casino takes in, the first 50 cents goes to the state. That only leaves the casino with 50 cents out of every dollar to pay expenses, local taxes, and make a profit. A casino’s expenses include their loans, employees, slot fees to the slot manufacturers, and casino upkeep. If a casino is lucky, enough customer traffic will meet those demands and the investors in the casino will make a profit. It is the customer who get squeezed because very little money is left out of that dollar for the customer. There are so many hands in the pot for the casino dollar that keeping customers happy is next to impossible.

Casinos use a variety of perks such as slot clubs. Slot clubs award redeemable points for slot play. The slot club gives the casino the opportunity to reward their customers with a few perks including comps for meals, rooms, and even slot dollars for play. But it is little reward for a customer who spends their money on slot machines and has nothing to show for it except a free dinner. I know that sick feeling of regret after losing and not even having the joy of a good hit (not a jackpot) on a slot machine to remember. A free meal helps take the sting out of the experience, but overall, the taste is sour after a several fruitless outings. When there is no joy in going, there is no reason to go.

When will our politicians learn that it is their continual meddling into private businesses that creates the problem? Now, State governments are attuned to the gaming industry for revenue, and you can depend on one thing, they will ruin it for everybody. Everything that the government touches in the private sector brings blight to that entity. Even when their motives are good, they screw it up.

The gaming industry is the one industry that needs a good lobbying effort on the State level. The need for dollars for politician’s reckless spending hurts everyone. But cutting spending never seems to gain any traction with our politicians. It seems as though our politicians think they have to spend our money to get reelected. Please support term limits to help protect us from the harm these busy bodies do to us.

I really did enjoy playing slots, but cannot afford the luxury any more since I know it is a rigged game. I don’t mean a crooked game, just an impossible one.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Email Comment to Robert

Spam Control

2009-09-13T10:19:00.000-07:00

Like everybody else, I get deluged with unwanted email. Where does all of this stuff come from? The numbers of people trying to make a few dollars through email solicitations is growing. On any given day I receive the same solicitation from many different people, which tells me that the spammer’s mail lists are being distributed to a lot of different people.

Email addresses are harvested through a variety of techniques, and one contributor to those lists is our email client program – Outlook, Thunderbird, etc, and etc. It would be a simple matter for the mail client programs to not send the attending mail addresses that are present when you receive an email from someone. But they don’t. Whenever a person sends you an email, unless that sender used the BCC option, his whole list of recipients is exposed. When the email gets forwarded by you to your mailing list, you are automatically forwarding the addresses from your email list and the person who sent the email to you.

Those email addresses that accumulate on all of those forwarded jokes, and interesting tidbits that we all forward to friends on our mailing list eventually get harvested by any party wanting to create or expand a mailing list.

It would be easy to blame the person who forwards an email for the problem, but the real culprit is your email program for allowing those email lists to be included on any document that you forward.

Anti-spam programs are as much a problem as the spammers. Controlling spam is a business. But the anti-spam business can also act like a censor. How, you ask? Spam filters work using a variety of techniques. Here are but a few:

• Reject mail using keywords.

• Reject mail with links to other web pages.

• Reject mail that has links to web pages on their blacklist.

When the people who control these anti-spam programs have an agenda, they can act as a censor or gateway to what you receive in your inbox. For instance, if the email that was sent to you references a known anti-Obama website, the anti-spam program can reject the email because the referenced site is on their “blacklist”. Or if it contains words in the email that are on the spam list, then the email is rejected.

Ever wonder why some advertisements seem to always get into your inbox regardless of the spam filter? These unwanted ads force you to deal with them. Remember, those anti-spam people are in the business to make money and for a price, they will not classify their customers as spam.

Take control of your inbox! Reject the anti-spam censors and insist on spam filters that let you be the arbiter of what gets into your inbox. I have never understood why any person willingly gives control over his/her life to someone else. The anti-spam programmers know that the majority of people do not rummage through their junk mail box to see if there is anything that they might like to read, so when the anti-spam program puts an email into you junk-box, you have been effectively censored.

Voice your concerns over this form of censorship to your representatives. No, I am not advocating allowing all spam into your inbox, but our email programs can do a lot better than they do.

When your prospective email contains a link to a blacklisted website, the mail servers may just reject the email and you never even get to see it in your junk box. Anti-spam companies and the popular mail servers do not share their list of blacklisted websites with you. Wouldn’t you like to at least know from whom your mail is being rejected? Wouldn’t you like to have the opportunity to decide for yourself if a particular website should be rejected?

I would be ecstatic if my mail server would allow me to decide what gets into my inbox. I would be ecstatic if my email client program would list all mail sent by my email program. I am especially interested in that email sent automatically without the keyboard being used. I would be ecstatic if the email “forwarding” instruction would delete the email addresses from the original sender and not let them propagate with each time the email is forwarded. The current crop of email programs fail miserably at controlling spam. There are some simple solutions if there was a will. Make no mistake, the anti-spam industry is beginning to look like ‘Big Brother’ and is becoming as much a problem for the unsuspecting users as the spam that they are supposed to curtail.

Given the above, I fully understand the problem with receiving unsolicited mail. I hate it as bad as the next person. In full disclosure though, I send to a limited number of people a weekly announcement of articles that I write. The largest segment of readers of my stuff comes through search engines – not email. Sure I would like to expand my reader list, but when users receive emails from people that they do not know, it doesn’t help readership expansion, it only serves to aggravate a potential reader.

I even thought about buying a mail list from one of those in the business to collect email addresses, but the reality of junk email prevents me from taking that approach. I do not want to be part of the problem. However, to my readers, if you find the articles to be worth reading, please pass the webpage address to others who you believe might want to read the article.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Email Robert a Comment

Selling Vapor Ware

2009-09-10T02:40:00.001-07:00

In his most partisan speech to date, Obama spoke last night about the virtues of a non-existent healthcare proposal. He listed details about what he wants, and will sign into law, but most of those details are absent in the only proposal that lawmakers have to work with.

I sat in astonishment that he would be out pitching a non-existent bill and at the same time call everybody a liar who has read what is on the table. The president has no bill, and for him to cite what he would assure us would be in the bill is ludicrous. What the lawmakers are working on and what Obama was talking about are two different animals.

His sales pitch last night revolved around debt neutrality, tort reform and no insurance for the Illegals living in America. None of these items are in the House bill which is the only proposal on the table.

Obama could have helped his cause by insisting that the bill currently under consideration be sent back to committee for an overhaul and incorporate the items he was trying to sell. But he didn’t. He accused those who have read the proposed legislation, of being liars. This type of rhetoric is offensive and does not help to solve the healthcare dilemma.

The president is the chief law enforcer of the United States. I find it sadly amusing that everybody talks about the fraud and abuse in the current system, but there is no attempt to go after the perpetrators of these schemes. How will passing new laws help what is clearly an enforcement problem? How many speed limit laws are needed to control the highways? Passing laws do nothing if there is no enforcement. Is Obama admitting that he is a failure at policing medical fraud? After all, there are already laws on the books against those crimes. It seems that everyone seems to know all about the abuse in the system, but nobody is willing to stop it. Why? Are new laws going to help put away the bad guys?

A little leadership from Obama would be refreshing. I look forward to the day that he stops running for office and starts actually being president. Strong partisan, rhetorical speeches do him more harm than good – and besides it is boring to sit through his wordy self aggrandizing speeches.

His naïve ideas about how to fix the world are putting the U.S. in a position of debt that has no end game except the impoverishment of its citizens. This isn’t like the past where a world war destroyed most of the industrial world except that of America. At the end of that war, America was the provider to the world and was able to overcome government spending. Such conditions do not exist in today’s world. Today, the largest source of income for the government is from its taxpaying citizens.

Our shrinking private labor force is a real problem. All of the revenue that graces the U.S. treasury comes from that shrinking private sector. It is the private sector that pays the salaries for all government workers. Government workers do not pay taxes, the total of their paid income comes from the treasury – they do not add to the treasury.

So I would say to Mr. Obama, stop selling vaporware. Start finding ways to help our business community so that they can begin the process of commerce again. Devising new tax schemes is not helpful. We cannot all work for the government – it has been tried in several economies and has never worked. National prosperity begins with motivating individuals to be creative and start new enterprises. Prosperity isn’t figuring out how to extract more money from a shrinking segment of the population.

I keep hoping that this president will mature and realize that his Utopian ideas are both unrealistic and unattainable. But so far, he hasn’t shown any interest in reality.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Email Comment to Robert

Insist on Term Limits

2009-08-26T04:40:00.000-07:00

When you throw all jobs against the wall of cushiness, only one will stick to it. Politicians have the cushiest jobs around.

A politician has only one mandatory obligation, and that is to get him/herself re-elected. And, their world is full of perks. They get to set the rules for everybody else. And of course spend other people's money. Spending other people's money is a fun sport that helps them with the only mandatory part of their job - getting re-elected. The challenge to a politician is to figure ways to keep a handy money supply to spend in order to convince the folks back home that he/she has the voters back.

I don’t know how much you have thought of the many ways that you pay the government. You can filter the ways you support the politicians with one simple sentence. If you earn money, buy anything, enjoy anything, own a home/property, transport yourself anywhere, or own a business, then you pay taxes.

The politicians have crafted taxes to make the taxes look like they are not taxing you. Gaining new revenue for the politicians is an art form. For instance, a city can levy hotel taxes to raise money and claim that the additional money comes from out-of-town visitors. Targeted taxes always have the appeal to the majority. It is always somebody else who has to bear the burden of those additional taxes. The result is that the politician has successfully increased revenues to the state/city/county, leaving himself unblemished as a tax-hiker. He can then go to the voters and make the claim proclaiming his fiscal responsibility.

Politicians play the property-tax game in most areas. No politician wants to go on record for recommending a higher property tax. What do they do? They make the appraisal process automatic so that the value of your property increases (for taxing purposes) every year. Again, the politician can claim that he hasn't raised taxes.

Politicians can and do sponsor a lot of projects in their districts/state/city. All it takes is money, and raising that money is an art form. The sleight of hand they use to make it look like the project is free and that somebody else is paying for it is what keeps the politician in office. Most of these projects would never get off the ground if the politicians were honest and let the citizens in his district/state/city decide for themselves with their money whether the project would be worth paying for.

By dividing us into groups, it is a relative easy process to set one group against another. We all come into one of those groups. These groups include the drinkers, smokers, drivers, property-owners, purchasers of goods and purchasers of certain goods, toll road users, travelers, lottery players, and casino patrons and casinos. I may have left some out, but the idea to take home from this is that as long as you are not in the group from which the tax is proposed, then somebody else will have to pay the tax - not you.

As stated above, separating you from your money is an art form. It doesn't matter which group that you are in, you will always be in one of the groups hit with a special tax. The taxes themselves take many forms. Taxes take any of the following forms - license fees, sales taxes, lotteries, income taxes, inheritance taxes, business taxes, gambler's winnings, and other creative ways that hide a politician's involvement in additional taxes. Remember, for every pleasurable vice that you have, a smart career politician will figure out a way to tax it.

Governments do have responsibilities, but making sure politicians get re-elected at our expense is not one of them. Pork hurts all of us, - even if we are on the receiving end of government largess, we have to pay for other groups in other states. There is no free lunch! The citizens of a local area should tend and finance all local projects that they find worthy. Higher government involvement in a local issue is purely political and designed for the benefit of the politicians.

Yes, a politician is the one job that a man can get into with modest means and leave a rich man. It is the cushiest job in town. In the next election, the public needs to take back control from the thieves of the night and vote them out of office. Incumbency should become a thing of the past with strict term limits imposed. Put term limits as one of your priorities when selecting the candidate that you want in office, regardless of governmental level.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Email Comment to Robert

Wants and Needs

2009-08-18T12:52:00.000-07:00

What a topic! Both 'wants' and 'needs' are motivators. Needs are the essential things that are basic to survival. For instance, we need food, shelter from the elements, and it could even mean a blanket on a cold night. Needs are the things that are essential for existence. To satisfy our needs in today's society, we can earn money, depend on charity, or become a criminal and just take what we need. One way of the other, we have to satisfy our needs or we will die.

Needs also means a lot of different things like companionship and cooperation with others. Fulfilling those needs are accomplished by grouping together into a society. Loosely translated, a society is a group of like minded people bound by a common thread of beliefs, goals, language, and traditions. Every society has their particular institutions and values that clearly define who they are. Until lately, the different societies divided into different geographical areas defined as countries. But mass transportation has allowed mass movement of individuals from and into different countries resulting in a blurring of how we define those societies. Since the late 1800's, the indigenous peoples of the geographical countries have seen their majorities shrink and their political power shrivel.

Because of immigration, birth control, and exodus of people around the world, the threads of these indigenous societies are weakening and will probably dissolve within this century. The new majorities are redefining 'needs'. Our evolving definition of life's necessities is altering both our political landscape and our interactions with each other. This writer just hopes that the conflicts of the 'needs' definition will get resolved peacefully - but there are indications that it will not.

We all meet our needs first. After meeting the essentials, we may decide that other things may make our life a little better. Those other things come into the category of 'wants'. Having wants is that peculiar human trait of not being satisfied. This trait is responsible for human progress. After all, the most primitive of people meet their needs, but it is our desire for the things that are not essential for life that drives the engine of progress.

Our wants drive us to heights above just meeting our needs. It might be that new large house, new car, or even a designer gown that catches our fancy. Our wants provide the incentive to be more productive so we can acquire the things we desire and in the process, establish industry and retail businesses to supply those things.

How badly we want to satisfy our wants is an individual thing. Some have an insatiable appetite that recognizes no limits. But most of us settle on a level that feels comfortable, and we tend to remain within a set of self-imposed boundaries. In this society, it is not a Liberal or Conservative imposed boundary, but a boundary decided by the individual as to how much is enough. Motivated individuals start businesses and in the process make it possible for others to make their way in the world.

Industries recognize the stratification of these boundaries and produce items suitable for each strata of human endeavor. A person can buy from the category that he can afford - everything from common fish-roe to Russian sturgeon caviar. What you buy depends on your self-imposed boundary of income level.

Wishing for more income does not produce diddly. If you fall into the category of a person who is envious of those who have more than you do, then you have exhausted your ability to reach higher. A person must meet certain requirements for advancing in a profit-motivated society. Education is always a good place to start. Education whether formal or from life's experiences when properly applied, will generally return good results for those seeking to satisfy their wants. There are no free lunches; it takes a lot of effort to succeed. We should admire those who reach their goals; not be envious of them. Most successful people have a lot invested in their success. We depend on those who demand better in life. Else, we would not have the industrial products, stores, and restaurants we enjoy. Our society would slowly decline to third world status if the Statist and Socialists have their way. Stifling competition only leads to mediocrity. Competition leads to the 'better mousetrap' that keeps the economy moving. Competition provides that incentive for the one-up-man-ship that drives commerce and innovation.

All of our progress depends on the wants of individuals. Your effort to satisfy those wants is up to you. Effort can overcome adversity, but waiting for someone else to do it for you will only accumulate cobwebs. I leave you with this thought. - The best apples need to be picked from the tree and therefore takes effort to get. Bottom feeders that are not particular wait on the ground for one to fall.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Email comment to Robert

Heading to a New Low

2009-08-13T17:33:00.001-07:00

Is nothing sacred? Freedom of speech was once the hallmark of America. But Obama has other ideas. The thugism as practiced by Obama is putting out the light of freedom of expression.

True to his roots, Obama has brought Chicago style politics to Washington. Threats and bullying has been the trademark of power hungry leaders since man's history began. Even though they always lose in the end, they are capable of doing great damage to a society. Because of the way Obama is leading this country, polarization of the American people is growing to a swell that may not be resolved peacefully. His rhetoric is empty, his lies are many, and by appointing the many czars to do his bidding, he nimbly sidesteps the constitution. Operating beyond the consent of congress, these czars have power not granted by the constitution.

Freedom of expression: Obama has sought to get Glenn Beck off the air by urging the boycott of his sponsors. Read the article:

Obama Official Linked to Racially Charged Boycott of Glenn Beck

by Michelle Oddis
08/13/2009

A racially charged activist group called “Color of change" founded by Van Jones, a special advisor to the Obama Administration, is trying to silence popular radio and Fox News personality Glenn Beck by calling for a boycott of Beck’s TV advertisers.

On July 28th, Beck made a comment on the Fox & Friends morning show about Obama’s reaction to the arrest of Dr. Henry Louis Gates Jr. During the discussion of “Professor-Gate,” Beck connected the President’s past association with Rev. Jeremiah Wright to Obama’s comment that Cambridge police officer, Sgt. James Crowley, acted stupidly. Though Beck acknowledged most of the Obama administration is in fact white, he concluded that the President’s world experience made him a “racist.”

Now “Color of Change” has bullied at least five of Beck’s big advertisers -- SC Johnson, Progressive Insurance, Geico, Procter & Gamble and Nexus Lexis -- to pull their ads from Beck’s national cable program. Jones, the founder of “Color of Change,” was named Special Advisor for Green Jobs at the White House Council on Environmental Quality -- a key administrative post -- this past March.

States Desperate for Money now Exploit our Young

Ohio guidelines would set legal age for slots at 18

Proposed guidelines released by the Ohio Lottery Commission would lower the legal age for playing slot machines to 18 at the state's new racinos. The commission is expected to approve the guidelines for the racinos, which are combination horse tracks and slot parlors, next week and forward them to the governor for approval. Four other states have set the legal gaming age at 18, according to the American Gaming Association. Read the full story here Akron Beacon Journal (Ohio) (8/13)

These are sad social notes on American greed. Obama and his thirst for power and an unquenchable thirst for more money by our governments - local, state and Federal. The new legal age for slot players is especially vexing because the allure of the slot machine can be overpowering to an eighteen year old. Where do you think an 18 year old will get his/her money? Most of our young do not realize the value of money other than for something you use to acquire life's baubles.

The debt that Obama has accumulated in the first 6 months of his presidency cannot be repaid by the private sector within the next 3 generations. Obama is gambling on the notion that those generations will not have emergencies of their own to take care of. Where does the spiraling debt end? Pinning hopes on Obama's "green jobs" is farcical. To begin with, his scheme's foundation of anthropogenic global warming is another false claim. Obama is going to be desperate to pay for all his grand, childish, and naïve ideas. Be very careful about your desire for Nirvana. That quest can lead to a very different place than the one you imagine.

The health care plan that the House of Representatives have proposed will kill good health care for Americans. Exceptionalism of care will only be in the province of the few elites in government who are exempt from the plan they write for you. Everybody else will fall under the statistical probabilities of remedy and expense. In other words if the cure is too costly or your age too advanced, be prepared to receive a "pain pill" and "end life counseling".

Government run healthcare is an appetizing looking morsel, but it carries an arsenic center. Be very vocal to your representatives in the House and Senate. Let them know that you do not want what they are offering. You are being lied to on a grand scale about the wondrous results that will result from government run health care.

Fact: Mayo Clinic Says Government-Run Health Care Will Force Doctors To Drop Patients

I leave you with this thought - The American military is the only thing standing between you and having to face Mecca five times a day. Protecting our free society is the only obligation that the government really has, not the nationalizing of private companies and intimidating political opposition. But this president sees things differently. His idea is to confiscate your freedom and bow to the rest of the world. What have we voted into office?

Cheers - I think,

-Robert-

Health Care Dilemma

2009-08-08T11:58:00.000-07:00

My email box is overflowing with viewpoints on the proposed health care plan before congress. Most of what I receive is opposed to the plan, but there are people out there who want this all-encompassing package to pass.

One conclusion that I have drawn is that all sides of the argument are genuine. The Liberals that read my column are not power-hungry mongrels as portrayed by talk radio and elsewhere. No, even though their point of view is very narrow, they feel like the system we have now, is faulty and that the government is the only thing big and tough enough to get relief to the poor and others without health care.

Political patronage and misrepresentation of this bill is what kills the current health care proposal for me. Examination of the bill reveals a real horror story. It really doesn't do anything but add to the already burgeoning deficit. But that is only the start of what is wrong with this bill.

If you really believe that we are going to provide coverage for millions of additional people and save money in the process, then you are certainly a Kool-Aid drinker.

Several of you railed against the profit motive as being the bad guy. C'mon, you people have brains. General Motors just declared bankruptcy because of 'no profits'. Do you think that by removing profitability that things would actually improve? Profits motivate progress. Progress cannot be mandated. Just look at any Socialist / Communist country. If mandates from the governments of those societies had worked, those countries would be the envy of the world, not wallowing in third world status.

There was a time in American history when unbridled Capitalism almost destroyed the underpinnings of this country. But the people fought back spawning new labor laws and just compensation. But the pendulum has moved too far left and we are again at the precipice of destruction. We have squeezed out most of our industry with over taxation. Our manufacturing base has dwindled from one job out of three, down to one job out of ten. You people do remember manufacturing don't you?

Manufacturing is where you take relatively worthless components/resources and turn them into something of value. Manufacturers set up shop because there might be a profit in doing so. But the governments (State, Federal, and Local) have literally stolen any opportunity for profits through taxation and regulation, so they just moved and took their jobs to a friendlier environment.

In a related issue closer to home, I used to enjoy going to the casinos and playing the slot machines. Most of the time it was a losing effort, but until the last few years I always thought that I had at least a small chance of winning. As you wandered through the casino, you heard 'yippee! and wahoo!' as lucky people hit good on the machines. But that has all changed now. Government squeeze on casino profits has put a damper on your ability to win playing a slot machine. You have to be extremely lucky to get a good hit anymore. Why? Because the local and state governments saw the casinos as easy pickings and started taxing the bejesus out of them. They take their slice off the top and casino operators are left to sort out how to keep the customers happy. One mechanism that casinos employ now is by way of the 'slot club'. Slot clubs allow the customers to accumulate points that can be redeemed for meals, rooms, or cash. It takes a lot of slot play to get any benefits and those benefits usually come with a very high price tag. Winning at the slots is now a rare event.

I tell you this story about the casinos to illustrate the point about profits. Casino customers are no different. The customers really don't go to the casino to see the bright lights, nor to hear the ruckus of the slot machines, no, they go there because lady luck might shine on them and they will win. So lo and behold, when that opportunity was removed and replaced with just a few very costly baubles, the customers started to stay away from the casinos. Casinos are now losing money. Greed, whether in the private or public sector spawns ruination.

The same is true for our manufacturing base, health care, or trade unions. - Something that very few of you know about me is that I am a retired union member. I even draw a retirement pittance from my union. My membership dates back to the sixties, and over time, the union has changed. We used to hear comments from our union leaders such as, "A day's work for a day's pay", and "You have to make the man money so he can afford to hire union labor". Construction locals fought hard to maintain their contractor base - but the unions got greedy. The more they demanded from those contractors, the more those contractors deserted the unions.

The world has always been like that. There is always that segment of the population that cannot and does not want to compete for standing. Instead, they make demands of those who have invested their time, effort, and money into succeeding. Demands from our governments with their tax policies hurt all of us. Heavy-handed governments always lead to ruination, always have, and always will. Ruination follows when any of life's participants get greedy. Greed at the dinner table even causes misery - either immediately after a big meal or later in life after you get fat. The piper is always there to collect his dues. There are no free lunches.

Certainly, there are issues that need addressing such as that young woman from Alvin, TX who found out she has cervical cancer. Her insurance required several thousand dollars deductible before they would approve coverage. It is indeed a sad tale. I certainly hope for this young woman's sake that she will soon raise the money. All people facing catastrophic health issues should have a way to get help whenever there are circumstances such as this young woman is going through. But, and I will repeat, the answer is not to be found with a total takeover of our health care system. We should address the bad in the system and make those corrections to the best of our ability without screwing up the world's finest health care.

I don't believe in altruism. If the government starts to regulate the pay for doctors, our medical system will take a quality hit. The government opens the door to mediocrity when they don't allow the market to dictate the cost and profits earned by doctors. Put yourself in the shoes of a young college student just entering medical school. The odds are that you will not put in all that extra time and work trying to be the best you can be. Why should you? The party hounds who don't work and learn will make the same amount of money as you and not have to expend the effort that is required to be a top notch doctor. To know that this is true, all we have to do is look at those countries where 'single-payer' systems exist. The number of doctors' drop because of the loss of profit potential. Doctor loss puts even more pressure on health care system, i.e. medical rationing becomes necessary because the system can't physically take care of the volume.

What you want to remember is that in today's medical schools, only 25% of the graduating doctors finished at the top. 75% graduated as middle of the road or worse. The top 25% worked extra hard to earn the rankings that they received. Lumping all doctors into the same income category would destroy the incentive for the extra effort that yields to the system our top-notch doctors. Eventually, the only doctors that will be available will be mediocre doctors. The profit incentive is what drives those students to make that extra effort to be the best. If you value freedom, you will reject this bill. We cannot afford a heavy handed government run health system.

Glaringly absent in this legislation is any mention of tort reform, incentives for increasing the number of doctors, or any guidelines as to the quality of the care you receive. There are no appeals to the decisions made by the boards and commissions set up by the government. Whatever they decide is it! Finito, end of story.

This bill, over time, puts the government in charge of the health care industry. If we force the private insurers into competition with a government, it will mean certain doom for the private insurance companies (and all of those jobs). This puts the insurance companies in a no win situation.- Plus, with the government's ability to just print money, and not have to make a profit assures that the playing field is not level. Private industry does not have those luxuries. Those American businesses that provide health care for their workers will gladly unload the expense of health care to the government. Who will pick up that added expense? This bill does not address how they will pay for this boondoggle.

The democrats are already proposing ideas for new taxes. The idea that just the rich will pay is patently ridiculous. All costs filters down to everybody either through higher prices, taxes on the things that you like, license fees, penalties, or other artistic and creative devices for separating you from your money. If they do not raise the income tax, you can count on stealthy means of getting your money. Politicians like collecting money through the back door; it gives them cover.

It is the same sick way local and state governments use to increase property tax collection. Property appraisals increase automatically with no accountability. The politicians can maintain their innocence by stating that they have not raised taxes. The result is the same though - it cost you more money.

Eighty percent of Americans now have insurance coverage. Sixty-eight percent of those are happy with their coverage. Some parts of our system need tweaking and I am all for fixing the bad parts. But the total takeover of one of the finest medical systems in the world is not an answer.

Have you read what's in this bill? Below is a brief that I received from someone who has read the bill and interpreted it. Have a look at this brief - is this what you really want from your government? Note of admission - I checked some of these interpretations and they looked okay to me - but I am not an attorney so read the bill for yourself if you want to test these interpretations. The bill is posted on- The Huffington Post

In the bill, you will find these goodies:

• Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!

• Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!

• Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process)

• Page 42: The "Health Choices Commissioner" will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None.

• Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services.

• Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Healthcard.

• Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to all individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.

• Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community organizer health plans (read: SEIU, UAW and ACORN)

• Page 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules to participate in a Healthcare Exchange.

• Page 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare Exchange (i.e., total government control of private plans)

• Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; translation: illegal aliens

• Page 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up individuals for Government-run Health Care plan.

• Page 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled: you have no choice in the matter.

• Page 124: No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No "judicial review" is permitted against the government monopoly. Put simply, private insurers will be crushed.

• Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set wages.

• Page 145: An employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the government-run public plan. No alternatives.

• Page 126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees AND their families.

• Page 149: Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays an 8% tax on payroll

• Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll

• Page 167: Any individual who doesn’t' have acceptable healthcare (according to the government) will be taxed 2.5% of income.

• Page 170: Any NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes (Americans will pay for them).

• Page 195: Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy will have access to ALL American financial and personal records.

• Page 203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax." Yes, it really says that.

• Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and the poor most affected."

• Page 241: Doctors: no matter what specialty you have, you'll all be paid the same (thanks, AMA!)

• Page 253: Government sets value of doctors' time, their professional judgment, etc.

• Page 265: Government mandates and controls productivity for private healthcare industries.

• Page 268: Government regulates rental and purchase of power-driven wheelchairs.

• Page 272: Cancer patients: welcome to the wonderful world of rationing!

• Page 280: Hospitals will be penalized for what the government deems preventable re-admissions.

• Page 298: Doctors: if you treat a patient during an initial admission that results in a readmission, you will be penalized by the government.

• Page 317: Doctors: you are now prohibited for owning and investing in healthcare companies!

• Page 318: Prohibition on hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand without government approval.

• Page 321: Hospital expansion hinges on "community" input: in other words, yet another payoff for ACORN.

• Page 335: Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures: i.e., rationing.

• Page 341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage Plans, HMOs, etc.

• Page 354: Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS individuals.

• Page 379: More bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee (healthcare by phone).

• Page 425: More bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior Citizens, assisted suicide, euthanasia?

• Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in estate taxes ahead of time.

• Page 425: Government provides approved list of end-of-life resources, guiding you in death.

• Page 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment; government dictates how your life ends.

• Page 429: Advance Care Planning Consult will be used to dictate treatment as patient's health deteriorates. This can include an ORDER for end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the GOVERNMENT.

• Page 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have at end-of-life.

• Page 469: Community-based Home Medical Services: more payoffs for ACORN.

• Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations: more payoffs for ACORN.

• Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. Government intervenes in your marriage.

• Page 494: Government will cover mental health services: defining, creating and rationing those services.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Email Your comments to Robert

Low Birth Rate

2009-08-04T02:58:00.000-07:00

There is a short video at the end of this post.

Are you obsessed with politics? Well, politics are important only to a secure nation. But our failure to maintain a sustaining birthrate is more of a threat than worrying about the politics of the day.

The pill, women's rights, and abortion have put the United States, as we know it, in an untenable position. First, I do not write this from any moralistic viewpoint, so please interpret this analytically.

Our society is happily pursuing self-gratification with no regard for the consequences of not maintaining a sustaining birthrate. When pregnancy does occur, a quick snip and flush easily takes care of the problem. But it is also a big fly in the soup. Our European descended population is decreasing while our 'other-than-European' population increases. The world is changing.

All Christianized western societies have slowed their birthrate while the Muslim population has maintained a high birthrate. Slowing our birthrate is fine under any civilized standard of measure because overpopulation also has its concerns. However, with a democratic system, the majority sets the rules. Elections have consequences. Do you suppose that a Muslim majority would oppose the transfer of power to a Muslim type of government? If you think it would be fine, then all you have to do is hang on for a few years and you will be able to see it happen if nothing changes.

There is no attempt here to be a Muslim alarmist. But there are some fundamental differences between a Muslin regime and a non-Muslim regime. A close examination between the two is very revealing. We cherish the freedom of being able to worship or not worship as we see fit. With that attitude, we don't look upon another faith as an entity that wants to usurp our way of life, but if our birth rate continues to decline, it will happen.

Under Muslim rule, the first sacrifices will be those who profess no faith - Atheists. Under our system, a person has the right to be an Atheist. Muslims summarily execute infidels. Women will become person's non-grata under a Muslim regime and destined for male domination. Women can also forget about an education and having the independence they enjoy now. In other words, everything about this country that we cherish will be lost.

The European nations and the U.S. have burgeoning Muslim populations, and if the present trend continues, Muslims will be in the majority by 2050. Our petty politics of today will not matter a whit if we do nothing to curtail this trend.

Not all is lost though. Our population has been enjoying the influx of immigrants from Central and South America. Like them or not, these people share most of the same values as we. This group of immigrants has sustained us because of their similar value system. There are a few missing ingredients however. The first, and most glaring of which is that so many of these immigrants do not go through the normal immigration system. They come in their millions without having to learn our language, customs, or about our institutions. In other words, we don't allow these people be integrated into our society.

In order for us to reap the full benefits of having these people among us, and they are necessary for us to maintain our culture, is to mandate their having to go through the proper immigration process and learn what makes America the greatest country in the world. I do not advocate sending these people back to their country of origin unless they want to return to them. That decision is not a political decision, but instead, one that faces the reality of our declining European stock population.

Next, we should restrict the Muslim population to its current percentage of the total population. We could accomplish this using the Chinese model of restricting the number of births and curbing the Muslim immigration rate. Minority Muslim populations are very peaceful, productive citizens.

I am not anti-Muslim, as long as I am not subjected to their way of life. That said, what they do is fine by me - with the exception of using their religion to overrun other countries. The history of the Muslims is not good. Most of their gains came through forced conversions of the indigenous peoples that they overran. Western democratic governments with an ambivalent attitude about religion invite takeover unless they control the makeup of their populations.

Cheers,
-Robert-

Email Comment to Robert
This short video will illustrate the population problem.

Regulation and Ethics

2009-07-30T07:41:00.001-07:00

It is an exercise in frustration to have to deal with crimes of greed. Whether it's the greed on Wall Street, our courtrooms, or the sale of fake and weak drugs to the developing nations. Crimes of greed decimate the innocent.

The question is, what do we do about it? Should we pass new regulations? Or maybe we should teach our young the universally held values of right and wrong for a foudation from which to grow.

Just one of the problems not getting much traction in the press concerns the lack of ethics and greed of the manufacture and distribution of fake and weakened medicines to treat malaria. This quoted from the organization that fights the good fight against the devastation of malaria "Africa Fighting Malaria". Africa Fighting Malaria (AFM) seeks to raise awareness of the huge burden of malaria in sub-Saharan Africa and promote sensible policies for long-term solutions.

Fake and Substandard Drugs Threaten Malaria Treatment in Cambodia

A stream of poor-quality and counterfeit malaria drugs coming into Cambodia is contributing to a growing resistance to treatment for the disease near the Thai-Cambodian border. Many of the drugs are cheaply made and don't contain the right chemistry, or are stored at incorrect temperatures, while others are deliberate fakes that have authentic-looking pills and packaging but contain only a small percentage of the active ingredient in each pill. People in Cambodia are unknowingly using "improper drugs and fake drugs which create resistance," Duong Socheat, director of the nation's malaria control program said. The problem is fueled by the country's many informal pharmacies and merchants that don't have the proper training to provide the correct drug regimen, he said.

The AFM newsletter chronicles the efforts of the world's effort in fighting malaria. If anyone is interested in reading the continuing saga of political interference, and greedy marketing that is preventing effective control over malaria can contact AFM and subscribe to their newsletter. You can email them at Africa@fightingmalaria.org .

The outrage of greed shakes our societies to their core. We can pass more regulations against these and others who want to succeed the easy way at other people's expense, but piling on more unenforced regulations doesn't do much to stop this greedy crowd. There are already laws against most bad behavior in all countries but laws alone cannot stop this contagion.

It seems that nobody wants to step up to the plate and enforce laws governing human behavior. For almost every law there is a contingent that opposes that law. Some of the constituencies against laws governing human behavior are large enough to exert political pressure against that law's enforcement. That leaves few avenues to corral bad behavior.

As long as regulations go unenforced, passing more such regulations is futile. Passing redundant legislation may be politically expedient, but does nothing to solve the problem. I do not doubt the sincerity of those who feel compassion for the guilty and transgressors of our laws, but at some point in time, there has to be a line drawn that violators cannot cross and be made accountable for their crimes.

You can list any of several laws that are either protested or not enforced. Some of these would be:

Illegal entry into the United States: Numerous groups including Democrats, businesses wanting cheap labor, and Church Groups support illegal immigrants. All have a vested interest in seeing that our laws are not enforced. Our immigration laws are in shambles because of the divisions over illegal immigrants.

Hate Crime Laws: Passed to appease our racial strife, adds additional penalties to existing laws. It is like telling the criminal, "If you break the law in this fashion, we are really going to get mad." Respect must be earned. It is not a question of deserves. Deserves has nothing to do with it. Passing gratuitous laws serve only to create more division.

Wall Street Woes: There are far too many laws passed to try and overcome the greed emanating from our financial institutions. But when you follow the education trail, the Wall Street elites come from the most Liberal Institutions in this country. Liberals have no interest in the teaching of ethics or right and wrong when it comes to human behavior. Most graduates from the Eastern Ivy League group are programmed to do only one thing - make money. We cannot produce enough non-corruptible overseers for corporate greed and corruption. We are at the mercy of the private ethics held by those titans of Wall Street.

Marketers of Bad Drugs: Same problem as with the preceding. There are already laws against this stuff. What is needed is a strong dose of enforcement and ethics. How would more unenforced laws help?

This is why I rail so much against those whose aim it is to destroy religion. The church is about the only place that stresses right from wrong. You never hear a peep about it from the secularist. The secular can only set up boundaries for a particular group and give no incentive for following those guidelines. So many of the laws passed by local, State and Federal are designed only for extracting money from people.

Once entrapped in the legal system, whether innocent or guilty, the court has the power to not only imprison you, but also pick your wallet. It is not an equitable system. You cannot defend yourself without an understanding of courtroom protocol. The average person drowns without a lawyer because of his/her not understanding how the legal system works. The process is designed that way for the enrichment of the beneficiaries of the system. Fines enrich the local authorities; bail is set for the enrichment of authorities and bondsmen.

Have you ever wondered why a bail is set? When a person comes before a judge whether innocent or guilty, for some reason, the judge only lets you plea. If you plead guilty, you get either a fine or/and a sentence for imprisonment. But if you plead innocent and want to fight the charges against you, you have to 'buy' your freedom through the bail process even if you are not a flight risk. The bail is usually set just out of reach of the average person which leaves him with no recourse other than to get a bail bond. It is a nice cozy arrangement for those in the system. If that is not enough, you have to sift your way through the low tier lawyers that haunt the courtrooms for easy government money to represent you. Or, you can hire an achieved lawyer for a princely sum. There is no way that you can get away clean, even if you are innocent, it will cost you dearly.

The legal system is what it is. I do not have the skills to design a better system. The point in writing about it is to convey a deeply held idea that the system is without ethics and has evolved into nothing more than a sham to extract money from you. Most of the crimes that come before the courts are misdemeanors and represent people who by nature are not hardened criminals. I am sure that the people involved in the system do not share my opinion, but they have done nothing to give me reason to take a different position.

In conclusion, no law should be enacted without the intention or resources to enforce it. No law should be enacted for political reasons. If any law is enacted where there is already provisions for such an incident, the old law should be stricken from the records. It seems that we never clean the books. We just keep adding to them, making life more complicated.

Everyone should be trained in ethical behavior. Many of our problems could be solved if people were just honest and truthful. But without a firm grasp of what is universally considered right and wrong, we will continue the upward spiral of unenforceable laws.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Mail a Comment to Robert

Faith and Freedom

2009-07-24T07:49:00.000-07:00

This was written to all of those who are out to destroy Christianity. Should you succeed in destroying this faith, inadvertently you will be destroying the very freedom that you enjoy. No doubt, the understanding of Christianity and its importance has not been taught to you or you would not be so doggedly determined to destroy it. First, you should know that Christianity is a faith-based religion. It is not a scientifically provable equation. There are certainties that are accepted as faith. Christians believe that Jesus was the sacrificial lamb whose blood redeemed all who would believe in Him. Just as the Jews had to sacrifice a lamb while they were in Egypt, and put the blood of the lamb on their doors to keep the angel of death from where they lived, Jesus fulfills that same purpose for all of mankind. Promises that are included to Christians of faith are inner peace, and everlasting life.

Christians are admonished to live within the Secular systems that they find themselves; hence the “Render unto Caesar” lesson in the New Testament. And to be peaceful by, “Turning the other cheek”. Christians are required to live God fearing, useful lives, and to accept Christ as their Savior. For the believers in Christ, their faith transcends the fear of death. They have an understanding that there is something better for them after death. Having faith is a far better way of life than living in fear of what is to come. Any person, who has the knowledge that his life has been one of devotion to God, and his Son, is in an immensely better position to face his own mortality than the person who has rejected God and his teachings.

There is nothing to fear from Christians in and among a Society. And yet, Christians are attacked at every level. Why? Simply put, Christianity represents having to make a choice between right and wrong. There are a lot of people who want to live certain lifestyles that are prohibited by God. So they see the teachings of faith as an obstacle to do what they crave for their own pleasures. Those who are weak and refuse to obey God, turn to the Secular to make things right for them. They want laws changed to address their concerns. The problem with shaping the Secular laws to suit the wants of people is that it’s like re-arranging the deck chairs of the Titanic. Their mortality still approaches and God has the final judgment, not man. Those who reject Christ need to ask themselves if a few years of depravity is worth an eternity of damnation.

Likewise, to those who have the authority to shape Secular law. By attempting to sanctify that which is prohibited by God, are you also not in danger of losing Paradise for yourself?

For the sake of not being misunderstood, I want to be clear that rules are necessary for the governance and protection of a society. But I want to explore the differences between the Secular and non-Secular adhesion to rules. It is these differences that define whether we are held hostage to “Big Brother” or allowed the freedom to maintain our societies.

There is a difference between having to obey Secular laws and a willingness to obey God’s laws. Secular laws are mere boundaries. They represent limits for which a transgression can be either criminal or just a fine. There is no guidance in navigating these boundaries. A person is free to bounce around in his Secular society as long as he doesn’t run afoul of one of these boundaries. There are Secular boundaries everywhere, but no guidance. You are allowed to drive your car down the highway as you choose as long as you don’t go over the speed limit, make an improper turn, fail to yield, not stop for a stop sign, and on and on. The lesson here is that society wants you to drive safely so as not to harm yourself or others. Hence, we have the establishment of all those boundaries. (Laws)

The differences I am talking about are profound. For instance, when a person who rejects faith approaches a stop sign and sees nobody, he may or may not run the stop sign. Running the stop sign gives him no remorse, because after all, there wasn’t any oncoming traffic. However, because there is no remorse, the lesson to him is that it is okay to disobey a Secular law. Remember though, all of the intersections won’t be empty. Others can be put in danger if it isn't realized that on this day, he was lucky.

Same scene with a Christian at the stop sign, and he also determines it is safe to run it. Now however, he knows he has done wrong, and it bothers him. His conscience will not allow the broken law to go unnoticed.

The Secular world without Christ just bounces one around from one boundary to the next. The only price to be paid, if caught, is maybe a fine or it could be a life behind bars, depending on the boundary that was violated. The emptiness of such a life is real. The search for “neat” things in the Secular world will expand exponentially because nothing can quench this thirst. The search for satisfaction eventually runs afoul of the Secular boundaries. The person is left with nothing. He becomes an island of despair, and turning to the Secular world for help is also empty. Nothing in the Secular world can help because the help that is needed is spiritual. No pill can mend what is broken.

When we accept Christ as our Savior, we also accept the responsibilities for our actions. Whenever a Christian does the wrong thing, there is this tug at his conscience that tells him about it. Guilt is spawned out of doing wrong, whether by disobedience to God’s Law or Secular Law.

The love of God creates a goal that is beyond Earthly goals. It is for that reason Christians are constantly aware of their actions here on earth. Once a person becomes a Christian, they receive an indescribable joy in their hearts. This spirit will guide them for the rest of their days. They will renounce sin and pray for forgiveness when they falter. And, all will falter, contrition is vital if there is to be any relief from the relentless tug of the conscience knowledge of transgression. It is our conscience reminding us and guiding us that makes life bearable for all of society.

Should this Nation lose it’s faith and succumb to nonbelief, the goodness that has bound us together since our founding will be lost. No more will we be guided by our conscience into doing the right thing, for we will have rejected the premise of right and wrong. The common trust between everyone will dissolve into avaricious behavior for riches and power. The great United States would be powerless in the face of such fractious behavior. Anarchy would reign.

So be of good faith, and know that your faith is the ultimate guarantor of freedom. There can be no freedom without faith. Remember, it is faith that creates the need for a decent life, not the threat of punishment from Secular laws.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Texas Heat Wave of 2009

2009-07-17T04:17:00.000-07:00

Texas has experienced a record-breaking heat wave between May and at least half of July. The main culprit isn't global warming, but rather a very persistent high-pressure area over the south-central region of the United States.

High-pressure areas, generally looked upon favorably because they usually mean good weather for the area they encompass. -But persistent high-pressure areas that don't move also have a darker side.

The air mass within a high-pressure area is mainly cloud free so rain or other precipitation is not possible. The clear sky gives an unrestricted window for the Sun to penetrate to the Earth's surface. A persistent high-pressure that lingers over an area for extended periods - up to 2 months or more can have a devastating effect on vegetation.

Watering plants help, but for a lot of plants fully exposed to the Sun, we still see a stunted growth. The continual exposure to an unrestricted Sun and high temperature difference between night and day is ruinous to most plants. Temperature differences, referred to as the temperature split, reaches about 20˚F within a high-pressure area in a 24-hour period. For instance, if you are experiencing 100˚F in the daytime, you can expect around 80˚F for a low temperature before sunup. Plants like a more even temperature and less radiation from the direct Sunlight to thrive which is why many gardeners and farmers try to shade their plants from the hot afternoon Sun.

I am no climatologist so I cannot explain why our high-pressure area was so persistent. But it was, and the grass outside is crunchy dry. My outside thermometer (electronic sensor) stays shaded by a popcorn tree for most of the day but there are periods when the full light of the Sun is on it. During the shaded times the sensor has registered as much as 104˚F, and in full Sun it has registered and astounding 114˚F.

The cloudless conditions we have been experiencing for the past two months have been painful. I am grateful for being retired because working outside in these conditions is brutal. Whenever I see those who have to be outside to make a living, I am just grateful it is not me. Those people deserve our admiration and respect for what they are going through to make a living.

The end of this period nears and rain chances are starting to appear in the forecast. My assumption is that the grass will green up if we ever get some rain. I don't know, but I hope the grass just goes dormant rather than dying when it gets this dry. We water our main plants but do not have the ability to water the full two acres that I live on so our yard looks a little polka-dotted with the green splotches where we have been watering.

In spite of a very hot and dry summer, I am expecting a very cold winter. But that is another story.

Stay cool!

Cheers,

-Robert-

Email Comments to Robert

Obama and Taxation

2009-07-13T04:20:00.001-07:00

Obama has pledged to the American people that no one making less than 250 thousand dollars would see a tax increase but instead would receive a tax cut. Can he make good on such a pledge and still pay for expensive new programs? The classical answer would be no, but connivance still reigns in the political arena.

The payroll tax is only one source of revenue for the government. But the one key thought to remember, is that all revenue comes from the taxpaying citizens. When a particular segment of the population receives a benefit, other tax devices are used. The government has resorted to 'targeted' taxes that result in taxing special interests. You know them as cigarette taxes, phone taxes, liquor taxes, etc. Other targeted taxes are licenses. Licenses make up another income stream for both local and Federal governments. There are too many targeted taxes to list here, but suffice it to say, that if you own it, subscribe to it, buy it, or use it, the government gets a share of its cost.

The money any politician can spend begins with the taxpayer. Taxpayers provide 100% of the money the government spends. The government has elevated the different ways of extracting money from its citizens into an art form. The more money the politicians have - the more power they have to wield over everybody. We have allowed the tin pot politicians to take control of our society and wrest the freedom to choose and decide from us. Once government injects dollars into an entity, politicians can then take a commanding role with that entity. The entity no longer has any independence. This is how we as citizens empower the government.

Don't get me wrong, there are places that the government must assert itself on behalf of the national interest. Defense, interstate commerce, and justice are but a few of the major roles that government must represent us. But not all projects rise to the level of national importance.

The definition of what politicians define as local or national projects separates me from Liberals. It seems lately, that all problems are national problems. Ambitious politicians anxious to climb the political ladder see the money from the government as the way to fame and glory. Thus, politicians use earmarks and political patronage as their stepping-stones. Local initiatives for ridiculous projects generally fail. But by acquiring Federal tax-dollars, the local inhabitants get a project for an apparent bargain, even though they would not have paid for it out of their pockets.

But I want to remind everybody that the combination of all federally paid projects comes with a big price tag. That is why we are all bending from the weight of all those taxes. Seeking the easy and cheap way out has cost us dearly in real terms of jobs and national wealth. As the government 'helps' more people, it needs more and more money. Taxes go up. Our politicians have been very creative in coming up with ways to get more taxes so that they can fund more projects. This creation of governmental dependence is a cycle that is mathematically certain to collapse the economy. It is important to note that as we demand more from our government, the more our government will have to demand from us.

That brings us back to the processes that Obama has put into motion. Recently, using the power of the governmental purse, the U.S. has loaned several large corporations billions of dollars. Because of the large stake in those businesses, the government has assumed a commanding role in dictating both function and management of those entities. After all, somebody has to look after the taxpayers investments. Obama has put into motion several projects that will cost trillions of dollars. The only source for that money is the taxpaying citizens of this country.

There are few options to get the money for his extravagance. He can monetize the debt (print the money), borrow the money from other countries on the hope that we will once again regain the upper hand, or he can use various taxing schemes to extract the money from the citizenry.

Monetizing the debt will devalue our currency and cause massive inflation.

Borrowing will put us in the same position that our American companies have found themselves in when they borrowed. The foreign lenders will have a commanding role in our country because they now own a large part of our economy. Borrowing massive amounts of foreign money is a disaster in the making. Americans will again lose their independence because others own us.

Taxation is the only method left. But as Obama will find out, the increase in taxes will only cause the economy to get worse. More jobs will be lost as businesses move to tax friendlier countries. Obama has pinned his hopes on revenue raising schemes such as 'Cap and Trade'. That irresponsible legislation is only another tax levied on all of us. It does not matter how much money that the government collects, it is never enough.

Federal intervention in lieu of local control robs each and every citizen of the ability to control and exercise his/her responsibility as a citizen. When the National Government usurps the local say-so, those citizens have lost the freedom to chart their course as they see fit. This is not about taking control from the Federal government, but rather about a takeover by the Federal Government. We have to say no to those schemes hatched by politicians for self-aggrandizement. If a project is worthy, the people will accede and find a way to pay for it without federalizing it.

Remember if you are making clubs that others use to beat you; it is time to stop making clubs. We keep asking for punishment every time we allow someone else to assume the responsibility that is ours. What seems as the best way today will eventually haunt us. The piper always gets paid and when he claims his payday, we will suffer for our actions.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Lazy Stupid Republicans

2009-07-03T10:26:00.001-07:00

Every day I receive emails from different Republicans both notable and wannabee notables that decry their pitiful plight under the Obama administration. They also have one thing in common, they all want donations. What a joke!

These guys were nowhere to be seen when we needed them. Where were they during the Bush years when we should have been reigning in spending? Where was their concern when Fred Thompson paired up with John McCain in the primaries to divide the conservative vote? The three conservative candidates divided that vote leaving McCain as the only non-conservative in the field. Guess who won? A pox on all their houses!

Where was the outcry about Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae when Bush tried to prevent the economical collapse in 2005? The Republicans knew exactly what was happening, but they just couldn't bring themselves to prevent a catastrophe - let the good times roll! Very few, if any Republicans bothered to stand on their hind legs when we needed them. And now, they have the gall to ask me for my money!

Where were the Republicans during the outrage happening in Iraq? Far too many American soldiers died before Bush finally made a positive move to gain the upper hand. Remember, everybody loves a winner and for 3 years, we weren’t winning. Reporters were too scared to even venture out of their hotels, and all the while, the Bush administration did nothing to even present a light at the end of the tunnel. Worse, Bush could not find any reason to defend either himself or his administration. Bush lost both public confidence as well as popularity for his perceived inaction. Bush failed us in so many ways that the Democrats made a mockery out of the Republicans.

Bush allowed Scooter Libby to languish through Hell even though the man was innocent until he finally committed the process crime of - not remembering. Bush allowed two border guards Ramos and Campean to be prosecuted and victimized because of political patronage to Mexico. Those guys were innocent and just doing their jobs - victims of mixing politics and justice. Bush knew that those two were innocent and finally commuted their sentences, but not their conviction, just before leaving office. Where was the Republican leadership in the senate that allowed those outrages to happen? Other than a few voices in the House of Representatives, the silence was deafening.

The Republicans created the conditions for Obama's rise from obscurity. Obama became a champion to the voters because he offered change from the 'business as usual' politics in Washington. Well, we sure got change! Remember, people always get the type of government that they deserve.

Even now, a fledgling protest movement is afoot, but there is no leadership from any mainstream Republicans there to support it. Oh, there are those who will applaud such actions as TEA parties, but other than a very small group of elected representatives that actively support the movement, it goes mostly unnoticed. And this group of sit on their hands Republicans still asks me for my money! How dare they be so brash? Do they think I buy hot air?

I do not recommend sending this lazy, lead with their jaws, afraid to rock the boat, money for any reason. The infighting for the direction of the Republican Party will either consume the Party or give birth to a new party, provided leadership can be located from somewhere in the bowels of chaos.

At one time, I thought that Newt Gingrich looked like a possible leader, but he too has failed miserably to vigorously pursue the good ideas he has. He conveniently slips back into his intellectual mode of softness instead of being the drumbeater for anything interesting. McCain isn't even up for discussion. Then, there are the forgettable former governors of Massachusetts and Arkansas, Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee. Are they inspiring? Not in my estimation, they espouse values but offer no reason to believe in their leadership. Huckabee makes a better entertainer than any political attributes that I can see. He is the master of the one-liner and an adequate bass guitar player, but still has the personality of a Baptist preacher.

Mitt Romney has a past that resoundingly says 'Liberal'. His tenure as governor in Massachusetts pretty well defines his brand of politics. So who is left?

Ron Paul? This Libertarian has a good record and stands firm on how he views the political landscape. But I don't see him as the one who can unseat Obama. His political viewpoints are not universally acceptable by Republicans.

Personally, I am keeping an eye on Sarah Palin. She has demonstrated that she will not stand by and allow the political opposition to succeed with their personal attacks on her and her family. She has the attributes of a leader who is not to be denied. The Democrats realize that she is a powerhouse and are throwing everything in the book at her to derail her politically. But the refreshing thing is, they are failing to make a dent. This moose-hunting, good-looking lady from Alaska defies their every effort. Here is a possible future candidate who may deserve your support. Asking you to contribute to her now may be a little premature but so far, I like what I see in her.

Let your dissatisfaction over the lack of leadership in the Republican Party be known to all office holders. Write to them, email them, and call their office. The more you care, the more they will care. The last thing this bunch of milk toast politicians want is to lose their jobs. If you want the horse to buck, you have to spur him on. Or, just throw the whole bunch of spineless sponges out of office.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Send Comments to: editor@robfg.com

Intelligent DNA 2

2009-06-27T09:56:00.000-07:00

Questions that lead to more questions result from the search for how an entity became what it is today. Take an ordinary watermelon for instance. What in the world inspired the watermelon to evolve? Think about it for a moment.

The watermelon we live with today fits nicely into a niche that keeps it thriving. There had to be a point in time that no watermelons existed. What brought it into existence? We can look at its current life cycle for clues, but the light we shine on the current life cycle only brings more questions.

Currently, the watermelon produces a tasty fruit that when ingested, its seeds travel through the digestive system of the animal that ate the fruit, then finally deposited in a dung heap that nourishes the seed into a new watermelon plant. It sounds easy up to this point, but my question is, how did the process start?

The seed knew that just popping out of a pod with seeds did not distribute the plant very well, and they might or might not have the proper conditions to grow. What the seed needed was distribution. It may be dry in its present location, but by moving to another location, the seed may find favorable conditions to grow. All sorts of methods for distribution evolved. Some, like the dandelion figured out that by making its seed light enough with hair like protrusions to catch the wind, it could distribute itself without the help of animals. But some plants, like the watermelon (and others), enlisted the help of animals.

In my mind's eye, I can just see the first seed (of another long gone plant) that made it through the digestive tract of an animal. The end of that journey left it deposited in the dung heap. The resulting plant flourished. The experience was so good for the seed that it started seeking ways to insure that its resulting seeds would be so lucky.

The seed at this point had two worries. The seed must coat itself to avoid digestion and attract an animal with an inefficient digestive system. (Where the animals with an inefficient digestive system came from is another question for another article.) Picking the proper animal group to distribute its seeds was a vexing chore. After all, the seeds didn't know what the animals wanted to eat. Biologists would tell us that natural selection solved the mystery, but I am not sure that natural selection initiated the process. The process for change started with a plant's need to reproduce itself. Natural selection only solved the dilemma after the DNA tried different strategies. New problems confronted the seed at every turn. Among its new problems was to figure out the best way to produce its seeds and how many to produce. Should it use a pod and make the pod attractive with odor or use many pods with the seeds bound together in a fleshy encasement.

An organism's DNA comes up with different strategies, but natural selection determines the winners and losers. You have to hand to the DNA structure; it realizes that a change would be beneficial so it starts the process of modification. The conditions that start the DNA to modify may be climate, predation, or competition with other organisms. The life structure seems self-programmed to succeed against a variety of obstacles. You can be sure that something in the inner workings of this life structure determines that a change is necessary. That is why I believe that DNA, because of its ability to self-program, is a creation of intelligence. DNA doesn't care what form it takes as long as that life form is successful. The dead-end life forms fail because the time to adapt is too short. Adaption time can be cut short because of severe climate changes, predation, or cosmic events. I'm sure there are other reasons but the idea is only to demonstrate some of the possible causes for extinction of different life form. But given ample time to adapt, the DNA will see to it that needed changes will emerge that can compete.

The opinions expressed here about DNA are mine. This is not a scientific document.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Send comments to: editor@robfg.com

Health Care Woes

2009-06-24T11:59:00.000-07:00

The news is full of unoriginal clichés. We hear about the 43 million people who are uninsured and how medical costs are skyrocketing. Then we hear about all of the savings to be had if we just had universal coverage. Sitting in my small office, I wonder if the bureaucrats have actually looked at the problems surrounding our health care.

Nobody is denied emergency or basic care regardless of income. However, the quality of care is better for those with coverage. What you do not hear is that if everybody had insurance, quality of health care would not improve. To begin with, our health care system is already overburdened. Even with money to spend on health, it takes at least a week to get an appointment with a doctor. How would your accessibility change if everybody had good insurance? Our doctors can see no more people than they do already. Most work long hours and their patient schedules are full. The burden on the medical community is also the reason for the long waits in emergency rooms. Simply put, there are already more patients than the doctors can treat in a timely manner. Appointments can be as long as a month for a specialist, a week or more for your family physician, or several hours in the emergency room.

To become a doctor, it takes years of training. Some of these doctor want-to-be students go through the years of training because they just want to serve their fellow man, but what motivates most is the prospect of building a private practice and having financial security. Yes, it is the good old profit motive.

Health care is a market driven business. That means, if you have enough money, you can have access to the best care that is available. But the best care is in limited supply and not everybody can possibly get the best care. So would a change in that system be good for anybody? I go back to the years it takes to become a doctor. How do you think that removing the profit motive will affect the number of young people entering medical school? Removing the motivation to become a doctor would be disastrous and lead to even more mediocrity and health rationing.

As stated, the best treatment is in limited supply. Do you remember when you were in school? There were the nerds who always made good grades, then there were the regulars who made satisfactory grades, and last were the dullards who just barely got by. Well, doctors are like that also. A third of all doctors graduated from the 'dullard' section, another third from the regular section, and then the elites of the class came from the top third of the class. It is literally and physically impossible for everybody to be treated by the top third of the class. So, only a fraction of patients has access to the smartest and most knowledgeable of our doctors.

It is also true that not all doctors treat the sick. There is a huge market for 'vanity' doctors. Vanity doctors are doctors that do the boob jobs, sexual reassignment operations and tummy tucks. Aesthetic cosmetic surgery, not to be confused with reconstruction plastic surgery, siphons off the supply of doctors who would otherwise treat our ailments. In 2007 there were 12 million cosmetic surgeries performed. The five most common were breast augmentation, liposuction, nasal surgery, eyelid surgery, and abdominoplasty.

Doctors doing vanity surgery specialize in that field and do not treat the sick. Not only does cosmetic surgery yield higher income, but only limited record keeping and insurance filings are necessary which drastically reduce office costs. Higher fees plus reduced cost makes cosmetic surgery highly attractive to doctors.

Some of the data available is revealing if people would take the time to inform themselves. Let's look a little closer at health care and health care dollars in the United States.

To begin with, basic health care is available to everyone. If you go to a state funded hospital or any emergency room, you will be treated regardless of your ability to pay.

Look at the statistics on the uninsured. In 2007, 45.7 million people did not have health coverage. 21% or 10 million of that total were full-time employees and 59% or 27 million were part time employees. 20% or one-fifth of the uninsured population could afford health coverage, but decide for their own reasons not to. 38% or 17.3 million of the uninsured lived in households making $50,000 or better.

According to the Census Bureau, 36 million or 78.7% of the uninsured were legal citizens while 9.7 million or 21.2% are non-citizens.

A large part of my writings have always been about solutions that are not well thought out. Americans are sold the glittering part of an idea but never the darker side. Computerizing our medical records may help with some costs, but there will also have to be staff enlargements at the doctor's office to put the data into the computers. Every visit has details that get recorded. Normally, the doctor would just write out the details of your visit and file your record. But by computerizing the data, we need yet another layer of personnel to enter the data into the computers. Office costs go up. That money has to come from somewhere, I wonder whom.

A doctor's office also has to retain a person(s) to do insurance filings. This person makes sure the codes are correct and that your provider is legitimate. There is no reason why we as patients and customers of our insurance companies can't file our own insurance claims. Doctors still take money for their services and it would reduce the health care cost if this added burden weren't added to the doctor's office expense. Insurance filing could be simplified with a method of verification so that you could file your own claims. By filing your claim, it would give more assurance to the provider that the doctor's office is not gaming the system.

By far the largest elephant in the room is lawsuits. Doctors are human and they make mistakes, some of them tragic and stupid. But I can't remember the last time that I met a doctor who wanted to make a mistake or hurt his patients. But for protection against lawsuits, doctors have to order unnecessary tests, pay huge insurance premiums, and regard every patient as a possible threat to his livelihood. Tort reform would help this situation but is not a part of the plan that congress is considering. Litigation and the threat of litigation substantially increase the cost of health care.

Another subject that I won't dwell on much is the rules and regulations of building a hospital that drive the costs up substantially. Local, state, and federal regulations that do nothing for patient safety or health, menace every part of the construction of new facilities. It is the little things like hospital grade sockets and plugs. Hospital grade outlets mandate that you need at least a four pound pull to dislodge the plug from it. Most sockets that you buy meets and exceeds this rating. But the contractor has to purchase 'hospital rated' outlets to comply with the code. That special rating comes with a special price.

There are literally thousands of other examples of rules that are written at the local and state level just for the benefit of certain individuals. All of which increase the cost of providing health care.

I want to say that I am for honest change but not political change that just redistributes how we pay and ration our health care. But sadly, the bill before congress does not accomplish anything useful, unless you do not plan on getting old.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Send comments to: editor@robfg.com

Nationalizing Lawyers

2009-06-18T03:33:00.000-07:00

Perhaps the time has come to reign in runaway legal fees. Obama is in the act of nationalizing healthcare for our benefit, so while he's at it, maybe it's time to look at the legal system as well.

There is not a lot of difference, operationally, between Doctors and Lawyers from the viewpoint of the average citizen. When you need a doctor and have no money, it is mandated (at least in Texas) that hospitals cannot refuse to treat you. Then there are the tax supported charity hospitals that provide free service to indigent people in need of healthcare.

The legal system is not much different. People without the ability to pay can get help at any number of pro bono services in Texas. These services are especially available to illegal immigrants through many Catholic outlets, YMCA, and various Universities. The majority of free services depend on the politics du jour. Battered women, illegal immigrants, anti-conservative causes, matters pertaining to drug abuse, and abortion rights all make up political causes readily available to the poor. Both sides of the political spectrum are represented but comparatively speaking, more help is available for left wing causes than the pro bono offerings for conservative causes.

Legal services generally (but not always) avoided by pro bono groups include family law (child custody especially), divorce settlements, corporate and business law services, and quality criminal defense.

Most lawyers deserve to be the butt end of those jokes so often recited about them. But make no mistake, when you need the services of an attorney, there is no place to go except to an attorney. Lawyers hold the same club as do doctors. Doctors realize that when you are sick, you need a doctor. The same holds true for an attorney.

The government is working hard to bring about single payer healthcare, so while they are at it, why not single payer legal fees. A person should have the right to go to the lawyer of his choice just like his/her ability to choose a doctor. The difference would be national legal insurance that all lawyers would have to participate in, willing or not. Their fees would be negotiated with the government. Those fees for the different services would be all inclusive, avoiding those side charges that eat up a legal service. Travel, hearing cancellations, additional legal submissions, and meals/entertaining expenses would all be a part of their negotiations. Then the lawyers would have to answer to oversight panels to judge their diligence on a case with their law license in the balance. The lawyers would still make money, just not from their hapless clients who know little about the affairs of the legal system. Any financial beef from the lawyers would be with the government. Appeals about the money value awarded to a lawyer by the government would go to a panel of at least 50% non-lawyers with the chairmanship permanently held by a non-lawyer. No more percentage based claims for lawyers. The client's settlement would be the amount received by the client.

Yep, Obama would do the country a service by pushing through the Equal Opportunity for Lawyers Act.

If it works for Doctors, it will work for lawyers. With a clients right to choose, the good lawyers will have plenty of business. Remember, law schools not only turn out law scholars, but they also turn out the rest of the pack. Those lawyers that finish in the bottom third of their class rankings would be relegated to doing paralegal work instead of milling around the courthouse looking for easy tax dollars.

Tongue in cheek-

Cheers,

-Robert-

Send comments to: editor@robfg.com

Troubled Blacks

2009-06-13T01:30:00.000-07:00

Before I get accused of swiping with too broad of a brush, I want to be clear that there is a minority of Black citizens working, contributing, and living upstanding lives. It is a sad fact though that this number is pitifully small. The majority of African American youths, driven by the perception that there isn't any other way, seem hell-bent on destruction. These misguided youths have adopted the 'shortcut' method for progressing in this society.

It is a disturbing fact that Blacks have the 'wants', but instead of utilizing the opportunities of this nation that allows a person to rise to the level of his ambition, young Blacks feel the need to shortcut the process. The shortcut methods include any activity that provides instant wealth using criminal means; including robbery, pimping, selling street drugs, home invasions, and scams. The shortcut method attempts to circumvent acceptable paths to success.

The alarming statistics of African Americans is not good. Seventy percent of their children are born out of wedlock. According to this statistic, a majority of Black children are raised without the influence of a father. While mothers are nurturing, they cannot provide the balance needed by a child. With few exceptions, children raised in single parent homes develop deficiencies that carry over into adulthood.

The majority white population feels responsible for the plight of Blacks. After all, the white population enslaved and discriminated against Blacks. Whites still think of Blacks as being inferior but at the same time, they feel guilty about the past. The accepted method for Whites to salve their conscience is to reward Blacks with undeserved status. The White population has done everything in their power to destroy the Black population with their kindness. Whites do not intentionally try to harm Blacks, because other than the Liberal elitists among the White population, the majority of Whites want to do right by Blacks.

School integration brought the first opportunity for Whites to help the Black population. A good education would have given Blacks the tools to succeed in our competitive society, but the Democrat elitists' leaders had other ideas. Instead of challenging these young minds, White politicians lowered the standards for students. Lowering standards for Black students was only an extension of the deeply held idea that blacks were somehow inferior and couldn't be educated to White standards. It is important to understand Liberal politics. The Democrats never intended for the Black population to succeed, all they wanted was to create the illusion of helping the Black Race. The last thing that Liberals want is for the Black population to succeed. Under the guise of helping Blacks, the Democrats quickly made them wards of the state. They destroyed any incentive for success that this segment of the population may have had. The Welfare State was born. Reverse discrimination became common in the zeal to make up for the bad treatment Blacks had endured at the hands of the Whites. The welfare state was an easy sell to the White community because of the mantle of guilt riding on their shoulders.

Subsisting on the welfare handouts and other crumbs from Washington destroys Black national pride. In the eyes of the Black person on welfare, there needs to be more crumbs. Their resentment is a manifestation of the rampant poverty that is so pervasive in their communities. Leadership from the Black pulpits is absent. Few if any, tell of the freedom and pride they would gain by standing on their own hind legs. Very few Black ministers preach self-worth and to quit blaming the Whites for all their problems. With the exception of a few, Blacks are not succeeding as a race.

Black athletes are heralded for their athletic skills as they perform for a mostly White audience. Their athletic heroes are in a unique position to set an example for the younger Black generation but alas, the majority of successful Black athletes do not. Most get caught up in consumerism that projects the 'I have arrived' mentality. There is a desperate need for more Black grass root enterprises to celebrate the 'reward for effort formula' to inspire younger Blacks to make the effort to win in life. Instead, these young Blacks are allowed to drift into the shortcut system. Embracing the shortcut system is also the reason for such a large Black population in our prisons.

Lack of Leadership

There are a few Black leaders trying to get the message to the Black community, Bill Cosby comes to mind. But Mr. Cosby's message is met with derision because the message is laced with the idea of taking responsibility for the sad conditions prevalent within Black communities. The voices that are heard the most within the Black community are from those pied pipers of 'blame the whites' like Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan, and Jesse Jackson. We can only hope that the future will bring leadership to the Black community. A leadership that understands the value of family, hard work, and reward for effort. It is sad that successful Blacks are accused of being Uncle Toms, or Lackeys for Whites. Perpetuating the stereotype of victimization only works to empower the 'blame the whites' trumpeters and does real disservice to the Black population.

In conclusion, the sad state of the Black population in this country should be addressed without the shroud of political correctness. The American White needs to quit feeling guilty over past injustices and respect Blacks as equals, not a people needing their pitiful handouts. I leave this one last thought, whenever Black students do get challenged in school to a higher standard, they respond remarkably well. There are numerous examples of what these students achieve when they are not treated as if they were somehow inferior and in need of lower standards to get through school.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Antidote to Greed

2009-06-10T05:27:00.000-07:00

Obama's answer to the financial problems forces more and more government intervention. Government handouts and subsidies only prolongs the problem and attracts more takers. When a business such as a bank gets careless and greedy, the one sure cure for over-leveraging and high executive compensation for non-performance is failure.

The executives at Enron experienced those results. What if we had bailed out Enron? They asked for government intervention but thankfully, the government refused their request. The courts dealt with the executives by sending them to prison. It was a fitting end for a crooked and ill run company. The customers, stockholders, and employees who suffered because of the shenanigans of the corporate office divided the spoils of that company. No, not made whole, but at least they shared in the proceeds of liquidation.

The government cannot be the side rails for a business. Only the honesty and character of the executive structure and the prospect of failure and disgrace can effectively control greed and avarice found in today's banking system. Yes, we have regulations but regulations can hurt as well as help. While regulations intend to prevent runaway fraud, they also prevent decisions that would be good for a business. Honest business decisions are frequently not made because of the prospect of running afoul of regulations. It is like the dog on a leash theory.

The leash theory goes like this. To prevent the dog from marauding through the neighborhood, we chain him to a tree. In this case, the chain represents imposed regulations and the dog is representative of a business. As long as the chain is long enough, the dog is happy. But more overturned trashcans in the neighborhood are upsetting the people, so we shorten the chain to prevent mischief. (As we impose stricter regulations, our chain gets shorter.) Now, the dog sees opportunities beyond the length of the chain and struggles mightily at the chain but the chain is unyielding. The dog runs around the tree searching for an avenue of freedom but with each trip around the tree, the chain gets even shorter. The chain finally strangles the dog. Of course, the moral of the story is that regulations have the ability to kill business if they are too restrictive. That is why we have to rely on the ethics and integrity of those in business.

When a business goes astray and proves to be untrustworthy, that business should fail. Failure is the ultimate cure for greed and avarice. We should avoid shackling our businesses with regulations inspired by the failings of another company. It is the old saying that "One bad apple spoils the whole barrel." Well, there are a lot of bad apples out there and believe me; they will take notice of business liquidations and prison terms. But the opposite is happening because of the government bailouts. Businesses from all over, even the porn industry has their hands out seeking taxpayer dollars. Taxpayer dollars for badly run companies and scandalous executives is nothing but honey that is attracting flies. Everybody wants in on the act.

Contrast what is happening to businesses now. If those same executives were shamed and their companies liquidated, other businesses and boards would pay attention. Going through the pain of failure is not an attraction coveted by any business, not to mention the prospect of prison terms.

When does the nightmare stop? Already some of the banks that received government money decided that they didn't need the help after all. The only problem with the whole episode with the bailouts was that there was no pain for the gross mismanagement of these public corporations. Some got a temporary reprieve with the bailouts, but only time will tell if the boards of these companies will step up to the plate and clamp down on the self-serving behavior of the executives that perpetuated the collapse of the banking system.

Hopefully, I am wrong and the bailouts will not just prolong the agony. The short run does look promising, but we haven't even begun to pay the piper yet. Inflation and depression are still lurking for the longer term. Our national case of myopia is dominating our senses and preventing us from taking the steps that would actually help.

Please note that I did not mention the culpability of congress in this whole sordid affair. That is a topic for another day.

Cheers,

-Robert-

A Naive Obama

2009-06-04T09:01:00.001-07:00

Obama paints the world through hopeful rose-colored glasses. Blatantly ignoring history and even getting it wrong, Obama seeks peace by sacrificing what this nation stands for. The speech was true 'Rodney King-ish' "Can't we all just get along." He might as well have been reciting Isaiah 11:6 --

"The wolf shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the young goat, and the calf and the lion and the fattened calf together; and a little child shall lead them."

Only who is the wolf and who is the lamb? Does he refer to the United States as the predatory wolf or the meek lamb? Does he think of himself as the 'small child'?

Obama was able to put his finger on most of the problems facing the world, but only edicts for solving them. Living with Jihad has been a problem for the United States since 1783. Then, it was the Barbary Pirates trying to earn their way into heaven by seizing American ships and enslaving their crews. Those actions created the trouble between the U.S. and the Muslims along the Barbary Coast. Obama failed to point out that before an American naval fleet existed that President Adams tried appeasement and making nice. It only made the matter worse. The same condition holds for the Somali Pirates of today. As long as their piracy pays off, they will continue their crusades against shipping.

Obama says we need a new beginning -- okay, but in his eyes and by his word, fault lies with what the United States is doing. We were wrong to have removed Sadam Hussein from power -- a war of 'choice' to use his words, and we are wrong to hold really bad people and keep them isolated from civilization at Guantanamo, we are not a Christian country, we still oppress women and minorities, it isn't fair for any country to have atomic weapons, and all good things have come from Islam, the 'peaceful religion'. Obama ignores the fact that Islam is the only religion to have spread by the forced conversions of non-Muslims. What do you think is happening in Darfur at the present? The genocide there is nothing but Muslims forcing non-Muslims into becoming Muslims.

The only thing standing between us and turning towards Mecca 5 times a day is our military. The only reason Iran hasn't struck out against others to establish the coming of the 12th Imam is the American military. However, as the U.S. weakens in the eyes of the Iranians, they will strike for purely religious reasons -- to bring about the return of the 12th Imam. It has nothing to do with diplomacy, statesmanship, or who likes whom, it is a religious concept held by the Shia. The president of Iran is a true believer; and Iran will not accede to punitive measures such as sanctions or other diplomatic measures.

Obama's mischaracterization of Jefferson in his speech was appalling. Isn't it amazing how politicians mischaracterize the words of famous and infamous people to bolster their own arguments?

I have two suggestions. Read the review of Victory in Tripoli: How America's War with the Barbary Pirates Established the U.S. Navy and Shaped a Nation By Joshua E. London John Wiley & Sons at: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1626427/posts or get the book and read it.

Then, Obama defended the war in Afghanistan as being necessary and part of his strategy to stop the extremism of Al Qaeda. Okay, --we will agree to solving the problems there, but wonder why the use of force is necessary in Afghanistan but not appropriate to stop Iran and North Korea from causing global mischief. Iran and North Korea have set a course that is even more perilous than that of Al Qaeda or the Taliban.

Nor did Obama's speech address the hate coming from the Muslim Mosques and the Madrassas that teach the young to hate anybody who is non-Muslim or infidels. Does Obama seriously think that blaming America and praising Islam will bring peace? Jihad is the duty of all Muslims, the Arabic meaning for Jihad is 'struggle' and while all Jihad is not violent, the Jihad by Sword version of Jihad is 'Holy War' where killing infidels satisfies both duty and struggle for Muslims. Die or become Muslim is the choice given to the Christian refugees of Darfur. It is the classical way that the religion has spread over half the world. I would say to President Obama, "Why hasn't your criticism included the Muslim means of converting non-Muslims?"

Obama finds no reason to criticize the root problems we face with the Muslims. They are a docile people until their numbers increase enough to make demands upon the host countries that they establish themselves in. Their reproduction rates far exceed those of most Western societies and soon are able to dictate the terms of peace. Western societies who are accepting of Muslims find themselves forced to accept Sharia Law or face riots and other forms of violence. Muslims overtake countries that have been open and fair to them. It is scary that Obama is willing to go down that road knowing the outcomes of past dealings other countries have had with Muslims.

Yes, I too felt like singing cum-bah-ya to the tune of Obama's speech, but at some point, reality has to surface. His praise and courting of Muslims will only lead to a bad ending for all of us. The idealism and naiveté of Obama is putting all Christians and non-Muslims into serious jeopardy.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Intelligent DNA

2009-06-01T04:40:00.000-07:00

Just the fact that life has to concern itself about reproduction means that life is a terminal condition, and -- that a life form is meant to colonize and occupy a niche in the fabric of life, and -- one could interpret reproduction as a method that life uses to adapt to a changing environment.

Lifespan periods today may be reflective of an Earth that has a continually changing environment. Nothing is ever as static as they seem. We have found evidence of ancient oceans on the highest mountains and old tropical forest in the frozen tundra. Through all of the environmental changes, life has remained tenacious in its habitation on Earth because the DNA that describes a life form is programmable. The ability of life to make changes and adapt to differing environmental situations has been a staple of Darwin's theory since its inception. But it is important to note that the changes come through the reproductive system. Once reproduced, the properties of that individual remain with that life form throughout its life. If you have big feet, you will have big feet throughout your life. But that doesn't mean that you automatically pass this trait on to your offspring.

DNA changes to a given environmental change usually do not happen in one life cycle of an organism. It may take several life cycles to complete the necessary changes to suit a particular environment. If the lifespan is too long, then the necessary changes may not occur to save the life form. This works well because the changing environment may be temporary in nature and full adaptation not actually required.

Rapid environmental changes can be too fast for an organism to adapt and in the process, dooming the affected organism. External forces such as cosmic collisions, volcanism, and changes in the Sun's output would bring about those rapid changes.

Evidence to support a slowing of the evolutionary process can be found by looking at the records of Earth's past. During the Precambrian/Cambrian period, there was a virtual explosion of life forms developed. But the Earth was in a state of rapid change and in order for life to stay viable, rapid changes to DNA was necessary to adapt to a changing world. In order to produce the changes fast enough, shorter life spans would have been necessary. The passing years have calmed the Earth's dynamism and mellowed out its widely varying environmental changes. These longer periods of stability have reduced the need for organism change due to environmental concerns. Translocation and predatory practices probably drive the slight changes in life forms we observe today.

Overall, the increase in stability means less demand for DNA changes and consequently, longer life spans become possible.

The larger question is how is it determined that a DNA change is needed. We know that certain pesticides trigger changes in how a life form deals with those chemicals. Is it the DNA making those determinations? You will notice that the change is always the appropriate response to the circumstance. The response isn't a guess, and after the change occurs, natural selection favors those organisms that made the necessary change. The rearrangement of the chemistry in a mosquito to make it immune to a certain pesticide is a remarkable feat, and to be able to pass the change to subsequent generations suggest more than just chance.

I would suggest that there is in every organism, whether simple or complex, a will to adjust to whatever ill that comes its way. Is this ability the workings of intelligence within the organism or just blind luck? If it is luck, then life has been very lucky to survive from its beginning so long ago. Yes, DNA and its attending retinues that maintain it are a marvel. It is as if there is a command post within our body that recognizes that it is getting warmer or colder and makes those necessary adjustments, or that there is a new chemical that needs to be dealt with.

Natural selection does the work after the changes are made but not before.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Paying for WWII and the Depression

2009-05-27T05:58:00.000-07:00

From This ---

To This

Deficit spending is the method being tried to end the current recession. But deficit spending, without a method of repayment is a disaster in the making. We continually hear from the Left about the era of FDR and the plaudits accorded him by the Democrats. We also hear from the Right about how FDR did not help us out of the depression, but instead, WWII intervened and saved the day.

Can it be that both contentions are right? For my friends on the Right, I would tell them that as noble as the war effort was, it was still a gigantic government-spending project. The government transformed into one huge customer for every conceivable type of product. The purchases by the government sent unemployment down to 2% as factories manned up to produce the materials for war.

Neither the war nor the deficit spending effort by FDR was the saving grace for our economy though. Immediately after the war, we were in debt and the demand for war materials all but stopped. This put the people back onto the streets for a brief time. The war's aftermath really ended the depression. Instead of returning to the depression, as you would expect after the government stopped buying war materials, the war had created a pent-up demand for goods and services that were unavailable because of the war. Factories couldn't convert back to peacetime output fast enough to satisfy the demand.

This from --
http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/tassava.WWII

"At a macroeconomic scale, the war not only decisively ended the Great Depression, but created the conditions for productive postwar collaboration between the federal government, private enterprise, and organized labor, the parties whose tripartite collaboration helped engender continued economic growth after the war. The U.S. emerged from the war not physically unscathed, but economically strengthened by wartime industrial expansion, which placed the United States at absolute and relative advantage over both its allies and its enemies."

Not only was the demand high domestically, but the United States was practically the only industrialized nation that was physically unscathed by the war. A decimated Europe, Japan, Russia, and England put the manufacturing ability of the United States in high demand. With her newfound status as supplier to the world, the United States was able to dig out from under the mountain of debt that had accumulated over the past two decades.

Large multi-national corporations evolved from the ashes of the depression. The United States became the economic juggernaut of the world.

When I declared that both the Left and the Right were correct with their statements, each only tells one-half of a story.

The government released wage and price controls after the war and enabled our industries to flourish once again as private enterprises. The Marshall Plan helped foreign economies and gave them the ability to purchase American goods. And G.I. plans helped the returning soldiers to purchase houses and to continue with their education. Another important piece to the puzzle was that the infrastructure of our industries was good because of the war effort. The war and its aftermath produced an almost perfect storm for an economic boom in the United States.

You can conclude that the war and its aftermath created the environment that gave us the ability to manage the deficits that we accumulated. But the conditions we face now do not have the same miracle attached to it as the conditions at the end of WWII. We are no longer the world's supplier of goods. Our export deficits, loss of a manufacturing base, and government regulations have made us into the world's largest debtor nation.

The U.S. today is akin to a man with his paycheck. His money has been spent and leveraged out with debt for many years to come. The U.S. is now facing debt as far as the eye can see. If we as a Nation do not get a handle on our economy soon, we will fail as a nation.

Cheers,

-Robert-

The War Against Blacks

2009-05-21T16:33:00.000-07:00

It gets little attention, but an effort to control the Black population is thriving. This effort is a blight on the human race. True, we have elected an African descended person to the presidency, but the all out push by Liberals to elect an Afro-American President is just cover for a very sinister agenda.

The effort to control the Black population is carried out on several fronts. One of the most effective tools is population control of Blacks using Malaria as the executioner. Malaria was promoted to main executioner because of a book written by Rachel Carson called the "Silent Spring". Rachel Carson was a marine biologist/writer whose book made a case against pesticides and the dangers they posed against animals.

This from Wikipedia about the impact of the book: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Carson

"In the late 1950s, Carson turned her attention to conservation and the environmental problems caused by synthetic pesticides. The result was Silent Spring (1962), which brought environmental concerns to an unprecedented portion of the American public. Silent Spring spurred a reversal in national pesticide policy—leading to a nationwide ban on DDT and other pesticides—and the grassroots environmental movement the book inspired led to the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency. Carson was posthumously awarded the Presidential Freedom Medal by Jimmy Carter."

I have no problem with the work of Rachel Carson. She was a dedicated person and worked tirelessly on behalf of the animal kingdom. But, her book inspired others to crusade against one of the most beneficial and economical pesticides we have ever used - DDT.

The crusaders made DDT a political issue and were responsible for the eventual banning of DDT. DDT was made the boogey-man for breast cancer, bird eggshell thinning, and uterine cancer. All of which have been debunked by science, but public hysterics over these issues forced the ban on DDT. Even today, the public believes that DDT was, and is a bad and harmful chemical.

As it turned out, DDT was the main weapon against Malaria in Africa and other tropical countries. DDT was an effective and economical weapon against Malaria by killing the mosquitoes that spread the disease. DDT was helping, not hurting humanity by preventing a terrible ravaging disease from decimating the Black population and others in tropical climates.

There were those who knew the truth about DDT but wanted to capitalize on the results of banning DDT. These were political elites of the Liberal movement. Their efforts solidified the beliefs of an already hysterical population that DDT was bad. Because of public sentiment about DDT, Western cultures threatened to ban the exports of any nations that used DDT for pest control.

This left little choice to those Sub Saharan African countries. They were already dirt poor, and if they could not sell their meager exports, their suffering would be multiplied many times over. So, with a gun to their head, they tried other chemicals and methods of prophylactic measures against the disease. The new chemicals were mostly just expensive and did little to help their plight. Millions upon millions die because of the now uncontrolled ravages of Malaria.

The WHO (World Health Organization) approved the use of DDT for specific applications such as painting the walls of homes and with mosquito netting. It was welcome news by the affected countries because of its proven effectiveness against mosquitoes. But just yesterday I received an update from AFM (Africa Fighting Malaria) with this pronouncement:

DDT Update
The United Nations' Retreat From Science in Controlling Malaria

AFM's Roger Bate writes in The New Ledger, "For two years the United Nations paid lip service to the truth that the insecticide DDT is a vital component of malaria control, but last week UN abandoned science in favor of superstition. The result is UN promotion of more dangerous and less efficient malaria control techniques. On May 5th, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Environment Program announced plans to reduce DDT use by 30% by 2014 and completely eliminate it by around 2020. In the mean time, the UN will roll out initiatives in 40 countries to test non-chemical methods of malaria control. In particular UN wants to scale up the programs of Central America, which have relied on "pharmacosuppression". Essentially, uninfected people in high-risk locations are given the antimalarial drug chloroquine to suppress any future infection. In 2004, 3,400 malaria cases were diagnosed in Mexico, 6,897 in Nicaragua, and almost half a million in Brazil. But both Mexico and Nicaragua each distrib
uted more anti-malaria pills (mostly chloroquine pills) than Brazil. Chloroquine is a wonderful drug at combating malaria and has saved millions of lives when used therapeutically, as in Brazil,, but prophylactic use is not safe because it is quite toxic and has led to heart problems when used repeatedly. As scientists at the University of Colima in Mexico explained last year, chloroquine "can induce lethal ventricular arrhythmias." Ironically, chloroquine is only slightly less toxic than DDT yet people have to eat chloroquine pills, they don't eat DDT."

For those interested in this sad tale of frustration by those suffering at the hands of the same phony science that gives us 'Global Warming', subscribe to their newsletter at africa@fightingmalaria.org --learn and see a real life tragedy unfold before you monthly.

One of the other weapons against the Black community is the use of abortion. Other than needing their vote, the same people who claim brotherhood and protector of Blacks are systematically eradicating Black newborns. Read the following from Rev. Childress. If you have any doubts about why the Liberals are so insistent about maintaining abortion on demand, you may want to rethink the BS that they espouse. Abortion is a tool to help control Black population.

Abortion's Blackest Secret: First from Planned Parenthood---

"We do not want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the (Black) minister is the man who can straighten that idea out if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members."
Margaret Sanger
Founder, Planned Parenthood
________________________
Answer from: Reverend Clenard H. Childress Jr.

"Although black women constitute only 6% of the population, they comprise 36% of the abortion industry’s clientele. The leading abortion providers have chosen to exploit blacks by locating 94% of their abortuaries in urban neighborhoods with high black populations.

This high rate of abortion has decimated the black family and destroyed black neighborhoods to the detriment of society at large.

1,452 African-American children are killed each day by the heinous act of abortion.

3 out of 5 pregnant African-American women will abort their child.
"...For those of you that don't know, Barack Obama became a "minister" of Planned Parenthood a long time ago. He's so good at carrying out their racist, murderous, agenda against Afro-Americans and society at large, they gave him a 100% score on his voting record.

Planned Parenthood is following the strategy of their racist founder, Margaret Sanger, to the letter. Planed Parenthood is saying, “We have our poster boy!

Get him out in front as a lure for their women and men. Get them into our abortion clinics and dismember their children by the millions!”

You say absurd? No Way!
Planned Parenthood’s Valentine cards were sent out to hundreds of thousands of young people in the nation.

Whose face is plainly seen waving to them with a big smile?

Whose endorsement is given to this racist and calloused organization?

Who is used to lure children to give credibility to its hideous plot?

Barack Obama, that's who!..."

By Rev. Clenard H. Childress Jr.,
March 5, 2008
http://www.blackgenocide.org/obama.html

In the United States, the Democrats solidify their partnership with the Blacks by discouraging their success and keeping them dependent upon crumbs from Washington. Is there no reason why the Black Man feels like he has no hope? He keeps investing his one tool, his vote, into the vacant promises of the Left. But the Left does not intend to allow Blacks to succeed. Obama is just a showpiece to keep Blacks pacified.

I apologize to the true believers in Obama. You were sold a phony bill of goods. The Socialist elites pull the strings and stir the passions of a leader-starved population. But the Obama revolution is showing signs of disappointment and it will get worse as time advances. It is not in the cards for the USA to become a Socialist Left country. People love freedom too much to allow it. Failure is also a birthright, not everybody can rise to the same level, but by effort and lessons learned from our failures, we can be all that we can if allowed to do so. That is freedom. Freedom means that we all have the same opportunity to make our fortune, but no guarantees on an outcome, the outcome of our efforts depend on us.

Genocides such as the one in Dar fur or Rwanda continue in Africa while a 'civilized' world just watches. People in the Malaria ravaged countries suffer and die in their thousands while being denied the most effective pesticide that would help. And finally, we in the USA allow abortion to thin out their population and uphold abortion as a right.

The war against Blacks continues -- one day, they will remember.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Sunspots and Earths Temperature

2009-05-13T06:35:00.000-07:00

Is there a connection between the Earth's temperature and Sunspots? Sooner or later, real science will have to come to grips and face the facts that it is the Sun's energy, and not CO2, that has been driving the temperature increases of the Earth. The CO2 theory is a fashionable political event, but has very minor, if anything to do with the increase in Earth temperature. (About 1degree in the last 100 years.)

The following graph maps out the Earth's mean and monthly temperature variations since 1880. I marked off the divisions of the Solar cycles so you could make a determination about the effects of Solar activity against the temperature anomalies. The bar-chart is from NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) and this link will take you to their website.

I had to use separate graphs so you could see the different cycles and make the comparisons to the temperature chart. There wasn't room to make an all-in-one comprehensive chart so a little navigating on your part between the solar cycles and the temperature chart will be necessary. All charts and photos are clickable to see the full size of them and it may be necessary to see the full size temperature chart to fully appreciate it.

As you look at the mean temperature chart, you will immediately see that the temperature anomaly has went from colder to hotter over the years since 1870. The CO2 advocates would look at the same chart and see it as proof that the Earth has been warming because of the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere. But not so fast -- What they have been missing is that the Activity of the Sun has been increasing during the same time-period and sorry folks, our minor CO2 discharges are not making the Sun increase its output.

Now, look at the Sun's activities. Solar storms have been increasing in size, number and intensity for the past several decades and the increase in energy output from the Sun has not only warmed our planet but others as well. Mars has also increased in temperature and that is certainly not a result of Earth CO2.

I delineated the places where each solar cycle fits on the Temperature chart so you can easily see where each solar cycle fits on the Temperature chart.

Solar Cycle charts are from the archives of http://www.solen.info/solar/ You can also go to that website and monitor the daily activities of the Sun. The site is updated each night and stays current with everything you might want to know about the Sun's activities.

One bright side, the last two solar cycles have been diminishing and because of that, the Earth's present cooling trend will continue. If I lived in the northern half of the U.S., I would be dusting off my long johns and stocking up on firewood (electricity may not be as reliable as in the past) as they are going to come in mighty handy for the foreseeable future.

Hope this helps with your understanding about the warming phenomenon. There is one last passing thought that I will share with you -- it is about the Earth's magnetic field. It has been diminishing. The magnetic field protects us from harmful rays emanating from the Sun. Since 1829 we have lost 14% of that field. There has been speculation that it is also contributing to our global warming as more energy can squeak through the weakened field and interact with the Earth. We need more research on that one, but it is out there.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Drawing Conclusions

2009-05-10T08:37:00.000-07:00

It is becoming more of a challenge to present good quality information to the readers of my articles. Just to highlight the problem of the research involved, here is an example of what I typically find at supposedly reputable websites. I was doing research on the oceans about how they absorb and discharge CO2 for an article that I am writing. But even from such venerable places as the Scripps Institution of Oceanography you find agenda laden information that is clearly meant to skew public thinking about 'global warming'.

I excerpted a couple of paragraphs from an article found on the Scripps' website for those of you who do not scour the web in search of unbiased information. It is amazing the different directions thought can lead when armed with just a few facts.

First, read the excerpted paragraphs from the article found on the Scripps' website. I also encourage you to follow the link provided to read the full article; there is a lot of good and useful information in spite of its agenda orientation. My comments will continue after you read the following from the Scripps' article.

Carbonated Oceans

An overload of carbon dioxide is acidifying seawater, posing a subtle but profound threat to marine invertebrates.

March 2009
By Robert Monroe

"The acidity of the water in Fabry's lab had been ratcheted up to levels that might not be seen until the end of the century, but she and other scientists fear that ongoing acidification of ocean water could be causing a slow-motion destruction of ocean ecosystems now.

The loading of carbon dioxide into oceans is a consequence of fossil fuel use that has only begun to be widely recognized as problematic in the past decade. Its subsequent effects on seawater chemistry have the potential to spread ecological disaster to a variety of industries dependent on the seas."

:: © 2009 Scripps Institution of Oceanography , University of California, San Diego. All Rights Reserved

First, there are facts to bolster the claims that show certain areas of the world's oceans with a decrease in the Ph of the seawater but the data is sketchy at best. Also, he doesn't cite any values, or even if the ocean water is in fact acidic. The acidification process stated is correct with respect for the creation of carbonic acid. But please notice the conclusion drawn by the author with no facts to bolster his assertions.

1.) The CO2 helping to lower the Ph of the oceans is from the burning of fossil fuels. This is pure propaganda. I would like to see the Ouija board that he uses to determine if the molecule of CO2 came from fossil fuel use or other natural processes.

2.) The Fabry's lab statement refers to an experiment where they acidized water in a tank and saw decay of marine shell. What did they expect? The calcium carbonate of the marine shells is an acid neutralizer. It is like taking a Tums to quiet the acid in your stomach. (Tums are also mostly calcium carbonate.)

3.) Man's contribution to the total CO2 is only 3% of the total atmospheric CO2. The Oceans are the gatekeepers for most of the rest of the atmospheric CO2.

Omissions about the sources for atmospheric CO2 are glaringly obvious. Yes, man's burning of fossil fuels accounts for the larger share of man's CO2 guilt. But mankind also takes millions of tons of marine life out of the oceans. That also has a direct bearing on the chemical status of the oceans. Normally, when a marine animal dies, its chemical properties remain in the ocean. But, when harvested for human consumption, those properties are lost to the oceans, and the CO2 from the consumption or decay of these harvested marine animals goes into the atmosphere.

It is important to remember that all of those harvested clams, oysters, lobsters, and other shellfish remains (calcium carbonate) would normally be left in the oceans to help neutralize any acidification of the world's oceans, but these harvested marine animals wind up in landfills.

No, I am not trying to say, "Don’t eat seafood." Just wanting to point out that Mr. Monroe's piece is just another biased piece in a lame attempt to demonize the use of fossil fuels. The exact cause of lower Ph readings of certain areas of the world's oceans is not known. Nor do we have any historical records that tell us whether the process is just a normal function of the oceans. The most significant increase in world atmospheric CO2 is the temperature rise of the oceans. As the ocean temperature increases, its solubility for CO2 decreases and releases more CO2 into the atmosphere. The most recent data suggest that the world's oceans are cooling and if the trend continues, we can expect the CO2 expansion to stop and eventually reverse as solubility for CO2 increases.

Another hair-brained scheme for "saving the world" is the use of ethanol. One of the results of this boondoggle was the loss of tropical forests. The indigenous people of poor tropical countries would harvest the old forests and replace them with palm nut trees for making ethanol. I am all for helping the planet and being a good steward of our resources, but a little thought has to go into unwanted consequences. Careening headlong into poorly planned 'solutions' hurts a lot more than it helps.

Also, as the demand for more lithium to make batteries continues to increase, there is an environmental disaster in the making. I do not want to discourage the use of lithium batteries; I only want some thought going into the project before it becomes another crisis to have to manage with yet another ill-conceived 'quick fix'.

If you are a person who likes to find out anything from the web, do not rely on any single source. Look up contrarian information as well. Your worldview will increase in the process. (Be less narrow minded.)

Cheers,

-Robert-

Freedom to Fail

2009-05-05T00:23:00.001-07:00

Ahhh, the engine of prosperity! It seems that everybody has a different way to shape that engine for the better. We tend to be divided into two different groups, the Conservative group and the Liberal group.

The Conservative group proclaims their idea of freedom is the ability to do as they want according to their ambitions. Those with less ambition achieve a smaller piece of life's pie, while the motivated among us get the big pieces. And in a purely capitalistic society, this divide between the ambitious and the not so ambitious becomes a reality. A society adopting such an unfettered system of Capitalism ultimately fails. The cancer of poverty among those living within the system only grows because the wealth of that society accumulates to the few. Ultimately, in such a system, those with the money and power choke off those avenues of upward mobility by others. The result is a Society that has two distinct groups, the very wealthy, and the very poor.

But, lest we forget, there is also merit in a risk-reward type of Society. Granted, there is a lot of bad in a purely capitalistic system, but preserving the good from this type of system and creating boundaries that will not allow naked greed to crowd out opportunity for the rest of the members of our society is the challenge.

This is the challenge accepted by those who follow the Liberal philosophical path. Just like Capitalism, there are problems as well as virtues. Both systems, when extended to their limits build a type of elitist aristocracy. Liberals build boundaries that are so onerous to enterprise, that they destroy the can-do attitude and ultimately the incentive to create new things and businesses. The resulting society moves backwards from lack of motivation.

What to do is the question. Finding a path that takes the good from both systems and by fiat leave the bad parts behind is the controversy raging in Washington as we speak. Both sides of the spectrum want things done their way.

Both systems, depending upon which is in power, exhibit the same characteristics. Political patronage, corruption, and the quest for omnipotence are all components of the same drug. Each side excoriates the other in their quest for power. But this piece is only concerned with the bigger picture and not with the localized infighting of the individuals who make up our Government.

A democratically elected Government will naturally interfere with both philosophies. The beauty of a democratically elected Government is that eventually, we will as a Society process the good, bad and ugly and ultimately discard those things that hurt us.

Right now, the Liberal philosophy controls the Government. The Conservatives do not possess the votes to prevent whatever policies put forward, so in a real sense, this is a test for the Liberal philosophy. If it succeeds, the voters will go 'yea' and want to continue with the same. But failure is also a real possibility.

I wanted to make failure the centerpiece of this article because it is failure that is the great teacher for all things. Failure is a humbling experience. If the present Liberal Government, with all of their policies enacted fails to solve our problems, then the American people will have learned just how far we as a nation can take this country to the left. We already have a boundary for how far right we can go. We learned those lessons during the late 1800's and early 1900's and we know that we do not want to return to such oppression. But the left extreme is about to be tested. The Obama administration is on a path to test that boundary.

Take hope all of you worried that the demise of America is imminent. This is a strong country with everybody rooting for her to succeed. It is my firm belief that we will eventually get to choose the good parts of both liberal and conservative philosophies and adapt them into a meaningful system. No, it may not happen overnight, but believers in their philosophies are not dumb and will recognize and boot out those bad elements that create chaos for us. Our future political arguments will lessen in their seriousness and be no more important than which way toilet paper should come off the roll, from the top or from under the roll.

We do live in a sea of freedom. We can choose our direction and will learn only through our mistakes, but this is freedom. Some things sound too good to not try them. Take heart everybody.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Fat Thoughts

2009-05-02T05:10:00.001-07:00

If you are not fat or have never been fat, congratulations. Having just undergone a bariatric by-pass procedure to prevent the train wreck that I was headed for - made me more contemplative about being fat.

There is only one upside to being fat -- you are experiencing the joys of unabated eating. Everything else is downhill from there. I want to pencil in some of the little discussed attributes of being fat. Hopefully, if you are heading into the wind with overeating, you might want to rein in some of those belly-bursting meals because the results to your body are not so pleasant. The stereotypical portrayal of the jolly fat person is a myth. (Except at eating time.)

Listed below in no particular order are just a few of the handicaps a moderately fat person will encounter. Note that things are much worse for the real heavyweights -- 400+ pounds, so this list does not generally apply to them. But for those who are potential candidates for obesity, please take heed. This is what your future holds.

1.) Tying your shoe laces. I know it doesn't sound like much, but when you can't bend in the middle very well, it can be a real problem. Usually, since you can't bend over, you have to be sitting down and try and get a leg crossed over the other one so you can reach your shoe. Even then, the knot does not center up on the shoe but will hang on the side nearest to where you can reach. Fat people find shoe tying a real problem.

2.) Cleaning yourself after toilet. Somehow, even with a fistful of toilet paper, you have to manage to reach around all that added girth to reach the area to be cleansed. It can be a daunting chore at times. For the sake of nicety, I won't go into details, but rather leave it up to your imagination as to the trouble with manipulating toilet paper when you can just barely reach your tail.

3.) The dickey-do for a man is one of the first signs that you are getting too fat. The phrase first coined by a comic, references your belly when it sticks out more than your dickey-do. It can get so bad that you have to look into a mirror to be able to see your private parts.

4.) Penis loss is another manifestation of being fat. (Sorry ladies, I can only relate the male side of what happens.) Penis loss happens because as you get fat, it accumulates in stages. But with each successive stage, another roll of fat adds to the last roll of fat and gradually hides your manhood. You haven't actually lost anything, the penis is just swallowed up by the accumulation of fat.

5.) Damaged joints join the parade of afflictions encountered by the fat person. Torn meniscus in the knees and hip problems make walking and especially getting up and down a problem. In fact, it takes so much effort to get up and down that you limit activities that you would normally enjoy. The decrease in physical activity adds to the problem because you burn fewer calories, but maintain the same caloric intake as if you were active. (You get even fatter.)

6.) Then there are the afflictions of having the workload of the heart increased. Are you aware that for every pound you add, there is an increase in the veins, arteries, and capillaries through which your heart has to pump blood? Most overweight people experience high-blood-pressure. Up until now, the only added expense to us was the food cost, but now we have to worry about having to buy pills to control blood pressure. High blood pressure is a killer.

7.) Diabetes is next on the list of maladies from being fat. If your pancreas is overworked and cannot produce enough insulin to help break down sugars, the sugar increases in the blood. High blood sugar can affect most things that happen in our body leading to everything from kidney failure to loss of limbs and death.

Okay, I'll stop but you get the idea. Just remember, nobody is immune from the seduction of overeating. I will guess that everybody's situation is different but in my case, I can honestly say that every diet that I ever tried, worked. The problem I had with dieting was in maintaining the weight loss after the diet becomes intolerable. For instance, one of my favorite diets was the cabbage soup diet. This diet was simple because all you had to do was take the vitamins you needed but it allowed all the cabbage soup you wanted to eat. In fact, you could gorge yourself with cabbage soup and still lose weight if you followed the plan. Cabbage soup is okay at first, but even changing the taste from spicy to normal and using different broths doesn't overcome the desire for different foods.

I finally gave up with diets and with my heft of almost 300 lbs. I sought out a bariatric specialist. Already using heart medications, diabetes medications, and endured a surgery to my right knee, I underwent a by-pass operation to prevent the calamity for which I was headed. In my next article, I will describe my operation and how it changed my life.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Dodging Rocks

2009-04-28T20:39:00.000-07:00

I wrote the piece below these comments with the fervent hope that the abuse in the credit card business would gain a little more notoriety. But from the response I received from my readers, I might as well have danced on the grave of Jesus. So for all of you rock ribbed conservatives, this message is for you.

The first thing that I would tell you is to stand up for what is right. Forget about what you cannot change. Especially now that Specter has changed parties, stopping any legislation that we don't like is not going to happen. But if we want to earn the credibility of the voters, we have to at least stand against abuse such as is going on in the credit card industry.

Oppose the legislation that you deem to be bad for the country, but stand up and be counted for legislation that will actually help us.

Not only will you be doing your party a favor, but will not appear to just be anti-everything. People have to stand for something and not be against everything.

It is impossible for any party with the political power that the Democrats have to not over-step and make things worse for everybody. But I want to tell you to keep your powder dry until we get the results in from Obama's far-reaching policies. There is not the first thing we can do besides gripe and carp about his agenda. But griping and carping only makes you and we sound like a bunch of sore losers who are out of touch with the majority who supports Obama and his policies.

There is going to be plenty of time to remind the Democrats that they were wrong. Since Conservatives are in a weakened position at the present, there is no reason to keep our panties in a wad over what we cannot change. So when Obama does something good, do not be afraid to admit it. As stated above, you will only gain credibility because of it, and people will pay more attention when you say something is wrong.

It is a personal belief of mine that the Democrats will have to damage themselves. Paying for their agenda will put a terrible yoke of debt on the private sector and out of the ashes; the Republicans will have the opportunity to win public support again.

In case you don't remember my previous writing about where the Government gets its money, let me remind you. Federal employees pay no taxes; their total take is from the treasury. The military pays no taxes for the same reason. State employees do not help the state coffers for the same reason. There are approximately 2 million prisoners that pay no taxes and several million retirees that pay no taxes. (The Social Security bunch)

That only leaves the private sector to carry the load.

Illegal immigrants do not pay federal income taxes, and further, cripple us with debt out the whazoo for public support. (Health care, education etc.) The small amount of sales taxes they pay does not come anywhere near paying for the services they receive.

When the Government sells debt to foreign countries, they own us. We already have to kiss the ass of some of our foreign creditors to get them to buy more of our debt.

So cheer up, there is going to be a day of reckoning for the Liberal agenda. Let us just hope the damage isn't so severe that we are permanently crippled.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Credit Run Amok

Your credit standing today means the difference in being able to own a car, home, or other consumer items or not have them. Most wage earners do not have the cash on hand to make a major purchase, so by means of the credit card; we leverage our future earnings by borrowing from one of the credit card issuers.

So far so good, as long as your job holds out and you don't skip on your payments. I was one who understood the need for a higher interest rate if it meant that a wider segment of our population could have credit according to their income and ability to pay. But the evolution of the fee based credit card has literally stolen from our most vulnerable citizens.

This from nclc (National Consumer Law Center) describes the outrages by various banks.

"Millions of consumers are being victimized by “credit” card offers that charge hundreds of dollars in fees and extend minimal available credit – sometimes as little as $50. These cards, which we call “fee harvester” cards, share a common thread: high fees that eat up most of an already low credit limit, leaving the consumer with little real, useable credit and at a high price.

One card featured in the NCLC report comes with a credit limit of $250. However, the consumer who signs up for this card will automatically incur a $95 program fee, a $29 account set-up fee, a $6 monthly participation fee, and a $48 annual fee – an instant debt of $178 and buying power of only $72"

I encourage you to read the full report at the above link.

Even as a conservative, I appreciate the efforts of Obama to drain this swamp of charlatans. Not all credit card issuers are guilty but all have contrived fees above their already high interest rates. In the example above, provided by the NCLC, "fee harvesting" credit issuers use almost all-available credit with fees. Little is left for the consumer to buy anything. Fee harvesting is literally a license to steal from the vulnerable that can least afford such exorbitant fees.

Remember, it is not only the sub-prime market affected by these shady practices. The card issuers raise their interest rate without notification, charge exorbitant late fees, and even lower your credit line for reasons that only the card issuers understand.

Obama should be applauded for his efforts to correct a bad situation for all of us. I have heard that by his clamping down on these practices that commerce will suffer. What?? The only business that will be affected is bad business. Credit card issuers will no longer be able to give credit to unworthy borrowers (via the fee system), and by shrinking their risk, save us all some money. The status quo is not an acceptable option.

This issue has nothing to do with 'Socialism', but instead, has everything to do with leveling the playing field for millions of people.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Middle Ground

2009-04-20T06:24:00.000-07:00

Lest anyone forget, whether you are on the right or on the left, the political middle ground has always been a moving target. What is considered middle ground today would have been 'far-left' in the 1920's. And the middle ground of the 1920's would be 'far right' by today's standards. The pendulum pointing to the middle ground has swung to the left since the late 1800's.

For those of you who may not recall conditions in the late 1800's through the early 1900's, that era of greed and avarice paved the way for transitioning to the left. During that period of time, workers, both child and adults were treated horribly by a non-caring American aristocracy. Risk/reward was out of whack as the industrialist of that era sought more and more power. Concern for the person who was trying to feed his family, was whittled to such low standards by those industrialists that it took several bloody strikes and finally Federal and state laws to help reign in the power of corporations.

One of the largest concerns was the low wages paid to individuals. The pay was so small that a family had to rely on all members to earn a living. Child labor abuse was rampant during this period. By 1899, 44 states and territories had a child labor law of some type.

Twenty-four states had minimum age limits for manufacturing employment by 1900, with age limits around 14 years in the Northeast and Upper Midwest, and no minimums at all in most of the South. Keating-Owen Act of 1916 regulated trade with goods made with child labor. Not tremendously effective but it was a step in the right direction.

I mention these tidbits of history to make the point that unbridled capitalism fosters a type of greed that is detrimental to the society and an oppressor of its citizens.

The same destruction happens with the far left end of the political stick. Countries without the risk/reward element in their makeup suffer from a social malaise that the government, no matter how well intentioned, can correct. Supply and demand has to regulate industrial output as opposed to quotas. For a nation to thrive, it needs a good healthy private sector.

Governments have tried to maintain the private sector, and at the same time, prevent ambition from harming the society. All developed nations learned the lessons of the late 1800's of how destructive unbridled greed can be. But finding that 'middle ground' has proven to be a tricky tight rope to walk for most nations and they generally get it wrong.

One of the more popular methods of keeping ambition at bay is the tax. Taxation can be a useful tool only if the tax doesn't become a personal means to an end. Politicians like to use the tax system for their own aggrandizement. The politician has within his power to select winners and losers by the way that he manipulates the tax code, and those political decisions may rest upon how much money the interested parties have been willing to 'donate' to the politicians. Such corruption is very much a part of the political landscape today. Neither party is exempt from the tug of the promise of riches. Both parties have their weak sisters who willingly dirty their hands at the expense of good government.

Democrats blame the Republicans and Republicans blame the Democrats for the political corruption in Washington. It is like the pot calling the kettle black though. Good sense laws are all but impossible because of public corruption.

So where do we go with our grievances over the way the government is working? The time-tested method in the United States is with elections. It is at that time that we can both throw the bums out and install new faces, or we can elect to maintain the status quo. Sounds good, but does it accomplish the job intended?

In this day of mass media, it has been shown that media control also controls the passions of the populace. For better or worse, an impassioned electorate elects the government trumpeted by the mass media along the lines of the agenda they harbor. An emotional tidal wave washes a candidate into office and not clear logical thinking. It is just the way things are and not a complaint. However, we the people deserve better than the marketing and packaging of a candidate without proper scrutiny.

Today's candidates only come under intense scrutiny if he/she does not fit the agenda of the mass media. The opposition candidate gets every I dotted and every tee crossed, while the media trumpets the candidate they approve of with little inspection. It is a fairness issue, not to the candidates, but to the people.

Term limits would certainly help, but politicians are not likely to pass any such initiative.

I don't see the pendulum swinging back to the right any time soon. It will however swing back after the left has punished the private sector so much, that jobs and income become serious concerns. Liberals will ultimately punish wealth creation to the point that they become unpopular. As I said, the political middle is always a moving target. Our best hope is to maintain our democratic way of choosing a government. The democratic system we employ will always balance itself whenever tipped too far in any one direction.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Outraged

2009-04-14T21:19:00.000-07:00

Every once in a while a piece comes to me that needs no further clarification or conclusions about it. This is one such piece sent to me by my cousin. Most of us feel like this woman. After reading the letter, ask yourself if you feel the same way that she does. If you do, then attending one of the many "Tea parties" may be a first step in taking our country back.

oooOOOooo

This letter was sent to the Wall Street Journal on August 8, 2008 by Alisa Wilson, Ph.D. Of Beverly Hills , CA . in response to the Wall Street Journal article titled "Where's The Outrage?" that appeared July 31,2008.

"Really, I can tell you where the outrage is. The outrage is here, in this middle-aged, well-educated, upper-middle class woman. The outrage is here, but I have no representation, no voice. The outrage is here, but no one is listening for who am I?

I am not a billionaire like George Soros that can fund an entire political movement.

I am not a celebrity like Barbra Streisand that can garner the attention of the press to promote political candidates.

I am not a film maker like Michael Moore or Al Gore that can deliver misleading movies to the public.

The outrage is here, but unlike those with money or power, I don't know how to reach those who feel similarly in order to effect change.

Why am I outraged? I am outraged that my country, the United States of America , is in a state of moral and ethical decline. There is no right or wrong anymore, just what's fair.

Is it fair that millions of Americans who overreached and borrowed more than they could afford are now being bailed out by the government and lending institutions to stave off foreclosure? Why shouldn't these people be made to pay the consequences for their poor judgment?

When my husband and I purchased our home, we were careful to purchase only what we could afford. Believe me, there are much larger, much nicer homes that I would have loved to have purchased. But, taking responsibility for my behavior and my life, I went with the house that we could afford, not the house that we could not afford. The notion of personal responsibility has all but died in our country.

I am outraged, that the country that welcomed my mother as an immigrant from Hitler's Nazi Germany and required that she and her family learn English now allows itself to be overrun with illegal immigrants and worse, caters to those illegal immigrants.

I am outraged that my hard-earned taxes help support those here illegally. That the Los Angeles Public School District is in such disarray that I felt it incumbent to send my child to private school, that every time I go to the ATM, I see "do you want to continue in English or Spanish?", that every time I call the bank, the phone company , or similar business, I hear "press 1 for English or press 2 for Spanish". WHY? This is America , our common language is English and attempts to promote a bi- or multi-lingual society are sure to fail and to marginalize those who cannot communicate in English.

I am outraged at our country's weakness in the face of new threats on American traditions from Muslims. Just this week, Tyson's Food negotiated with its union to permit Muslims to have Eid-al-Fitr as a holiday instead ofLabor Day. What am I missing? Yes, there is a large Somali Muslim population working at the Tyson's plant in Tennessee . Tennessee , last I checked, is still part of the United States . If Muslims want to live and work here they should be required to live and work by our American Laws and not impose their will on our long history.

In the same week, Random House announced that they had indefinitely delayed the publication of The Jewel of Medina, by Sherry Jones, a book about the life of Mohammed's wife, Aisha due to fear of retribution and violence by Muslims. When did we become a nation ruled by fear of what other immigrant groups want? It makes me so sad to see large corporations cave rather than stand proudly on the principles that built this country.

I am outraged because appeasement has never worked as a political policy, yet appeasing Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is exactly what we are trying to do. An excellent article, also published recently in the Wall Street Journal, went through over 20 years of history and why talking with Iran has been and will continue to be ineffective. Yet talk, with a madman no less, we continue to do. Have we so lost our moral compass and its ability to detect evil that we will not go in and destroy Iran 's nuclear program? Would we rather wait for another Holocaust for the Jews - one which they would be unlikely to survive? When does it end?

As if the battle for good and evil isn't enough, now come the Environmentalists who are so afraid of global warming that they want to put a Bag tax on grocery bags in California; to eliminate Mylar balloons; to establish something as insidious as the recycle police in San Francisco. I do my share for the environment: I recycle, I use water wisely, I installed an energy efficient air conditioning unit.--But when and where does the lunacy stop? Ahmadinejad wants to wipe Israel off the map, the California economy is being overrun by illegal immigrants, and the United States of America no longer knows right from wrong, good from evil. So what does California do? Tax grocery bags.

So, America ,although I can tell you where the outrage is, this one middle-aged, well-educated, upper middle class woman is powerless to do anything about it. I don't even feel like my vote counts because I am so outnumbered by those who disagree with me."

Alisa Wilson, Ph.D.
Beverly Hills , California

No further comment needed,
Cheers,

-Robert-

Lazy Reverends and Preachers

2009-04-04T14:04:00.000-07:00

The cornerstone of Christianity is the relationship between a Church and its congregation. It is lamentable that the Church administrators and ministers are no longer out and about shoring up the faith of the faithful. Those wanting and needing spiritual guidance migrate to the mega-churches hoping for spiritual guidance, but it is a futile gesture. Mega-churches are all about money. There is no way that a person can benefit from a relationship with the pastor of such churches. The sheer size of the congregation makes any personal spiritual guidance impossible.

Gone are the days when the pastors of the local churches greeted newcomers in their area to encourage attendance to their respective churches. By ignoring possible new church members, the resident pastors lose these people either to others or to no church at all.

The church Budget is always a concern at local churches, but if its pastor is out doing the things he needs to be doing instead of brooding about money, the chances are good that he would be able to inspire his flock to new heights. It might even slow the gradual decay of our society.

This is not to ignore the responsibility of the Christian to seek out the church of choice whenever he/she moves into a new community, but the odds are better that they will attend if the local pastors take a more proactive position. The chances for both old and new citizens to become part of a local congregation grow exponentially when the local pastors get to know these individuals. They may not secure a new member the first time they meet, but a continuing effort by the pastor will gain the confidence of the prospective member. Remember, there comes a time when everybody needs spiritual help and guidance. And in those times, they will remember who has been seeking fellowship with them.

Absent any other refuge, the person may just drift without ever receiving the spiritual guidance needed. A shameful situation like that is avoidable if our Ministers and Pastors were just doing their job. A church needs to fire a lazy pastor that is continually concerned about money. Remember churchgoers, if your church services sound like a board of directors meeting instead of a spiritual awakening, you need to corner your pastor and tell him.

I visited a church not many Sundays ago and we listened the better part of that service about the need for increased funding for the 'Missionary Fund', the 'Building Fund', the 'Alms Box' for the poor, and Church expenses. I noticed quite a few empty seats in that Church, and yet, this pastor was building a large new facility. I am not against any of the needs that he spoke about, but with that many empty seats, I could tell that tending the flock was not his long suit.

Do not be afraid to dispose of a pastor who is not serving your church well, or who is instead trying to build an edifice to his fund-raising skills. What we as a Christian nation need now more than ever are pastors willing to do the Lord's work. Those other matters will take care of themselves when a pastor takes it upon himself to tend the needs of his congregation. There is a great spiritual need in this country and Christians from all over need to pay attention to it.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Credit to Obama

2009-03-31T22:02:00.000-07:00

While in a reflective mood, it came to me that Conservatives and Republicans alike share a lot of Obama's goals. No doubt, we would take different paths, but as a Conservative, I realize that until the political structure in this country changes, things are going to be done Obama's way. So I worked at finding positive things about what he is trying to accomplish. It makes no sense for any group that is not in power to keep their panties in a wad over what they cannot change. I know my readers will find this piece distasteful, but whether we want to believe it or not, we are all in this boat together. At the present, the majority does not support our ideas.

As it appears to me, Obama is acting neither on ideas that are shallow nor for any short time gain. One of those priorities is the reduction of our use of oil and other fossil fuels. His comprehensive goal is to reduce our demand by several means. Some of the first priorities is to get rid of the gas guzzling autos and use some of the new technologies like electric and alternative fuel. His plan for Detroit, aka GM and Chrysler includes the production of these vehicles. Next, he has taken steps that will curtail drilling and exploration for new oil in and around the United States.

Tax structures will send the prices for gasoline to high enough levels to force most hold outs with their SUV s and other gas-guzzlers to switch to the more economical vehicles. Deep down, I do not believe that he harbors some nefarious plan to destroy this country. Obama is only giving it a nudge to where market forces would eventually take us, but only after the price of oil is too high to use.

We are also starting to learn how to monitor the electrical energy that we use every day. The new technology could have beneficial results and we could potentially save a lot on energy. For instance, using electricity at certain times is less costly than at others. During peak demand times is a bad time to be adding more electrical load to the system. Learning to co-operate and use electricity less sporadically will help a lot with power generation. The new technologies will help us in that respect.

The reduction in our use of oil will also accomplish another good thing. Countries like Venezuela, Russia, and those in the Middle East will see their selling price for oil dwindle as the United States decreases its use of oil. By reducing our use of oil, we will gain the moral authority we need to persuade other countries to shed their dependence on oil. With the United States leading the way, our technologies on alternative sources will be in demand and possibly reinvigorate our economy.

Remember, Obama is a true believer in anthropogenic global warming. For that reason, I do not believe that he is out to wreck this country as some of the other writers and pundits have stated. It also explains his insistence on the cap and trade policy, even though it will be very costly to the American consumer.

Will his plans work? I don't think there is a snowballs chance in Hell of them working without turning us into a Socialist country. But we shall see. Kudos to him if it works and we maintain our free enterprise system, but the Conservative side of me thinks he will overreach with all of the other items on his list. Energy independence alone would be a big item to accomplish without nationalizing healthcare and cap and trade. Those ideas are very contentious and divisive. We can do without such initiatives at this time. As to the roadwork and other infrastructure projects, that infrastructure work is both necessary and will be an investment in the future.

This is not a capitulation on my part, just a realization that any attempts to upstage Obama before his ideas have had the chance to mature would be counter-productive to any opposition group. Americans will continue to support him if he can show some progress with his efforts. American support is his shield against efforts to thwart him.

Cheers,

-Robert-

A Nation of Dummies

2009-03-27T23:20:00.001-07:00

It has become blatantly obvious to anybody observing. We live in a nation populated by historical, mathematical, geographical, political, and scientifically ignorant people. The ignorance of our population is only getting worse.

I have always found 'man on the street' questions to ordinary folks entertaining. Jay Leno has a segment every once in a while, and you can get a glimpse of what people know on the different quiz shows like 'Who Wants to be a Millionaire' and others. The questions asked of the people are simple such as, "Who is the Vice-President?" or "How many inches in a Meter?" It is truly amazing the percentage of people that do not know the answers and most have absolutely no idea.

But asking pop-culture questions hits the jackpot. They hardly ever miss questions about songs, movies, or games. They know how to use their gadgets (cell phones, X-Boxes, or Wii's) but have no clue as to how their gadgets work. They can tell you the latest hits by most of the headliners, even the lyrics to most, but can't answer the simplest question of substance.

What has gone wrong? It is not a question of money. The average dollar spent per pupil is over $8,000.00 per year. The following are three states rated by the amount of money spent. The one that spends the most, one from the middle and the state that spends the least are rated by how well they are teaching math and reading skills. This information is from http://putourkidsfirst.com/kidsfirst/nat_reading.asp

Dollars/student:

1st New Jersey $11,793 ---, Spending per pupil - First in Spending

20th Minnesota $7,736---, Spending per pupil - Middle of the Pack

50th Utah with $4,900 ---, Spending per pupil - Spends the Least

How They Rank
Math:

1st Minnesota 44% rated above Basic Levels

13th New Jersey 33% rated above basic levels

20th Utah with 31% rated above basic levels

Reading:

7th Minnesota 37% above basic levels

13th New Jersey 36% above basic levels

29 Utah with 32% above basic levels

Does money make a difference? It is also notable that no state has a majority (over 50%) of their students above the basic levels. As you can see by the tables above, Utah spends the least amount of money per pupil, but ranks solidly in the middle of learning statistics among all 50 states.

If you click on the link above you will notice that those states with high minority populations consistently rank in the lower half of the statistics.

What do we do? Continuing with our dummy factories only has one outcome - more dummies. I am absolutely no authority but I have a wish list about educating our children. Parents are not parenting nor making sure that their children are doing the things necessary for an education. So first, we have to train the parents. A parent should be fined if a student does not have his/her homework on time, a child's truancy, misbehaving in class, and not following instructions. - Else, a parent should sign over to the school permission for the school to administer appropriate corporal punishment (spankings, extended exercise, corner standing, etc.) for intentional offenses that impede the child's education. The parent will hold the school harmless in all cases that do not rise to the level of injury, harassment, or sexual abuse of any stripe.

Education is a serious matter and the sooner we address it and solve the problems in our schools, the better. My ideas may not be the way to do it, but somebody needs to do something other than argue about the teacher's union, parents, poor teachers and all of the rest of the carping and playing the blame game. A good start would be to establish order in our schools. In the beginning, it might seem to be heavy handed but once the students realize that they will have to use the school as a place to learn instead of a social club, it will get better.

This piece is not meant to impugn the small percentage of students who do well in our public schools. This writing only calls attention to the majority of students who graduate functionally illiterate.

Please send me your thoughts on the subject,

Cheers,

-Robert-

Christianity Under Siege

2009-03-24T05:50:00.000-07:00

Your Tax Dollars at Work

2009-03-22T16:30:00.001-07:00

Watching television makes my blood boil anymore. Entrepreneurs seem to dominate the airways hawking their many methods of getting Uncle Sam to pay for things. It is no wonder that our taxes are sky-high.

Taxes: Are you behind on your taxes? Do you owe more than you can repay? Have you failed to file your taxes for several years? Hiring a tax lawyer can solve most of your problems with the IRS. The airways are full of ads from attorneys who for a fee will get your taxes settled for pennies on the dollar. Personally, I don't have any sympathy for tax-cheats. I think that everybody should pay their taxes and not try to wriggle out of it. It saves a lot of pain, anguish, and worry. Letting tax cheats off the hook hurts the rest of us. By not collecting those taxes, the Government may decide they need to raise taxes to make up for the lost revenue.

Blood Sugar Testing Supplies: Insurance companies want to nail the Government for you blood sugar testing supplies. They'll even kick in a free meter to be able to send a UPS truck around when you need more strips, lancets, or batteries for the meter. Why should the Government do this? My medical insurance pays for mine. All I needed was a prescription from my doctor. Medicare also provides for blood sugar testing supplies. So the question remains - why would I want to stick the Government with shipping and handling expenses to get these supplies sent to me from out of state.

Power chairs: Power chairs are another example of a way to pick the pockets of the Government. The purveyors of those motorized wheelchairs hold out the carrot of little or no expense to the chair recipient. It is a hard sell showing only the sunny side of having a power chair. What the commercials do not talk about is the need for assistance to go anywhere with the chair. The commercial shows people rolling happily around in their yard, the park, and the mall - but not a word about how the chairs get to those locations. The truth of the matter is that anybody wishing to just go into the back yard will need someone to help with the chair. Those chairs are heavy and can be unwieldy, even on a ramp.

Loading and unloading the chair from a vehicle can also be a hassle, especially if you cannot afford one of the electric lifts to raise the chair into the vehicle. Most just use a ramp, but again, the ramps need a strong person to help with the loading and unloading. Then the mobility challenged person also needs to be loaded in most cases. I am not trying to throw a wet blanket on the idea of a power chair, but getting the chair is only the start of many problems to solve. In many cases, the fold up wheel chair is better suited for a person's mobility outside of the home. They are light and easily handled by most grown-ups, and are more easily stored in a vehicle than a power chair.

As useful as a power chair may be to some, my position is that I do not think it is a Federal responsibility to furnish them. And believe me; getting a power chair is much like buying a boat. The buyer will find an endless parade of doo-dads to purchase in order to get the full value of the chair. Those extras are generally not part of the original purchase of the power chair.

But the sellers of these chairs have found willing financing through Medicare etc. And they milk it for all that it is worth.

The Racket of Student Loans: There was a time when student loans were about the most beneficial benefit around. But in the last decade or two our colleges and universities have taken advantage of it. Like all government programs from health care to college loans, the idea of educating or healing our citizens may have had the best of intentions, but the real losers were Americans. Government sponsored programs just bring out the greed in people. Colleges have put their prices so far out of reach of ordinary citizens that getting college degrees now means that the students have to take out government loans. Gone are the days when a person could work his or her way through school - the cost is just too much.

It is an arrangement that works well for Liberals. The Universities and colleges know where their money comes from and how to get more, so for their part; these institutions promote and produce brainwashed students in Liberalism. Colleges and Universities are the perfect place to take advantage of our young people because it is at that age that we are naturally idealistic.

Conclusion: Given enough time, we will have to give more to the government to meet our obligations. There is no limit to the number of hands out to receive this manna from the taxpayer. The government will consume everything in a few years and we will become a totalitarian state. Our once vaunted and admired population of self-reliant people will have become just another self-indulgent population wanting everything done for them.

President Obama is doing everything possible to hasten that day.
The surest way I know to save on taxes is to stop electing Democrats.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Wondering

2009-03-20T00:21:00.000-07:00

Responsibility: Ever wonder what has happened to being responsible? It seems that the whole nation has the 'wants' and is depending on 'others' to make their dreams come true. What happens when the 'others' get tired of propping up those with the 'wants'?

Global Warming: Have you been wondering why the Al Gore crowd changed their mantra from 'Global Warming' to 'climate change'? Could it be because the Earth is experiencing a cooling trend?

Wealth Creation: Ever wonder why it is so bad to have ambition and create wealth but perfectly acceptable to confiscate that wealth and give it to others?

Class Warfare: Ever wonder what to tell the 30% of our economy engaged in building and maintaining yachts, private jets, limousines, and other finery that depend on those jobs? Who needs the construction jobs that build and furnish such luxuries as penthouse apartments, or the tall buildings built by those greedy rich people? Democrats will no longer tolerate those mean heartless rich fat cats; they'll show them a thing or two.

The Greedy: Ever wonder who are really the greedy ones in our society? You don't suppose local, city, and state governments qualify - do you? Liberals understand that businesses want to stay in locations where there are plenty of taxes to help them lose their competitive edge. Did you ever travel through Gary, Indiana or Detroit, Michigan or New Orleans? These cities were all glittering jewels of commerce and activity before the Liberals took them over. You can tell the predominating politics of an area just by visiting. It is shocking how Liberals can devastate an area in such a short time. If their policies ever dominate nationally, the whole country will look like it does in Detroit, Gary, New Orleans or any of the many other places where Democrats hold sway in the local politics.

Religion: Ever wonder why Liberals are trying to stamp out God? Could it be that a self-indulgent public rejects decent behavior and they do not want the guilt for their disgusting lifestyles? Did you know that a lot of serious legal time and effort goes into preventing those dangerous manger scenes at Christmas time? Did you ever think that rejecting God may be at the heart of the chaos in our society?

Jobs: Ever wonder where all of the jobs are going to come from after Liberals kill the reward incentive for wealth creation? After the Obama Presidency, we may all have to move to China to get a job.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Our Shrinking Tax Base

2009-03-18T00:43:00.000-07:00

It's the numbers that are getting to be alarming. The Federal payroll is growing at an alarming rate and with every job added to the Federal payroll; we get another non-contributor to the tax rolls. Federal employees do not contribute to the treasury; in fact, their income is a drain on the treasury. Regardless of the importance of the job, a Federal job contributes nothing to the money that the Government needs to spend.

The numbers of Federal employees add to the others in our society who not contributing to the economy. Those groups include our prison population, social-security recipients (retirees), the military, and those on welfare. This is a large portion of our population and growing. The strain on the rest of society that is supporting this large aggregate of non-contributors is also growing.

There is a lot of talk about people's mortgages that are upside down, but when the number of contributors to the treasury dwindles to the point that they cannot keep up with the demand from the government, our society can look forward to the complete Socialization of our economy. This is scary stuff.

If you haven't heard, the Obama administration has allegedly given China the option of imminent domain over US territory as collateral for our debt that China holds. If true, Obama is mortgaging our country to satisfy his spending spree. The Chinese can see the trouble we are in and have demanded assurances that the dollar holds its value. There are a lot of blogs reporting that Hillary Clinton did in fact surrender the right to China to seize assets in the United States as part of an agreement that China would continue to hold and purchase our debt.

Snopes' is reporting that the claim is false and you can read their statements here: http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/domain.asp My problem with the Snopes' account is that their rebuttal is based on logic rather than produce proof for their stand.

To read the viewpoints from the perspective that Obama has made that agreement with China, do a search in Google using this search criterion. "US gives China option of imminent domain" I would give you a website to go to but there are so many that I did not want to choose. None of the sites listed are familiar to me so on that regard - caveat emptor. Also, keep in mind that the internet is full to the brimming with conspiracy nuts.

I only bring this to your attention because of the theme of today's article about the declining tax base. The policies that Obama is advocating will drive the value of the dollar down and can make us vulnerable to the Chinese demand for payment of our debt. If we continue to grow the government, then we will become a progressively poorer Nation. Our real wealth lies in our industriousness and our ability to produce. But we are rapidly losing that edge as we progress to the welfare state. The risk/reward incentive is undercut by the notion that life is not supposed to be challenging. --There is a limit to how long the prosperous among us will continue to tolerate the shenanigans of an ultra Liberal Government. It is a mathematical certainty that those we depend on now to finance the Government will seek and find greener pastures elsewhere. It is already happening on a small scale, but it will not take much for that trickle to become a torrent.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Property Taxes

2009-03-12T02:20:00.000-07:00

In 1973, I bought a house for $15,000. Payments which included an escrow for insurance and taxes were only $76.00 / month. I have borrowed via a second mortgage against the property, and kept it rented for 17 years. Those mortgages were paid off several years ago and now, the only expenses to pay on the house and property are the upkeep and taxes. The house is the same as when I bought it except for closing in the garage to make another bedroom, the occasional paint job, replacement of trim, and two roofs.

Today the property, for tax purposes, is estimated at $100,000. That’s a seven-fold increase in the 36 years that I have owned this property. Am I carping -- no, but just think about it. The house was 10 years old when I bought it. It was built to different standards than new houses and add to the mix, the foundation has settled, cracking the brick veneer outer walls. (2 very minor cracks) Looking at the house from a purely physical standpoint, the house is not as good as it once was, so it ought to be worth less, not more. The property the house sits on hasn't gained any girth so it is the same size.

The neighborhood was once a thriving middleclass area, but most of the houses are rental houses now and the middleclass have moved out to the burbs for newer digs. So what is it about this property that the county, city and state find so valuable?

I know that this story is not unique, but when you own a property in an area dominated by Democrats and Liberals, you can expect your housing appraisal to increase with regularity. By increasing the appraisal value, they can collect more taxes and make the claim that they haven't raised taxes. At least they can claim not to have raised the tax rate.

If I were still living in the house, other than carp about the taxes, I probably would not have an issue. The house is kept rented which supplants my income and pays the taxes on the property. However, I have to rent it for much more than I should to overcome the high taxes and insurance. Several times, I have listed the property for sale, but received no offers for what the county appraiser says the property is worth.

I think of myself as a principled person so I took the house off the market for good. I will leave the disposition of the property to my children when I am gone. In good conscious, I cannot saddle another human being with a mortgage of $100,000 for a 46-year-old, small 1400 square foot house in a rental neighborhood. It is my opinion that the house is not worth its appraised value and that the county officials should be ashamed of themselves for running up the appraisal on those old tract houses. No doubt, that the house has appreciated in dollar value because of a less valuable dollar, but not to the tune of what the county appraisers say. If I sold the house for what I thought it was worth, I would be cheating myself out of a good monthly income from the rent I receive.

If I were to sell the house for market value, the new owner could not recoup the purchase price. It works for me because I have so little in the property. So, if you like seeing your house increase in value because of tax appraisals, then keep electing Democrats. They will keep you satisfied.

I relate this story because everywhere Liberals or Democrats dominate, their areas become depressed. It is always for the same reasons -- they tax their constituents until those with the ability to pay move and leave the high taxes to those who cannot. The county in Texas where I live is being developed at a very fast pace as people move here from Houston to escape the city and county taxes. Friends of mine who bought their homes in Harris County pay more in taxes than for their mortgage. It is really a sad commentary for an area with so much industry and great heritage. Unless things turn around in Houston, that city will wake up one morning and realize that those who can afford to pay high taxes are gone. That leaves the city with those who cannot afford the taxes. What will they do then? It will be especially painful for Houston if the Liberals and Greens diminish the oil business. Yet the people keep electing Democrats. Democrats are like smoking cigarettes, you know they will kill you but the addiction (to their handouts) is too powerful to overcome.

Maybe it is just me, but I don't see anything that Obama is doing that will help this country. His policies will drive our wealth to foreign shores. If you are one of the lucky ones to have a job, I would suggest that you hold on to it. Unless Obama stops his war against those who make it possible for everyone else, things will get immeasurably worse. We will be sitting here with our high tax rates for the rich and watching our jobs migrate to other countries. We won't have to worry about polluting the atmosphere when nobody can afford to drive their cars if they own one.

Hope to be more cheerful next time. I promise to not write just after opening my 401K statement.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Agenda 21: Part 1

2009-03-09T20:40:00.000-07:00

In spite of divination from conspirators, Agenda 21 is not a diabolical conspiracy. Large segments of the world's population really believe that humankind is contaminating and ruining the planet. They also hold fast to the notion that the wealth of the planet is unevenly distributed and that it is up to the governing authorities to distribute the world's wealth equitably among its inhabitants. The Agenda 21 program is supposed to remedy the ills of the world. This plan exists in document form at the United Nations website (see below) and is available for all to scrutinize. Opportunistic political interests want to use Agenda 21 for their own purposes, but this article only relates to Agenda 21, the UN program. The following is my take on that program.

Agenda 21 is a program run by the United Nations related to sustainable development. It is a comprehensive blueprint of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the UN, governments, and major groups in every area where humans impact the environment. The number 21 refers to the 21st century.

The text of Agenda 21 reads like the book of Genesis. It is full of grand rhetoric that translates into broad statements describing outcome much like the "Let there be light" statement in the Bible. The Agenda 21 lays out a wish list that will turn our societies into Utopian enclaves. The doctrine challenges every level of government from the highest to the lowest local level to formulate and put to task procedures that will change the human experience from one on the precipice of global contamination to one where we will all join hands and sing cum-ba-ya in a world free of anthropogenic garbage.

The goals laid out in the doctrine are laudable. But vague outlines of outcome are a recipe for disaster. For instance, who is in actual control of the policies? In order to enforce some of the goals, we would need a world government. There are references for local groups to 'get together' and express their ideas. But who makes the determination that an idea from these local groups is useful? Who would determine if an idea was a good or bad?

Clean Energy: The Agenda 21 document only outlines outcome with no roadmap on how to get there. It does not specify any of the details needed to implement how to do things. Sustainable rates of pollution are arbitrary so the document is no help to energy providers. I couldn't find a stamp of approval for any method of the generation of power, but research is called for to help develop green energy sources.

There is also no mechanism for funding these research programs. Whom do you think the document is referring to fund and manage this research? The answer to the question is obvious -the burden will fall on the industrial nations of the world. Who else has the expertise and economical strength to do the research? By making no specific statements about how we accomplish the high goals articulated in its doctrine, the economical burden of such research is not reward oriented but instead bureaucratic in nature. Incentives for accomplishing the goals specified are the goals themselves.

In case you are confused with my statements, the long story short is that the document needs more specificity than just fine sounding rhetoric of wishful thinking. The best way to educate yourself about what is contained in the document is to read it. You can find it here at http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/agenda21/english/agenda21toc.htm. Not everybody will agree with my conclusions about Agenda 21, but by your reading it, you can draw your own conclusions.

Poverty: Who wouldn't like to see a world without poverty? In spite of the feel good rhetoric espoused by the Left, distributing wealth to the less motivated in the world does nothing to help elevate those people from poverty. In fact all that happens is the creation of a dependency that either has to be continued or risk a cultural war if it is discontinued. The Agenda 21 program does nothing to address the real source of the disparity between the haves and the have-nots and that is the motivational gap between the two groups.

Any group motivated more than another group will accomplish more and reap more reward than the less motivated group. The United States has been successful because of the risk/reward feature of its society. All Americans have the same opportunity, and those who take advantage of those opportunities reap the reward while those who do not, fall into the welfare basket. So to solve the problem of poverty, ways of motivation must be found so that an individual will use his talents to climb the socio-economic ladder. Those who cannot or will not motivate themselves will always be at the mercy of those who have.

Mid-latitude countries (Those countries that lie between Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn) of the world have evolved people that best suit those environments. In those perpetually hot, humid places, the inhabitants of those regions generally exert as little energy as possible to survive. It is not easy to thrive energetically in such oppressive locations. Skin color has nothing to do with a person's motivation. Skin color does however indicate a person's background to one of these oppressive places. Nature's evolution and not laziness is more of a factor in the low energetic output generally found from these peoples. Other than hunting and tribal celebrations, the only other energy expenditure is sex.

Do these traits disappear when such a person relocates to one of the temperate or colder regions? My answer is a firm maybe. You can make an argument for either side of the question. However, when questions of poverty come up, unless the goal is to make dependents out of these people, we are going to have to find a way to motivate them into helping themselves.

This is important because expecting an energetic output from the people of the mid-latitudes is a non-starter. Residents of the temperate and colder areas where the human body isn't punished for physical exertion do much better. Evolution provided those people with a different outlook towards expending oneself for gain.

These are only generalized observations but I haven't been able to find any persuasive argument to change my mind.

Reducing poverty in the mid-latitudes will require a thought process that accepts the idea that the technologies involved will have to account for a less energetic people. Large plantations do well because the work suits the lifestyle of the indignant people. But expecting them to create and produce products using the European model without strict supervision is not possible. Factories built in the mid-latitudes fall into disrepair and are quickly abandoned after the European supervision leaves. The same type of result applies to most European models set up in those mid-latitude regions. The indigenous people are just not genetically inclined to pursue objectives like the people from the temperate and colder climates.

Motivation for these people is not impossible. But the motivation should suit their lifestyle, not ours. The mid-latitude people need motivation if we expect them to overcome poverty.

Agenda 21 is anti-freedom. A fully implemented Agenda 21 program would necessitate an oppressive government to limit ambition and motivation. The government's role would, by necessity have to suppress motivation to maintain an egalitarian society. It is truly a frightening concept for freedom loving people.

More to Come-

Cheers,

-Robert-

Environmental Concerns

2009-02-28T15:20:00.000-08:00

Writing this column would be impossible without the support and feedback from my readers. A recent email brought this response from a reader.

"I've always wondered, do Republicans think that they don't have to drink the same water and breath the same air? I'm serious. Because this anti-environment movement implies that you don't believe that the destruction of the environment will actually affect you.
I guess I should just limit this to anti-environment Republicans because I know that Jane for example is a Republican that supports cleaning up the environment. You see, Jane has a M.S. in Biology. So she is acutely aware that we all drink the same water and breath the same air and if we keep destroying the earth, we will ultimately destroy ourselves."
"There is a reason why SE Texas has some of the highest rates of cancer."

First, I want to address the issue that the reader assumes that I am a Republican. Although I support a lot of Republican ideas, I am not a Republican. To be a member of any political party for a particular issue undermines the freedom of thought from an individual.

For instance, the issue of abortion cuts both ways. There are several issues but for the purpose of this piece, I will restrict it to abortion.

A loyal party member must adopt the party positions. A loyal Republican must be anti-abortion whether he/she believes in it or not. Some may feel that there are circumstances that justify abortion, while others do not. But to be a loyal party member you have to accept the official party position or the party can't stand united.

Being a loyal Democrat means that you have to accept abortion on demand or you are not a good loyal Democrat. Those who believe differently and espouse a different viewpoint would alienate a large segment of other party faithful.

The point is, that in order to be a loyal party member, anything you feel that is at odds with the party leadership cannot be tolerated. That is freedom lost. I choose to maintain my freedom and not abandon principles that I hold dear. My choice of a candidate is always the one whose ideas are closest to my own. I think most people can relate to that, but I also want the freedom to speak out when I am at odds with the prevailing thought. So thanks, but no thanks to joining a political party.

The Environment:

The next statements in her response were particularly interesting. The reader's impression is that because I understand that CO2 is not the bad guy it is made out to be, that I want poisoned water and to breathe dirty air. I make no apologies for daring to oppose what is surely one of the most outlandish of all Liberal ideas - that the planet is warming because of CO2.

The "Green" movement has honorable objectives. The Greens also deserve credit for making us all aware of the things that we do to mess things up. Their efforts have made the public acutely aware of how important maintaining our planet is to all of us. But their efforts have been hi-jacked by politicians for reasons of gaining political power. To make the 'big show' for the voters, politicians have pushed for projects that are neither well planned nor thought through. What usually ensues is a bigger mess than what we started with. Projects espoused but not adapted, without careful planning, will yield more catastrophes in the future. For instance, here are a few examples.

The Lithium Battery Powered Car:

Expert after expert tells us that the technology is not ready for full-scale adoption of this power source. Those same experts do not detail those obstacles. But to a wide-eyed "Green", that is only a trifling matter.

To begin with, Lithium does not lie on the ground just waiting to be picked up. Lithium is found bound to other elements and it is a complex chemical process to purify it. There are some economical by-products to the process, but also a lot of mess discard to deal with. Lithium is found in mostly remote and pristine areas such as old salt lakebeds. The yield is very low, even for the high-grade deposits.

To get a more detailed picture of the production outlook and processes in purifying Lithium go to this web address.

http://www.meridian-int-res.com/Projects/Lithium_Microscope.pdf

This report confirms that mass production of Lithium Carbonate is not environmentally sound, it will cause irreparable ecological damage to ecosystems that should be protected, and that LiIon propulsion is incompatible with the notion of the "Green Car".

Mass adoption of the Lithium power source for a "Green" car will put pressures on Lithium production and will drastically run up the cost of manufacture. Large areas of wilderness will have to be sacrificed to create settling ponds for the Lithium Carbonate mixture to vaporize. This is all before the purifying process can begin.

Do not look to this technology in the present tense to save the planet!

Hydrogen Power:

Hydrogen power is one of the most promising technologies around, but there are still problems to consider. The hydrogen powered car discharges water vapor. Water vapor itself is far and away more of a greenhouse gas than CO2. If we swap to all hydrogen, which also is not just lying around for us to use, we will have to manage the constantly wet streets, and in cities with a lot of traffic, the average temperature could rise with so much water vapor in the air.

Ethanol:

This was supposed to be another of those great ideas. So with plenty of Government subsidies, ethanol became a reality only to find that there were plenty of problems related to both its source and getting it to the refineries for blending. Without taxpayer subsidies, the cost would be prohibitive to the American consumer. And that was only the beginning of the problem. So many farmers worldwide started producing corn for ethanol, (they could make more money) that prices skyrocketed for food. People in the poorer countries could no longer afford corn and corn products that they eat. Tortillas come to mind as well as other flat breads used in those poorer nations.

Some countries are destroying large tracts of rainforest to raise palm nut trees for their use in making ethanol. It is a growing problem for all who want to save those dwindling forests.

Ethanol is another rushed into project without thoroughly understanding the consequences of its adoption. This is an idea that has brought more problems than solutions.

Wind Farms:

Wind farms are a real possibility for a small percentage of our electrical needs. But again, the environment suffers. In those places where there is enough wind constant to harvest, roads have to be built to accommodate the truck traffic to maintain them. And we will still need conventional or nuclear power plants to provide the rest of our needs.

Petroleum:

Gasoline is still the preferred fuel for powering the automobile. Gasoline has been getting cleaner and issue far fewer pollutants than it used to. There was a time when you could not see the skyline of Los Angeles for the smog. But science has corrected most exhaust emissions that were causing the 'smog' problem.

Catalytic converters also help with the cleanup of emissions and the prospects for even cleaner burning gasoline are bright. Here again, the environmentalists do not want to correct the problems remaining with gasoline, they want to get rid of it. No don't fix it, and maintain good cheap reliable energy, they want to throw it all away for the pie in the sky proposals. Sometimes I think that the left just resents the oil industry. Few of the rabid anti petroleum advocates have any idea of the progress made in the drilling, refining, and distribution of petroleum products. It is a very narrow view for a person to take if all he/she can see is the Exxon Valdez accident.

Conclusion:

I am not against doing real environmental cleanup. I just want the proponents of these ideas to fully understand their proposals and the problems that they create. Less emotion and more thought into these proposals would help with those unintended consequences. I am tired of every special interest trying to push their whiz-bang idea on the country in the name of saving the planet with results that do more harm than good because of a lack of forethought.

Following the money, and who stands to gain from these ideas is a good place to start. Thoroughly and publically educating the public on all aspects of a proposal, not just the high points, would be helpful. Turning any of these hair-brained schemes into reality without a close inspection is dangerous.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Worrying About CO2

2009-02-26T17:08:00.000-08:00

Some of you better informed people will have to help me with this one. It has been hard to get answers from usually good web sources. All the squawking is about 'Green Energy' and how it will save us from those dreaded greenhouse gases.

Listening to T. Boone Pickens this morning, it was clear that he believes that oil will return to around one-hundred dollars a barrel by the end of the year. The 'Greens' want the price of oil to rise substantially to prevent having to use it more than necessary. But is their worry about our CO2 usage justified or just political maneuvering.

A Look at CO2

Like anyone who wants to write about a subject, I did a lot of research from the best sources possible. One of the sites that I used data from was the charts from the Mauna Loa Observatory, Hawaii. You can see the CO2 increases from 1979 -Jan 2009 by going to this website.

ftp://ftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/ccg/co2/trends/co2_mm_mlo.txt

Make no mistake; the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is increasing. But when you dig a little deeper into the data, certain trends become evident. The rate of CO2 increase has been slowing slightly for the past 4 years.

Without cherry-picking the data, I took the most recent entry - January 2009 and the three preceding months. I averaged these four months since 2004. The results are as follows.

Months Oct, Nov, Dec, and January averages:

Year--------------Four Mo. Average -----Increase Over previous Year

2008-2009-------384.88 ppm------------1.7 ppm

2007-2008-------383.18 ppm------------2.19 ppm

2006-2007-------380.99 ppm------------1.8 ppm

2005-2006-------379.175 ppm-----------2.535 ppm

2004-2005-------376.64 ppm

Note: ppm = parts per million

The difference between the 2004/2005 to 2005/2006 was the most notable increase with 2.535 ppm. When we scrutinize the data, one has to conclude that he growth rate is decreasing. If you visit the website above, you can make your own determinations about CO2 growth.

CO2 growth rate changes are not new. These changes in the growth rate coincide nicely with the solar cycle. The growth rate slows a little during the periods when the Suns activity is at a minimum. At the present, the Sun is in an extended Minimum period. The expected increase in Sunspot activity has not started yet.

CO2 Graph Click to Enlarge

Notice how the CO2 growth rate dips slightly at each of the minimum periods of the 11-year solar cycle. The next graph is a comparison of several of the last solar cycles. Pay particular attention to the greater magnitude of cycle 17, 20, and 23. Those increases in the magnetic storms (Sunspots) cause about a 1% gain in irradiance from the Sun during the maximum part of the cycle. Most cyclic minimums do not last long enough to change the Earth's climate very much but the increase in the magnitude of the cycles as shown by the graph has meaningful effects.

Comparison of Late Solar Cycles:
Click to Enlarge

The past several cycles have shown an increase in the Sun's activities. As a result, over time, the oceans of the Earth have responded by warming. Why is that important? The Oceans act as a buffer against sudden climate changes on Earth. It takes years to warm them up and years to cool them down. The reluctance of the oceans to change abruptly means that our climate remains decently steady. But there are consequences to the oceans cooling as well as warming.

As the oceans warm, they release more CO2 into the atmosphere, and conversely, cooler oceans absorb more CO2. That means that the CO2 corollary to global warming is just the reverse of what we are told. CO2 has been increasing because of the warming of the Oceans, not the other way around. Since 2007, the Oceans have been cooling. There has been less radiance from the Sun during this minimum part of the solar cycle, and the oceans have reacted by cooling. The following Sea Surface Temperature maps will demonstrate that the oceans of the world are in a cooling phase. Ocean cooling is a gradual process but non-the-less, cooling is cooling.

Sea Surface Temperatures Jan-2001
Click to Enlarge

Sea Surface Temperatures Jan-2007
Click to Enlarge

Sea Surface Temperatures Jan-2009
Click to Enlarge

2001 and 2009 match up very evenly while 2007 is obviously the warmest. The most severe Arctic recorded ice-melting period was in 2007. The year 2007 represented the highest loss of Arctic ice in our records. But the trend of ocean warming has ended and we are now in a cooling period as the sea surface temperature maps demonstrate. The warming oceans caused measurable problems noted in the oceans coral reefs, sea-ice melting, and an added violence to the large storms that generate over the oceans. Some of this telltale activity may continue, although with a decrease in magnitude if the oceans continue to cool. The fly in the soup is whether the Sun will maintain its current state. The prediction is that the normal cyclical nature of magnetic storms on the Sun will resume in the near future, but that is only a prediction. Historically we know that the Sun enters long periods of low activity. The last extended low activity period, known as the little ice age, or the Maunder-Minimum occurred from 1645-1715.

The theory is that the cyclical nature of solar activity is caused by the Suns motion with respect to the barycenter of the solar system. The barycenter is the theoretical center of mass for the solar system with the Sun at its center. However, the gravitational pull of the orbiting planets causes the Sun to wobble slightly as the planets rotate around it. The 11-year solar cycle coincides very well with the planet Jupiter. Jupiter takes just over 11 years to circumnavigate the Sun and the Jupiter tidal effect on the Sun probably most certainly influences the magnetic pole shift as well as the sunspot activity (which are magnetic storms).

There is one more celestial event that is worth mentioning, and that is the 'solar jerk'. The 'solar jerk' is the changing of the Suns position with respect to the center of gravity of the solar system. When all of the planets are aligned on the same side, their combined gravitational pull is thought to be able to shift the solar system center of gravity outside of the photosphere of the Sun. Whereas if Jupiter is on the opposite side of the Sun with respect for the rest of the planets, the solar system center of gravity is contained within the photosphere of the Sun. These particular alignments are cyclical and happen less frequently than the normal ebb and flow of the solar cycle. The effect of the 'solar jerk' on the Earth's climate is a subject of much debate among scientists.

Those who predict what the near future of Earth's climate differ dramatically. However, they generally agree that if the solar activity stays low (decrease in irradiance to Earth) that more cooling is probable.

Back to CO2:

I can safely state that the CO2 increases seen at the present come largely from the warming of the oceans. All of man's endeavors only result in about 3% of the increase of CO2. Further, CO2 is a greenhouse gas in that it absorbs some portions of the infrared spectrum. But CO2 is also shown to release that energy very quickly through the process of convection. The concentration of CO2 on Earth is very tiny, measured in parts per million. It makes up less than 1% of our atmosphere.

The Earth also has the advantage of not having a layered atmosphere. Our atmosphere is homogeneous because it stays mixed by the wind and convection currents. Warm updrafts lift the hot air to the cooler upper atmosphere releasing heat. When you look up into the sky and see clouds, you know that the process is working. Clouds form when rising warm moist air condenses in the cooler atmosphere.

Venus is not so lucky. They have an atmosphere that is almost all CO2. Venus has a forty plus mile high column of CO2 that blankets the planet. CO2 is heavier than water, so the atmosphere is almost a soup with very little opportunity to lose the stored heat by the convection process. So Venus is a very warm planet. Compounding the problems on Venus is the length of its day. The day on Venus is actually longer than its solar year. There is not much temperature diversity on Venus for wind creation; also, the slow rotation of the planet contributes to this. Venus is a sad situation because with today's technology, man's survival or exploration of the planet is next to impossible.

What we can expect on Earth if the ocean temperatures continue to decline is the levels of atmospheric CO2 declining. The cooling oceans will absorb more of the atmospheric CO2. One last note on CO2 is the amount of biology that we are taking from the oceans. All life is carbon based, and when we take a lot its biology from the oceans by fishing, whaling, and other ocean harvesting, the carbon that is contained within that biology releases into the atmosphere. Kelp, fish, mollusks, and whales that we harvest from the oceans all contribute to the increase in atmospheric CO2.

Cheers,

-Robert-

One Trick Pony

2009-02-19T00:32:00.000-08:00

Money put into the pockets of people who want to better themselves is an investment that will bear fruit. However, money put into the hands of those who are satisfied with their status quo will just squander it.

Poor people are poor for only a few reasons, but the majority of the poor are in that status because they choose to be. The poor I am talking about never get beyond a minimum pay job at the best, and survive on welfare and handouts at the least. Low achievers are fully equipped with the 'wants', but never put forth the effort to realize their dreams. Whenever they have money, it flows from their hands like water through a tea strainer.

Please don't confuse those poor with the low wage earner just starting out in entry-level job positions or those who are having setbacks due to divorce, or suddenly find that medical expenses have cost them all of their savings. This category of low-income earners will either get the help they need or learn and go on to advance in life. These groups of poor whether just starting out at entry level jobs or down on their luck will find a way to progress. The first group will not.

The majority of our poor fall into the first category. This group of poor, for reasons known only to them, cannot and will not achieve independence.

That is why I call them a 'one trick pony'. They don't look beyond today and will spend the money given to them by the Government, but when the money ceases to come into their hands, they will not have advanced from where they were in the beginning. This class of poor will remain on welfare because they haven't the desire or motivation to move up the ladder. Please don't get me wrong; I am not against welfare and helping the poor, just against putting a lot of taxpayer dollars in the hands of this group of poor with any expectation that they will make the economy better. Everyone will know that the stimulus money is only temporary and not something that you would rely on for the long haul.

Bottom-up economics works that way. The philosophy goes that if you put money into the bottom, they will spend it, and the money will trickle up the food chain. The Government will then tax those businesses and the people who are the benefactors of the spending, and return it to the poor. It is a crazy scheme, but in practice, it isn't successful. First and foremost is the problem of motivation. When the Government over taxes, and steals the reward from those who establish a business, they have defeated their own purpose. There is little reason for the sacrifice and dedication to keep a business open if you can't enjoy the fruits of your labor.

That is the catch-22 of bottom up economics. The result is a mathematical certainty that the Government will have to nationalize everything to meet its obligations. But due to the gross inefficiency of Government run economies, they never work for very long. Normal, well-motivated people become discouraged. The loss of incentive drives people into the bottom classes because of the handouts from the Government. Think about it, not everybody can be the beneficiary of Government largess. Somebody has to have their shoulder to the wheel and producing. This is what happened in the old Soviet Union. Other than their military, most Russians were more like the people in the third world than those of an affluent country.

You Liberals need to pay attention. You are driving the United States off of a cliff from which we may not recover. You need to buy into the idea that life is supposed to be a challenge. Working to overcome life's obstacles is the source of real satisfaction. Everybody has an equal opportunity to succeed. A person weak in motivation is a person weak in motivation. The general rule is that this person, without forcing him, will never achieve. According to Obama, our welfare system will no longer try to motivate the recipients. We can't win with policies like that.

It doesn't matter what your money or income situation happens to be, you have challenges. The winners are those who are able to put their challenges behind them, and not hold them out as a reason for needing a handout.

Cheers,

-Robert-

Staying Challenged

2009-02-13T14:22:00.000-08:00

As strange as it may seem, Humans do their best when challenged. As life's challenges decrease, self-indulgence increases.

Self-indulgence itself poses a challenge to avoid. It denigrates one's character, and narrows a person's perspective into one of selfishness. At its zenith, self-indulgence destroys the underpinnings of the society which spawned it.

Unless a society has a focus on some challenge to keep it unified, the unity breaks down into local concerns. These local concerns can be strong enough to rip apart the whole.

Our society is broken down into two main groups. On one side are those less motivated who achieve little, and on the other side are the people who are motivated to achieve. My father used to tell me that there are two kinds of people, 'doers', and 'dreamers'.

Achievement groups subdivide into smaller groups. The following listing illustrates this hierarchy from the bottom to the top.

1.) Dependency Class: The bottom achievers include those on welfare that perpetually depend on the mercy of the higher achievers, and the generosity of others.

2.) Minimum Wage Earners: -Clerks, fast food, day laborers etc. (Those who never advance beyond entry-level positions.)

3.) High Risk: Those who work low skill, but in higher paying jobs that carry significant personal risk such as a miner or fireman.

4.) Trades' People: The trades' people are those who have acquired skills they can market such as electricians, carpenters, healthcare workers, plumbers, and air-conditioner repairmen. This is certainly not a complete list, but enough to give flavor to the statement.

5.) Professional: This group belongs to college graduates. They answer only to those who are higher achievers than they are. This group includes the engineers, doctors, lawyers etc.

6.) Business Entrepreneur: This highly motivated self-starter creates and manages business. This person can be from any educational level.

7.) Power Seekers: This is the last group. It includes our politicians and those who are never satisfied with what they have. The power seekers drive themselves to want more.

Of the seven groups mentioned above, the first four make up the vast majority of Americans. Those seeking power exploit these groups to gain political power. After all, in a majority rule society, numbers of supporters translate into power.

This piece will confine itself to the power seekers. The largest two power seekers in our society are the Liberals and the Conservatives. The liberals seek power by redistributing from the higher achievers to the lower achievers. Liberalism is attractive to lower achievers because their vote is the only cost to them. By giving their political support, they can have things without all of the effort of earning them. Their support is like feeding chickens, just toss out a few grains and they will keep clucking and being happy. But since every coin has two edges, there is another side to this story,

The Conservative power seekers seek power by motivating those who achieve less. Those who do get motivated to succeed become loyal devotees to Conservatism. By any stretch, it is the harder sell to the masses. The main weapon in the fight for Conservative followers is by rewarding achievement. Life is meant to have challenges, and those who manage to fight off adversity and achieve, find a pride that is absent in the ranks of those who achieve less. It is an abrasive rub to Conservatives when Liberal power seekers take what they have achieved and give it away to those who have not earned it. Conservatives deeply believe that everyone should be able to pursue and have equal opportunity for happiness, and overcoming life's challenges produces real happiness. Conservatives also believe that receiving undeserved benefits from politicians does not lead to happiness.

The destruction of so many of life's challenges by Liberals hurt our society. Many adherents to the Liberal cause feel strongly about helping those who are needy. I recognize that everybody who feels for the poor are not political hacks. Where we differ is the way that we choose to help the poor. Handouts do nothing but create a dependency that is difficult to overcome, even by those who want to break the cycle of poverty. Certainly, nobody should starve or have no shelter when the weather turns bad. But, believe it or not, personal discomfort is a great motivator.

There is nothing like having to scrounge around the private shelters and soup kitchens to make a person realize that there might be a better way. Those people who like living under underpasses and pushing grocery carts with all of their worldly possessions around probably will need those charitable organizations all their life. But among those down on their luck, some will find the bottom rung of society rough enough to motivate them to do better.

The danger with over helping is getting a lot of people stuck in the welfare system. Those who are stuck in that system get just enough to get by. They get used to having 'just enough' and do not try and change their status quo. Liberals who buy their votes with a continuous trickle of doo-dads and goodies harvested from those who are meeting life's challenges make it even harder for the poor to escape this vicious poverty trap.

My gripe against Liberal power seekers is that they have no conscience. They fully realize that their policies steal the desire for self-reliance. To the Liberal Politician, it is all for political power to have large numbers of people look to them for their sustenance. The sad truth is that they could care diddlysquat about the misery that they inflict upon those people. No, not the rank and file of the Democratic Party. The rank and file has no understanding of the misery that their Party is causing because they are the true believers in the Government helping the poor and using the power of the Government to control the wealth of the achievers.

Remember, underlying our society is the danger of self-indulgence. When we as a people are relatively at peace, without National challenges, we turn inward. We have to invent reasons for our existence. What we find that occupies our time and thinking to challenge our existence is not a unified structure. We rally around those groups that pique our interest and stir our passions. Some work to eradicate poverty, some want to make life happier for everybody. And some just want to use those passions to build a political base of power.

Christianity used to be one of our unifiers, but not anymore. Our esteemed preachers have jumped onto the millionaire bandwagon and become mega-rich television heroes. Yes, as a banner carrier, Christianity is only a shadow of its former self. There is no escaping the hue and cry for money, even in small town churches. Attending a service is like going to a board of directors meeting. You have to hear about the building fund, the orphanage fund, the missionary fund, the alms box for the poor, and the preacher needs a new car. Nowhere in this society can you find refuge from those who have their hand out.

My email box is crowded daily with solicitations from political parties, politicians and PAC's. Why would I want to donate to any of them? Over the past two decades, they have taken a substantial bite out of the freedoms that we once had. The only thing that matters to these power seekers is your vote and your money. The email solicitations don't even allow you to make a comment. That is because they really don't give a hoot about what you might be thinking, they just want your contribution. I say a pox on all their houses.

You can be sure that things will only get worse. We can't spend our way to Nirvana with money we don't have. If we sell all of this debt to foreign investors, they will become our owners. If we print the money, it will devalue what we already have. It is a fine kettle of fish to be in.

We have a President - not raised in this country during his formative years, so he thinks like a foreigner. His education, given to him because of his minority and foreign status was a gift from the American people. And now, with very little real experience, he portends to lead us into the promised land of indebtedness.

For all of you Obama lovers, not to worry, I am an equal opportunity political basher. The Republicans nominated a weak candidate who espoused no reason to vote for him. At a time when the country was crying out for leadership, Obama was able to articulate his vision. At least he believed in the power of Government and convinced a majority of the voters of his vision. Whether you agree or disagree with the job Obama is doing, he is staying true to his Liberal philosophy. The Republicans cannot claim that they have remained true to their ideals of smaller Government.

The National fracture is perpetuating because of a lack of inspiration, National purpose, and lack of personal accountability. We are so laid back that we have no National purpose other than worrying about our next electronic toy, computer game or saving the polar bears. As long as somebody else says, "They will solve our problems!" and it doesn't interfere with our daily do nothing lives, we just say, "Go ahead!" We could care less about any thoughts deeper than looking for a lost TV remote.

Absent a National purpose, we will continue to fragment into an unrecognizable Nation. A Civil War is not out of the question. Feelings run deep for the philosophical mantras we have adopted. Each side proclaims that they are right. Already, just associating with those who don't believe the way you do is uncomfortable.

I only wish I could articulate a light at the end of the tunnel. I cannot, because I only see darkness. If we don't find a National purpose soon, there may never be a light.

Cheers - I think-,

-Robert-

No Help From Federal Workers

2009-02-02T04:56:00.000-08:00

Over the past few months, the Federal Government has added substantially to its payroll. Recent statistics were unavailable regarding the exact numbers for 2008, but the Federal Labor Union enrollment is burgeoning. Why is this important? Federal employees do not help with the tax burden shared by the rest of us. They do not contribute one dime to the treasury. 100% of their earnings is from the treasury and by definition cannot contribute to it. Federal workers will point to their paystubs that show a deduction for taxes, but make no mistake about it, that deduction means just a little less taken from the treasury for pay. They do not add to the treasury.

Every added employee to the Federal payroll means one less person that is shouldering the load with the rest of us. By December of 2007 there were 2,462,127 full time civilian federal employees. Of course, some of them are necessary, but as our government grows, so does the burden on the non-government employees. The non-government employees put money into the treasury, not the federal employees. It is not partisan politics, but simple math; growing the government means that the government needs to take in more money from fewer people.

Surprisingly, the Postal Service hires more civilians than the military. But the Military budget out strips everybody, consuming 4.1% of GDP. But when the military is included as Federal Employees, the total of government employees comes to 3,906,680. That’s a lot of people living off of the taxpaying private sector.

Please note, I am not making any judgments about what is and is not needed. These are only numbers to demonstrate the folly of increasing the size of our government in relation to the jobs available in the private sector. It is a mathematical certainty that as public civilian employment rises, so will the demands on a shrinking taxpayer base. The real problems will start when the private sector will no longer be able to keep up with the public sector demands. If we tax our private sector too hard, the whole system will collapse. We as a nation need business owners and the wealth creators to thrive for the sake of the rest of us. The quest for rewards drives our economy. Remove life's rewards with taxation and we lose the incentive that creates economic activity. Already, high taxes have been instrumental in ruining our manufacturing base. Businessmen have been forced to take their businesses to foreign countries. You can guess who has to shoulder the expense of losing good paying jobs.

As quoted from Ronald Reagan, "The Government is not the solution, it is the problem."

As I write this piece, the obscene recovery package is before the Senate. It is for so much money that just to imagine a trillion dollars boggles the mind. If you were to count 24 hours a day, it would take you better than 30,000 years to count to a trillion. Government projects will not provide a lasting recovery. Yes, there will be a burst of activity around each project, but when the money runs out, that activity will cease. The saddest part about it is that we do not have the money. We will have either to borrow it or just print it. We devalue our money when goods and services do not follow the money supply. The devaluation of our money is called 'inflation'.

Scary Stuff,
Check out what the rest of us are having to support with our taxes.

Cheers,

-Robert-

The Military:
Active personnel 1,444,553 (ranked 2nd)
Reserve personnel 1,458,500
Expenditures Budget $583 billion (FY08)(ranked 1st)
Percent of GDP 4.04 (2007 est.)

Federal Civilian Employment:
http://ftp2.census.gov/govs/apes/07fedfun.pdf
Click to Enlarge

Bailout Bounce

2009-01-27T21:25:00.000-08:00

Make no mistake about it - Government can induce economic activity. What we must not do is link bailouts to economic recovery. An analogy to spending taxpayer's money to save taxpayers from themselves is inserting your fist into a pail of water. Whenever the fist is withdrawn, the water returns to its original level.

Another way of looking at it is the way we leverage our income with our credit cards. As long as we have an income to leverage, we make a lot of merchants happy. They, in turn, are able to leverage their receipts into more economic activity. The main reason that this works so well is because there are so many sources from the private sector, that should one fail, then activities from other sources compensate for the loss. But when there is only one source (such as the Government), and the funding from that source ends, everything upstream of the source fails. And, just like you and your credit card, the bill will come due. After all, when you leverage your paycheck, you are in actuality borrowing money.

Our banks found themselves over-leveraged using collateralized mortgage debt securities as an income stream. And when the value of the securities plummeted along with that income stream, the aftermath was a bag which contained debt out the whazoo with nothing to cover it. Those securities were real estate loans bundled into a device called a Collateralized Mortgage Obligation. Those CMO's lost their value because of bad lending practices to people without good credit standing. The same thing would happen to you if you lost your job and had to default on your debt. Bad loans meant defaults on payment for whatever reason by the borrowers.

Not wanting to digress into the cause of this financial mess, just wanting to illustrate what happens when the foundation of an economic system is lost. The same holds true for Government sponsored jobs and projects. Except for some relief in the short term, there has been no improvement to the situation. Remember the fist in the water. The Congress votes to spend a certain amount of money as a stimulus to the economy. Once they spend that money, then without more money, whatever depends on that money will cease. That includes the upstream economic activity developed supporting the project/work relief effort.

The temporary bounce received from the stimulus may not be beneficial in the longer run because of inflation. Inflation occurs when we dilute our money supply. Inflation is perhaps the cruelest tax of all. Think of the money supply as a bowl of soup. If you keep adding water to the soup without the other ingredients, you will find that the soup is so weak that nobody wants to eat/drink it. The Government is not collecting that stimulus money from the taxpayer (yet); there are only two sources available. It is either printed or borrowed from other countries. Either way creates a debt that will have to be paid -- just like your credit card debt when you lose your job. The money supply must stay in balance with goods and services to prevent inflation/deflation.

Be of good cheer though, Obama will straighten out everything.

Cheers,
Robert

Robert@robfg.com

Changes for America 4

2009-01-20T02:07:00.001-08:00

The Liberal 'Wants' list:

1. Green Energy

2. Stimulus package

3. Small, high mileage cars

4. Jobs

5. Get out of Iraq

6. Get Ben Laden

7. Close Gitmo

8. Impeach Blagojevich

9. Gay Marriages

10. Unfettered abortions

11. Higher taxes for the rich

12. Open borders

13. Amnesty for the undocumented in this country

14. Degrade the values of morality (right and wrong)

15. Socialized medicine

16. More money for a broken school system

This is the fourth in this series. This fourth article includes items 8,9 and 10. These 3 topics represent my opinion only. Feel free to disagree and to send your comments.

My Comments on the 'List' Article 4

Impeach Blagojevich: As stated above, this is only my opinion of the problems concerning the Governor from Illinois. To begin with, I think Blago made a deal with Jessie Jackson's son for the Senate seat. But then here comes Obama who wanted somebody else to take his old Senate seat. So now, Blago has to either give up the money from Jackson and appoint Obama's choice or try to shake down Obama to replace the money he would lose if he appointed Obama's choice for the job.

Blago took the second choice. But Blagojevich is not smart. Jackson feels jilted over the deal and informs Patrick Fitzgerald the Federal Prosecutor. Subsequent wiretaps of Blago catches him making incriminating statements and the rest as they say is history.

But there is a fly in the soup. Fitzgerald stopped his investigation before a crime was committed. Why? To begin with, Blagojevich knows where all the bodies are hidden. Putting him on trial with witnesses under oath has the possibility of opening more of Pandora's box than the Democrats care to have exposed. Forcing the resignation of Blagojevich would have been the cleanest path for the Dems to take, but Blago would not play that game. The Illinois Senate will start an impeachment trial to have Blago removed from office. Sounds like a reasonable solution, but if enough of those State Senators do not want their own dealings exposed, they may reach an agreement with Blago --privately of course. An agreement with Blago not to spill the beans could be privately negotiated before the trial begins.

Then the question arises, what will happen if Blago does not get removed from office? The ball would get bounced back into Fitzgerald's lap. Fitzgerald would have to make the decision to indict or not. It will be his decision to open Pandora's box or not.

Now that Blago has filled the Senate seat, some of the problems go with it. The seat is no longer a bone of contention between the interested parties.

Gay Marriages: My view on gay marriages is a tainted one. Or maybe I should say I feel as though we are experiencing tyranny by the minority.

With the exception of very few homosexuals who are born with mixed up hormones, the vast majority of gays choose that lifestyle. Most begin their gay life as either lonely people needing friendship, people who have had a rough time establishing satisfactory relationships with the opposite sex, or those just seeking the thrill of a different experience. The more mainstream the gay lifestyle becomes, the easier it is for those disaffected and lonely people to adopt the gay lifestyle. Usually, when one of these vulnerable people befriend a gay, more than likely that person winds up being seduced instead of helped.

There are dedicated gay couples, but again the vast majority of gays drift in and out of relationships. Why they even want to legally tie themselves to each other is a mystery to me. The idea of gays getting married is insulting to me. Having judges rule on such issues without the consent of the governed is also insulting. I view the subject as just one more step that is disintegrating the fabric of our society.

Unfettered Abortions: First, my view is against abortion on demand. I soften my view when such a procedure is medically necessary. In this day and time with a myriad ways to prevent pregnancy, there should be no problem. Without a lot of fanfare, maybe all of our young should automatically be put on birth control. In today's system of sex education, students are given tacit approval for having sex. Schools willingly hand out condoms and birth control to those who seek them. Some schools will even direct students to abortion clinics without informing the student's parents of a pregnancy. And some states do not require parental notification of an abortion.

Then there is the issue of morality. An abortion certainly takes the life of a child, but we have managed to cloak the meaning with such phrases as 'tissue-mass' 'a woman's right to choose' and other such terminology. The abortion pill is an acceptable alternative to me. Since it takes approximately 72 hours for the sperm to fertilize an egg, the abortion pill can prevent the pregnancy if taken the morning after an encounter and solves the moral question of killing a child. I understand that some religions do not support any form of birth control, but I feel that such a view is detrimental to the well being of a society.

Look for volume 5,

Cheers,

-Robert-